Write a note on following concept;-

•Power/Balance of power (10 marks)

balance of Power: Meaning, Nature, Methods and Relevance

“Whenever the term Balance of Power is used without qualification, it refers to an actual state
of affairs in which power is distributed among nations with approximately equality” — Hans. J.
Morgenthau.
“Unmanaged struggle for power can be a source of war in international relations.”
Such a realization stands universally recognized and it has led to the development of certain
devices of power management. One such device has been Balance of Power.
In fact, Balance of Power has been traditionally an important fact of international relations. It
has been guiding the decisions and policies of nations. Since the 17th century Several scholars
regard it as the best guide for securing the goals of national interest without getting involved in
war. Upto the first half of twentieth century, Balance of Power was regarded as being the only
known modern device of international management of power.
“Balance of Power is a nearly fundamental law of politics as it is possible to find.” —Martin
Wright
Palmer and Perkins also hold that balance of power principle has been “a basic principle of
international relations.
What is Balance of Power?
It is indeed very difficult to define Balance of Power. It has been defined it differently by
different scholars.
“The trouble with Balance of Power is not that it has no meaning, but that it has too many
meanings.”.
Some writers define it in terms of equilibrium where as others in terms of “preponderance” or
“disequilibrium”. Some define it as a principle of action while others define it as a policy or
system.
Some Popular Definitions of Balance of Power:
(1) “Balance of Power is such a ‘just equilibrium’ in power among the members of the family of
nations as will prevent any one of them from becoming sufficiently strong to enforce its will
upon others.” —Sidney B. Fay
(2) “Balance of Power is an equilibrium or a certain amount of stability in power relations that
under favourable conditions is produced by an alliance of states or by other devices.” —George
Schwarzenberger
(3) “Balance of Power is such a system in which some nations regulate their power relations
without any interference by any big power. As such it is a decentralized system in which power
and policies remain in the hands of constituting units.” —Inis Claude
(4) Balance of Power means “the maintenance of such a just equilibrium between the members
of the family of nations as should prevent any one of them from becoming sufficiently strong to
impose its will upon the rest.” —Lord Castlereagh
ADVERTISEMENTS:
(5) “Whenever the term Balance of Power is used without qualification, it refers to an actual
state of affairs in which power is distributed among nations with approximately equality.” —
Hans. J. Morgenthau
All these definitions clearly reflect that Balance of Power is defined differently by different
scholars. It is very difficult to give or select a uniformly acceptable definition. This difficultly
makes it essential for us to study the features of Balance of Power.
Nature of Balance of Power
Palmer and Perkins describe several major features of Balance of Power (BOP):
1. Some Sort of Equilibrium in Power Relations:
The term Balance of Power suggests ‘equilibrium which is subject to constant, ceaseless
change. In short, though it stands for equilibrium, it also involves some disequilibrium. That is
why scholars define it as a just equilibriums or some sort of equilibrium in power relations.
2. Temporary and Unstable:
ADVERTISEMENTS:
In practice a balance of power always proves to be temporary and unstable. A particular
balance of power survives only for a short time.
3. To be Actively Achieved:
The balance of power has to be achieved by the active intervention of men. It is not a gift of
God. States cannot afford to wait until it “happens”. They have to secure it through their
efforts.
4. Favours Status quo:
Balance of power favours status quo in power positions of major powers. It seeks to maintain a
balance in their power relations. However, in order to be effective, a foreign policy of balance
of power must be changing and dynamic.
5. The Test of BOP is War:
A real balance of power seldom exists. The only test of a balance is war and when war breaks
out the balance comes to an end. War is a situation which balance of power seeks to prevent
and when it breaks out, balance power comes to an end.
6. Not a Device of Peace:
ADVERTISEMENTS:
Balance of Power is not a primary device of peace because it admits war as a means for
maintaining balance.
7. Big Powers as Actors of BOP:
In a balance of power system, the big states or powerful states are the players. The small states
or less powerful states are either spectators or the victims of the game.
8. Multiplicity of States as an Essential Condition:
Balance of Power system operates when there are present a number of major powers, each of
which is determined to maintain a particular balance or equilibrium in their power relations.
9. National Interest is its Basis:
Balance of Power is a policy that can be adopted by any state. The real basis that leads to this
policy is national interest in a given environment.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
The Golden Age of BOP:
The period of 1815-1914 was the golden age of Balance of Power. During this period, it was
regarded as a nearly fundamental law of international relations. It broke down due the
outbreak of First World War in 1914. It was tried to be unsuccessfully revived during 1919-
1939. However, the attempt failed and the world had to bear the Second World War.
The Second World War (1939-45) produced several structural changes in the international
system as well as in the balance of power system. Under the impact of these changes, the
Balance of Power system lost much of its relevance as a device of power management. It is now
lost much of its relevance in international relations.
Underlying Principal Assumptions and Postulates of Balance of Power:
The Balance of Power rests upon several fundamental postulates and assumptions.
(a) Five Principal Assumptions:
(1) Firstly, Balance of Power assumes that states are determined to protect their vital rights
and interests by all means, including war.
(2) Secondly, vital interests of the states are threatened.
(3) The relative power position of states can be measured with a degree of accuracy.
(4) Balance of Power assumes that “balance” will either deter the threatening state from
launching an attack or permit the victim to avoid defeat if an attack should occur.
(5) The statesmen can, and they do make foreign policy decisions intelligently on basis of power
considerations.
(b) Major Postulates of Balance of Power:
(1) A nation following balance of power is prepared to change its alliances or treaties if the
circumstances may so demand.
(2) When a nation finds that a particular preponderance of power is increasing menacingly, it
gets prepared to go to war for maintaining the balance.
(3) Balance of Power postulates that no nation is to be totally eliminated in war. War is aimed
only at the weakening of power of the violator of the balance. After war a new balance of
power system is achieved. The basic principle of Balance of Power is that excessive power
anywhere in the system is a threat to the existence of others and that the most effective
antidote to power is power.
From the above discussion of the features, assumptions, postulates and purposes of Balance of
Power, it becomes clear that Balance of power is a device of power management which is used
by several major powers for maintaining a balance in their power relations.
In this process they maintain a sort of equilibrium in their power relations and do not permit
any state to violate the Balance. In case any state tries to disturb or violate the balance of
power, the other states individually or collectively or is a group can take action, including war,
for weakening the power of the violator as well as for restoring the balance.
Methods of Balance of Power:
Balance of Power is not automatic; it has to be secured by the states following this policy. In
fact, there are several methods by which states try to secure and maintain balance of power.
“Balance of Power is a game which is played by actors with the help of several devices.”
Major Methods of Balance of Power:
I. Compensation:
It is also known as territorial compensation. It usually entails the annexation or division of the
territory of the state whose power is considered dangerous for the balance. In the 17th and
18th centuries this device was regularly used for maintaining a balance of power which used to
get disturbed by the territorial acquisitions of any nation.
For examples the three partitions of Poland in 1772, 1793 and 1795 were based upon the
principle of compensation. Austria, Prussia and Russia agreed to divide Polish territory in such a
way that the distribution of power among them would be approximately the same.
In the latter part of the 19th century, and after each of the two world wars of the 20th century,
territorial compensation was used as a device for weakening the powers of the states whose
actions had led to a violation of the balance. It was applied by the colonial powers for justifying
their actions aimed at maintaining their imperial possessions.
II. Alliances and Counter Alliances:
Alliance-making are regarded as a principal method of balance of power. Alliance is a device by
which a combination of nations creates a favourable balance of power by entering into military
or security pacts aimed at augmenting their own strength vis-a-vis the power of their
opponents. However, an alliance among a group of nations, almost always, leads to the
establishment of a counter alliance by the opponents. History is full of examples of such
alliances and counter alliances.
Whenever any nation threatened the balance of Europe, other states formed alliances against it
and were usually able to curb the power of the over- ambitious state. After the Triple Alliance
of 1882, a rival alliance—The Triple Entente, was slowly formed through bilateral agreements
over a period of 17 years (1891-1907).
In post-1945 period, alliances like NATO, SEATO, Warsaw Pact emerged as devices of Balance of
Power. The first two were established by the USA and the third one was organised by the
erstwhile USSR for strengthening their respective power positions in the era of cold war.
III. Intervention and Non-intervention:
“Intervention is a dictatorial interference in the internal affairs of another state/states with a
view to change or maintain a particular desired situation which is considered to be harmful or
useful to the competing opponents. Some times during a war between two states no attempt is
made by other states to intervene. This is done for making the two warring states weaker.
As such intervention and non-intervention are used as devices of Balance of Power. Mostly it is
used by a major power for regaining an old ally or for picking up a new ally or for imposing a
desired situation on other states. British intervention in Greece, the US intervention is Grenada,
Nicaragua, Cuba, Korea, Vietnam, and (Erstwhile) USSR’s interventions in Poland,
Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and Afghanistan can be quoted as examples of interventions carried
out by the big powers.
IV. Divide and Rule:
The policy of divide and rule has also been a method of balance of power. It has been a time
honored policy of weakening the opponents. It is resorted to be all such nations who try to
make or keep their competitors weak by keeping them divided or by dividing them.
The French policy towards Germany and the British policy towards the European continent can
be cited as the outstanding examples. The rich and powerful states now do not refrain from
using divide and rule for controlling the policies of the new states of Asia, Africa and Latin
America.
V. Buffer States or Zones:
Another method of balance of power is to set up a buffer state between two rivals or
opponents. Buffers, observes V.V. Dyke, “are areas which are weak, which possess considerable
strategic importance to two or more strong powers, Buffer is a small state created or
maintained as a separating state i.e. as a buffer state for keeping two competing states
physically separate each stronger power then tries to bring the buffer within its sphere of
influence but regards it as important, if not vital, that no other strong power be permitted to do
so.
The major function of a buffer is to keep the two powerful nations apart and thus minimise the
chances of clash and hence to help the maintenance of balance.”
VI. Armaments and Disarmaments:
ADVERTISEMENTS:
All nations, particularly very powerful nations, place great emphasis on armaments as the
means for maintaining or securing a favourable position in power relations in the world. It is
also used as a means to keep away a possible aggressor or enemy.
However, armament race between two competitors or opponents can lead to a highly
dangerous situation which cans accidently cause a war. In this way armament race can act as a
danger to world peace and security. Consequently, now-a-days, Disarmaments and Arms
Control are regarded as better devices for maintaining and strengthening world peace and
security. A comprehensive disarmament plan/exercise involving nuclear disarmament can go a
long way in strengthening the balance (peace) that exists in international relations.
VII. The Holder of the Balance or the Balancer:
The system of balance of power may consist of two scales plus a third element ‘holder’ of the
balance or the balancer. The balancer is a nation or a group of nations, which remains aloof
from the policies of the two rivals or opponents and plays the role of, “the laughing third
party.”
It poses temptations to both parties to the balance, and each contending party tries to win over
the support of the laughing third party—the balancer. Normally, the balancer remains away
from both the parties but if any party to the balance becomes unduly weak resulting into a
threat to the balance, the balancer joins it and helps the restoration of balance.
After that the balancer again becomes aloof. Traditionally Britain used to play the role of a
balancer in Europe. However in the era cold war no state could perform the role of a balancer
in international relations.
The rise of unipolarity after 1991, involving the presence of only one super power has now
further reduced the chances for the emergence of a balancer in international relations. These
are the seven major methods or devices of Balance of Power. These have been traditionally
used by nations pursuing the policy of a balance of power.
Critical Evaluation of Balance of Power:
Balance of Power has been strongly praised as well as severely criticized.
Some Scholars observe:
“Balance of Power is nearly a fundamental law of politics as is possible to find,” —Martin
Wright
“Balance of Power is a basic principle of international relations.” —Palmer and Perkins
As against this several others like Richard Cobden criticize it as unreal, inadequate and
uncertain system. They hold that Balance of Power admits war in the have balance and makes
the nations power hungry. The supporters of Balance of Power advance a number of arguments
in favour and give example of the 1815-1914 period of history to prove the effectiveness of
balance of power as a device of power management.
Role and Relevance of Balance of Power in International Relations:
“As long as the nation-state system is the prevailing pattern of international society, balance of
power policies will be followed in practice, and in all probability, they will continue to operate,
even if effective supranational groupings on a regional or world level are formed” —Palmer and
Perkins.
In contemporary times, Balance of Power has lost much of its utility due to several changes in
the international relations. The following changes in the international relations as well as in the
traditional balance of power system have adversely affected the role and relevance of Balance
of Power as a device of power management in International politics.
(1) End of the era of European Domination and the dawn of era of Global Politics:
The structure of international politics has undergone a radical change from the classical period.
From a narrow European dominated international system it has come to be a truly global
system in which Asian, African and Latin American states enjoy a new and added importance.
Today Europe is no longer the centre of world politics. European politics constitutes only one
small segment of international politics. This changes has considerably reduced the operation
ability of balance of power.
(2) Changes in Psychological Environment:
The characteristic moral and intellectual consensus that characterised European nations during
the classical period of Balance of Power (1815-1914) has ceased to exist. Each major power now
seeks to protect its interests as universal interests and hence tries to impose these upon others.
The use of propaganda and ideology as instruments of national policy has increased manifold.
This development has further checked the importance of balance of power.
(3) Rise of Propaganda, Psychological and Political Warfare as instruments of National Policy:
Previously, diplomacy and war used to be the chief means of conducting foreign policies. The
decline of diplomacy, rise of new diplomacy and the new fear of war as a means, have brought
into operation two new devices- Propaganda and Political warfare, as the instruments of
national policy. These have in turn reduced the popularity and role of balance of power
principle in international relations.
(4) Emergence of Ideology as a Factor of International Relations:
The new importance of ideology and other less tangible but, nevertheless, important elements
of national power have further created unfavorable conditions for the operation of balance of
power.
(5) Reduction in the Number of Major Powers:
The most obvious structural change that has seriously limited the role of balance of power has
been the numerical reduction of the players of power-politics game. For its operation, Balance
of Power needs the presence of a number of major power actors. The presence of two
superpowers during 1945-91 discouraged the operation of balance of power and now there is
present only one super power in the world.
(6) The Bipolarity of Cold War period and the new era of Unipolarity:
The bipolarity (presence of two super powers and their blocs) that emerged in the cold war
period reduced the flexibility of the international system. It reduced the chances of balance of
power whose working requires the existence of flexibility in power relations, alliances and
treaties. Presently unipolarity characterizes the international system.
(7) The End of the Era of Colonialism and Imperialism:
Another big change in the structure of balance of power has been the disappearance of
imperialism and colonialism: It has limited the scope for the exercise of power by the European
powers, who in the past always worked as the key players of the principle Balance of Power.
(8) Disappearance of the “Balancer”:
The rise of two super powers the disappearance of the “holder of balance” or the “balancer”
considerably reduced the chances of balance of power politics during 1945-91. Traditionally,
Britain used to play such a role in Europe. The sharp and big decline in the power of Britain in
the post-war period compelled it to abandon its role of balancer between the two super
powers. No other nation or even a group of nations was successful in acting as a balancer
between the USA and the (erstwhile) USSR. The absence of a balancer further reduced the role
of balance of power in post-war international relations.
(9) Change of Concept of War into Total War:
The emergence of nuclear weapons and other revolutionary developments in war technology
has produced a big in change the nature of war. The replacement of war by Total War has made
war the most dreaded situation in international relations. This has forced nations to reject war
as an instrument of balance of power which rests upon the assumption that nations can even
go to war for preserving or restoring the balance.
(10) The Emergence of Global Actors:
The rise of the United Nations and several other international and regional actors in
international relations has given a new looked to the international relations of our times. The
presence of the UN has made a big change in the structure and functioning of the international
system. With a provision for collective security of international peace and security, the United
Nations constitutes a better source of peace. Due to all these changes in international relations,
Balance of Power has come to suffer a big decline. It has definitely lost much of its relevance.
In contemporary times, Balance of Power has ceased to be a fully relevant and credible
principle of international relations. However, it still retains a presence in international relations,
more particularly, in the sphere of regional relations among states.
Some scholars observe:
“The idea of balance of power is still the central theoretical concept in international relation.” —
Snyder
“The Structural changes in international politics of post-war period have not greatly affected the
principle of Balance of Power. It still holds good in respect of regional relations among nations.”
—Arnold Wolfers
Although Balance of Power has lost must of its relevance as a global level device of power
management, it is still being used by the states of a region to maintain a balance in their power
positions.