Power (international relations)
Part of the Politics series |
Basic forms of government |
---|
List of countries by system of government |
Politics portal |
In international relations, power is defined in several different ways.[1] Material definitions of state power emphasize economic and military power.[2][3][4] Other definitions of power emphasize the ability to structure and constitute the nature of social relations between actors.[1][4] Power is an attribute of particular actors in their interactions, as well as a social process that constitutes the social identities and capacities of actors.[1]
International relations scholars use the term
Entities other than states can have power in international relations. Such entities can include
Concepts of political power
Michael Barnett and Raymond Duvall define power as "the production, in and through social relations, of effects that shape the capacities of actors to determine their circumstances and fate."[1] They reject definitions of power that conflate power as any and all effects because doing so makes power synonymous with causality.[1] They also reject persuasion as part of the definition of power, as it revolves around actors freely and voluntarily changing their minds once presented with new information.[1]
- Power as a goal of states or leaders;
- Power as a measure of influence or control over outcomes, events, actors and issues;
- Power as victory in conflict and the attainment of security;
- Power as control over resources and capabilities;
- Power as status, which some states or actors possess and others do not.
Power as a goal
The primary usage of "power" as a goal in international relations belongs to political theorists, such as
Power as influence
Under certain circumstances, states can organize a
International orders have both a material and social component.[15] Martha Finnemore argues that unipolarity does not just entail a material superiority by the unipole, but also a social structure whereby the unipole maintains its status through legitimation, and institutionalization. In trying to obtain legitimacy from the other actors in the international system, the unipole necessarily gives those actors a degree of power. The unipole also obtains legitimacy and wards off challenges to its power through the creation of institutions, but these institutions also entail a diffusion of power away from the unipole.[16] David Lake has argued along similar lines that legitimacy and authority are key components of international order.[17][18]
Susan Strange made a key contribution to International Political Economy on the issue of power, which she considered essential to the character and dynamics of the global economy.[19] Strange was skeptical of static indicators of power, arguing that it was structural power that mattered.[20] In particular, interactions between states and markets mattered.[21] She pointed to the superiority of the American technology sector, dominance in services, and the position of the U.S. dollar as the top international currency as real indicators of lasting power.[22] She distinguished between relational power (the power to compel A to get B to do something B does not want to do) and structural power (the power to shape and determine the structure of the global political economy).[19] Political scientists Henry Farrell and Abraham L. Newman argue that state power is in part derived from control over important nodes in global networks of informational and financial exchange, which means that states can "weaponize interdependence" by fighting over control of these nodes.[23]
Power as security
Power is also used when describing states or actors that have achieved military victories or security for their state in the international system. This general usage is most commonly found among the writings of historians or popular writers.
Power as capability
American author
Power is the capacity to direct the decisions and actions of others. Power derives from strength and will. Strength comes from the transformation of resources into capabilities. Will infuses objectives with resolve. Strategy marshals capabilities and brings them to bear with precision. Statecraft seeks through strategy to magnify the mass, relevance, impact, and irresistibility of power. It guides the ways the state deploys and applies its power abroad. These ways embrace the arts of war, espionage, and diplomacy. The practitioners of these three arts are the paladins of statecraft.[24]
Power is also used to describe the
Michael Beckley argues that gross domestic product and military spending are imprecise indicators of power. He argues that better measurements of power should take into account "net" indicators of powers: "[Gross] indicators systematically exaggerate the wealth and military capabilities of poor, populous countries, because they tally countries' resources without deducting the costs countries pay to police, protect, and serve their people. A country with a big population might produce vast output and field a large army, but it also may bear massive welfare and security burdens that drain its wealth and bog down its military, leaving it with few resources for power projection abroad."[26]
Power as status
Definitions
Much effort in academic and popular writing is devoted to deciding which countries have the status of "power", and how this can be measured. If a country has "power" (as influence) in military, diplomatic, cultural, and economic spheres, it might be called a "power" (as status). There are several categories of power, and inclusion of a state in one category or another is fraught with difficulty and controversy. In his famous 1987 work,
"France was not strong enough to oppose Germany in a one-to-one struggle... If the mark of a Great Power is country which is willing to take on any other, then France (like Austria-Hungary) had slipped to a lower position. But that definition seemed too abstract in 1914 to a nation geared up for war, militarily stronger than ever, wealthy, and, above all, endowed with powerful allies."[27]
Neorealist scholars frequently define power as entailing military capabilities and economic strength.[2][3][28] Classical realists recognized that the ability to influence depended on psychological relationships that touched on ethical principles, legitimacy and justice,[28] as well as emotions, leaders' skill and power over opinion.[29][28][30]
Categories of power
In the modern geopolitical landscape, a number of terms are used to describe various types of powers, which include the following:
- Hegemony: a state that has the power to shape the international system and "control the external behavior of all other states."[31] Hegemony can be regional or global.[32] Unlike unipolarity, which is a power preponderance within an anarchic international system of nominally equal states, hegemony assumes a hierarchy where the most powerful can control other states.[31]
- Unipole: a state that enjoys a preponderance of power and faces no competitor states.[31][33] According to William Wohlforth, "a unipolar system is one in which a counterbalance is impossible. When a counterbalance becomes possible, the system is not unipolar."[33] A unipolar state is not the same as an empire or a hegemon that can control the behavior of all other states.[31][34][35]
- Great power: In historical mentions, the term great power refers to the states that have strong political, cultural and economical influence over nations around them and across the world.[41][42][43]
- WTO.[45]
- Small power: The International System is for the most part made up by small powers. They are instruments of the other powers and may at times be dominated; but they cannot be ignored.[46]
Other categories
- Emerging power: A transitional category in which a state or union of states is viewed as on a trajectory of increasing global influence.[47][48]
- Regional power: This term is used to describe a nation that exercises influence and power within a region. Being a regional power is not mutually exclusive with any of the other categories of power. The majority of them exert a strategic degree of influence as minor or secondary regional powers. A primary regional power (like Australia) has an often important role in international affairs outside of its region too.[49]
- Cultural superpower: Refers to a country whose arts or entertainment have worldwide appeal, significant international popularity or large influence on much of the world. Countries such as China,[50][51][52] India,[53][54][55] Italy,[56][57][58] Spain,[59][60] Japan,[61][62][63][64][65] France,[66][67] the United Kingdom,[68] the United States,[69] Jamaica,[70][54][71][72] South Korea[73][54][74] and Greece[75][76] have often been described as cultural superpowers, although it is sometimes debated on which criteria this is determined. Unlike traditional forms of national power, the term cultural superpower is in reference to a nation's soft powercapabilities.
- crude oil, natural gas, coal, uranium, etc.) to a significant number of other states, and therefore has the potential to influence world markets to gain a political or economic advantage. Saudi Arabia and Russia are generally acknowledged as the world's current energy superpowers, given their abilities to globally influence or even directly control prices to certain countries. Australia and Canada are potential energy superpowers due to their large natural resources.[77][78]
Hard, soft and smart power
Some political scientists distinguish between two types of power: Hard and Soft. The former is coercive (example:
Hard power refers to coercive tactics: the threat or use of
Joseph Nye is the leading proponent and theorist of soft power. Instruments of soft power include debates on cultural values, dialogues on ideology, the attempt to influence through good example, and the appeal to commonly accepted human values. Means of exercising soft power include diplomacy, dissemination of information, analysis, propaganda, and cultural programming to achieve political ends.
Others have synthesized soft and hard power, including through the field of smart power. This is often a call to use a holistic spectrum of statecraft tools, ranging from soft to hard.
See also
- Global policeman
- International relations (1814–1919)
- Peace through strength
- Power Politics (Wight book)
- Power transition theory
References
- ^ S2CID 3613655.
- ^ ISBN 978-0-07-554852-2.
- ^ ISBN 978-0-393-02025-0.
- ^ JSTOR 2539267.
- ^ Useem, Jerry (2003-03-03). "One Nation Under Wal-Mart: How Retailing's Superpower—and our Biggest, Most Admired Company—Is Changing the Rules for Corporate America". CNN. Retrieved 2010-05-22.
- ^ "SIX PRINCIPLES OF POLITICAL REALISM".
- ^ Bauer, Richard H. "Hans Delbrück (1848–1929)." Bernadotte E. Schmitt. Some Historians of Modern Europe. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1942.
- ^ ANGELA LAMBERT (27 July 1992). "INTERVIEW / Sir Claus Moser: 73.5 per cent English: 'What is dangerous". The Independent.
- ^ Anonymous (16 June 2016). "About the EU – European Union website, the official EU website – European Commission" (PDF). Retrieved 27 November 2016.
- ^ Anonymous (16 June 2016). "About the EU – European Union website, the official EU website – European Commission" (PDF). Retrieved 27 November 2016.
- ^ "The SIPRI Military Expenditure Database". Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. Archived from the original on March 28, 2010. Retrieved 2010-08-22.
- ^ "The 15 countries with the highest military expenditure in 2009". Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. Retrieved 2010-08-22.
- ^ A.J.P.Taylor, "Origins of the First World War"
- ^ Ensor, Sir Robert (1962) 2nd ed. "Britain 1870–1914" The Oxford History of England.
- PMC 7989545.
- ISSN 1086-3338.
- S2CID 148632667.
- ISBN 978-0-19-997008-7
- ^ ISBN 978-0-691-13569-4.
- ISBN 978-0-521-76543-5.
- S2CID 34947557.
- ISBN 978-0-691-13569-4.
- S2CID 198952367.
- ^ Marcella, Gabriel (July 2004). "Chapter 17: National Security and the Interagency Process" (PDF). In Bartholomees, Jr., J. Boone (ed.). U.S. Army War College Guide to National Security Policy and Strategy. United States Army War College. pp. 239–260.
- ISBN 978-3-319-45689-8. Retrieved 2016-11-25.
- S2CID 57560003.
- ISBN 0006860524.
- ^ )
- ISBN 978-0-333-96377-7.
- ISBN 978-0-19-997008-7
- ^ S2CID 57558611.
- ISBN 978-0-393-34927-6.
- ^ S2CID 57568539.
- .
unipolarity implies the existence of many juridically equal nation-states, something that an empire denies
- S2CID 17910808.
in empires, inter-societal divide-and-rule practices replace interstate balance-of-power dynamics
- ISBN 9780140513974.
- ^ Kim Richard Nossal. Lonely Superpower or Unapologetic Hyperpower? Analyzing American Power in the post–Cold War Era. Biennial meeting, South African Political Studies Association, 29 June-2 July 1999. Archived from the original on 2019-05-26. Retrieved 2007-02-28.
- ^ Lemahieu, Hervé. "Five big takeaways from the 2019 Asia Power Index". Lowy Institute. Archived from the original on Jun 21, 2020. Retrieved 2020-05-06.
China, the emerging superpower, netted the highest gains in overall power in 2019, ranking first in half of the eight Index measures. For the first time, China narrowly edged out the United States in the Index's assessment of economic resources. In absolute terms China's economy grew by more than the total size of Australia's economy in 2018. The world's largest trading nation has also paradoxically seen its GDP become less dependent on exports. This makes China less vulnerable to an escalating trade war than most other Asian economies.
- ^ "Many Germans believe China will replace US as superpower: survey". DW. July 14, 2020. Retrieved 2020-09-21.
- ISBN 978-981-287-823-6.
- JSTOR 571588.
- ^ Heineman, Ben W. Jr.; Heimann, Fritz (May–June 2006). "The Long War Against Corruption". Foreign Affairs. Council on Foreign Relations.
Ben W. Heineman, Jr., and Fritz Heimann speak of Italy as a major country or 'player' along with Germany, France, Japan, and the United Kingdom.
- ISBN 9780415140447. Retrieved 2013-08-11.
- ISBN 978-3-319-45689-8. Retrieved 2016-11-25.
- ^ Rudd K (2006) Making Australia a force for good, Labor eHerald Archived June 27, 2007, at the Wayback Machine
- ^ Vital, D. (1967) The Inequality of States: A Study of Small Power in International Relations
- ISBN 0679-720197.
- ^ Renard, Thomas; Biscop, Sven (2013). The European Union and Emerging Powers in the 21st Century: How Europe Can Shape a New Global Order.
- ^ Schenoni, Luis (2017) "Subsystemic Unipolarities?" in Strategic Analysis, 41(1): 74–86 [1]
- ^ "Scholars and Media on China's Cultural Soft Power". Wilson Center. Retrieved 2020-09-21.
- ^ "Asia Power Index 2019: China Cultural Influence". power.lowyinstitute.org. Retrieved 2020-09-21.
- ^ "Elcano Global Presence Index: China". explora.globalpresence.realinstitutoelcano.org. Retrieved 2020-09-21.
- ^ "'DIAF projected India as a cultural superpower'". 11 January 2020.
- ^ a b c Smith, Noah (27 October 2021). "What makes a cultural superpower?". Noahpinion. Archived from the original on Nov 29, 2023. Retrieved 14 October 2023.
- ^ Oaten, James (25 February 2020). "Donald Trump arrived in India with much fanfare. Here are the key moments from his first day". ABC News. Retrieved 17 October 2023.
- ^ "Italy, a cultural superpower". Arab News. 2012-06-02. Archived from the original on December 26, 2014.
- ^ Midgette, Anne (2023-08-26). "Coming to the U.S.: 'The Year of Italian Culture 2013'". Washington Post. Archived from the original on Mar 22, 2023.
"Culture is by far the most important element of Italian foreign policy," Terzi said on Friday, adding, "Italy is a cultural superpower
- ^ Italy has been described as a cultural superpower by The Australian. Italy has been described as a cultural superpower by the Italian consul general in San Francisco, and by US President Barack Obama.
- ^ "Spain, main reference for world's Hispanic heritage". ABC.es (Madrid). 2014-07-03. http://www.abc.es/cultura/20140703/abci-espana-patrimonio-inmaterial-humanidad-201407011734.html. Retrieved 2016-06-08.
- ^ "Elcano Global Presence Index – Explora".
- ^ "The other superpower". The Guardian. London. 2002-06-01. Retrieved 2009-07-17.
- ^ "How Japan became a pop culture superpower". The Spectator. 31 January 2015. Retrieved 27 November 2016.
- ^ Tamaki, Taku (26 April 2017). "Japan has turned its culture into a powerful political tool". The Conversation. Archived from the original on 2021-11-18. Retrieved 2021-12-12.
- ^ "'Pure Invention': How Japan's pop culture became the 'lingua franca' of the internet". The Japan Times. 2020-07-18. Archived from the original on 2021-12-14. Retrieved 2021-12-12.
- ^ "How Japan's global image morphed from military empire to eccentric pop-culture superpower". Quartz. 2020-05-27. Archived from the original on 2021-10-21. Retrieved 2021-12-12.
- ISBN 9783319704647.
France remained a "military, economic, scientific, and cultural superpower"
- ^ "Why France and Italy can't help clashing". The Economist. 2017-08-10. Retrieved 2020-04-20.
France and Italy both consider themselves the cultural superpower of Europe
- ^ "The cultural superpower: British cultural projection abroad" (PDF). Journal of the British Politics Society, Norway. 6 (1). Winter 2011. Archived from the original (PDF) on 16 September 2018. Retrieved 24 October 2014.
- ^ Entertainment Superpower: the economic dominance of American media and entertainment, Alexa O'Brien, 17 February 2005
- ^ Motune, Vic (25 July 2017). "Countdown to I Love JA Day: Dawn Butler on heritage | The Voice Online". archive.voice-online.co.uk. Retrieved 14 October 2023.
- ^ "Jamaica". 6 September 2022. Retrieved 17 October 2023.
- ^ "Portland, Jamaica: A Journey Down the Rio Grande and Beyond". World Travel Magazine. 11 July 2023. Archived from the original on Sep 27, 2023. Retrieved 14 October 2023.
- ^ Jun-hee, Park (16 November 2022). "[Feature] Making big waves: How K-pop swelled into cultural superpower". The Korea Herald. Retrieved 14 October 2023.
- ^ "Sunday Feature: South Korea - The Silent Cultural Superpower". BBC. 14 February 2016. Archived from the original on Feb 24, 2024. Retrieved 14 October 2023.
- ^ Vourlias, Christopher. "How a New Generation of Greek Filmmakers Rode Out the Crisis and Found International Success". Variety. Variety. Retrieved 15 February 2024.
- ^ Falcinelli, Patrizia. "Italy and Greece: A common way ahead". E-Kathimerini. E-Kathimerini. Retrieved 15 February 2024.
- UPI.com. 2012-07-20. Retrieved 2013-04-30.
- UPI.com. 2012-05-14. Retrieved 2013-04-30.
Further reading
- Bennett, Andrew (2013). "The mother of all isms: Causal mechanisms and structured pluralism in International Relations theory." European Journal of International Relations.
- Barnett, Michael; Duvall, Raymond (2005). "Power in International Politics". International Organization 59 (1): 39–75.