Lecture 8

BALANCE OF POWER THEORY

 Balance of Power
 A balance of power is a state of stability between
competing forces. In international relations, it
refers to equilibrium among countries or alliances
to prevent any one entity from becoming too
strong and, thus, gaining the ability to enforce its
will upon the rest.
 DEFINITIONS

Castlereagh defined balance of power as

”the maintenance of such a just
equilibrium between the members of the
family of nations as should prevent any of
them becoming sufficiently strong to
impose its will upon the rest. ”
Similarly, Fay defines as ”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 the others.”
Spykman observes, the truth of the
matter is that states are interested only in
a balance which is in their favor. The
balance desired is the one which
neutralizes other states, leaving the
home state free to be the deciding force
and the deciding voice.
Dickinson also explains the two usages
of the term “it means, on the one hand,
an equality, as of the two sides when an
account is balanced, and on the other
hand, an inequality as when one has a
balance to one’s credit at the bank.”
Dyke explains, the prime object of the
balancing of power is to establish or
maintain such a distribution of power
among states as will prevent any one of
them imposing its will upon another by
the threat use of violence.
Thompson and Morgenthau have
identified it as a policy. Thus it is held that
in a multi state system, the only policy
which can check the erring behavior of
other states is that of confronting power
with countervailing power.
Balance of power is also known as a system
of international politics. According to this
meaning balance of power is a certain kind of
arrangement for the working of international
relations in a multi state world. Martin Wight,
A.J.P. Taylor and Charles Lerche have used
this term as a system.
Many other scholars have used it not as a concept
but merely as a symbol of realism in international
relations. This usage is based on the idea that
balance of power is nothing but a corollary of power
factor in international relations. The acceptance of
power factor gives way to foreign policies based on
balance of power. Louis Halle, John Morton Blum
and Reinhold Niebuhr have all treated balance of
power as a symbol of the realist philosophy.
Morgenthau has used the term in four different ways :

(1). As a policy aimed at a certain gate of affairs,

(2). As an actual state of affairs,

(3). As an approximately equal distribution of power,

and

(4). As any distribution of power.

Thus as a status or condition the balance of power
has meant three things namely,

1. An equality or equilibrium of power among states

resulting in balance,

2. A distribution of power in which some states, are

stronger than other, and

3. Any distribution of power among states.

 Characteristics
 The balance of power is subject to
constant changes from equilibrium to
disequilibrium.
 It is not a gift of God but is achieved by the active
intervention of man.
 Real balance of power seldom exists, if war take
place it means real balance of power not there.
1. Equilibrium:
The term suggests equilibrium, an equal distribution
of power. When this equilibrium is lost, the balance of
sewer fails. Balance is not a permanent feature of
international politics as occasional disequilibrium is
not ruled out in the system. Thus, the concept is
concerned with equilibrium as well as disequilibrium.
2. Temporary:
The balance of power is always temporary and
unstable. With the change of time and
conditions it also changes and gives way to
another system of balance of power. Neither a
balance of power system nor its original
contending powers , can live long.
3. Active Intervention:
Balance of power is not “a gift of the gods” but
an outcome of the active intervention of the
mans. Whenever a state apprehends that the
balance is being titled against it, it has to
quickly counter it. It must be prepared to take
necessary steps, including risking a war, if it is
determined to safeguard its vital interests
which would be in danger if it remains passive.
Thus, balance of power is the result of
diplomatic activity, not of natural happening.
4. Conflicting Aims:
Primarily its aim is to preserve peace. At times
it has achieved this aim in particular areas or
in the state system as a whole. At other times
it has also tended to increase tensions
between nations and to encourage wars.
5. Big-Power Game:
It is mainly a big power game. Big
powers are neither interested in peace
nor in stability but in their own security.
Small powers are usually victims or at
best spectators, rather than players.
They are used as mere weights in the
scales. They are objects rather than
subjects.
Types Of The Balance Of Power:

Simple Balance

Multiple Balance

Local, Regional and Global

 Simple balance of power
 Simple balance of power aims to preservation of
safety of the nationalities of the world.
 In simple balance of power there are two
powers/states required to establish a kind of
parity between them.
 Example of simple power balancing is Cold War
between United States and Soviet Union.
 Complex balance of power
 Balance of power is considered complex if it is
concentrates on the preservation of peace due to
warring positions of the two militant nations.
 Europe in mid eighteenth century represented the
situation of complex balance of power.
 Balance of power between Pakistan and India also
has taken shift from simple to complex.
 Local, Regional balance of power
 Local balance of power seeks to checkmate only
one power or state.
 Regional balance of power aims to maintaining
balance in a particular geographical or political
region.
 The United States, for example, is an actor in all
the regional balances of power within the world.
 World wide balance of power
 The balance of power is regarded as worldwide
if it concerns more than one region.
 During the two world wars the principle of world
balance of power motivated the actions of
various states.
 Rigid balance of power
 In rigid balance of power two groups of states take
a particular stand and are not willing to go back
from the decision.
 The rigid stand taken by USA and USSR as
leaders of the two groups which emerged after the
second world war, is an example of this type of
balance of power.
 Flexible balance of power
 In flexible balance of power member of states
change their alignments and seek fresh alliances
due to changed circumstances.
 Methods of balance of power
1. 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.
2. 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 favorable 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 organized by the
erstwhile USSR for strengthening their respective
power positions in the era of cold war.
3. 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 minimize the chances of clash and hence
to help the maintenance of balance.”
4. Armaments and Disarmaments:
All nations, particularly very powerful nations, place great
emphasis on armaments as the means for maintaining or
securing a favorable 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.
 Conclusion
 The balance of power has been a central concept
in the theory and practice of international relations
for the past five hundred years. It has also played
a key role in some of the most important attempts
to develop a theory of international politics in the
contemporary study of international
Balance of relations. Power,
theory that and
international relations policyof
asserts that the most
effective check on the power of a state is the
power of other states.