Historical Reality vs. Neo-Realist Theory

Schroeder, Paul W.

doi:10.2307/2539150

Cited by 233 publications

(109 citation statements)

References 81 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

100

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Paul Schroeder (1994) and Randall Schweller (1998) have suggested that states may react to a rising power with strategies very different from balancing. Schroeder, whose field of specialization was European diplomatic history, suggested, in reply to the Waltzian thesis that states react to rising powers by way of internal or external balancing, that "I cannot construct a history of the European states system from 1648 to 1945 based on the generalization that most unit actors within that system responded to crucial threats to their security and independence by resorting to self-help" (Schroeder 1994, 117).…”

Section: Power Shifts and International Alignments: Ir Theory And Empmentioning

confidence: 99%

Theories of International Balancing, the Rise of China, and Political Alignments in the Asia Pacific

Grieco¹

2014

kjis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Power Shifts and International Alignments: Ir Theory And Empmentioning

confidence: 99%

Theories of International Balancing, the Rise of China, and Political Alignments in the Asia Pacific

Grieco¹

2014

kjis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…2 Others argued that some behavior often associated with balancing is actually something else: states often fight powerful aggressors not because they balance against these aggressors but rather because they are directly attacked (Schroeder, 1994;Rosecrance and Lo, 1996; 2 Vasquez, 1997).…”

Section: Hegemonic Threats and Balancing In Europe 1495-1999mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Hegemonic Threats and Balancing In Europe 1495-1999mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Scholars also undertook empirical studies of particular cases to see if states balanced against threats (or power) or bandwagoned with them (Labs 1992;Kaufman 1992;Walt 1992). Schroeder (1994) broadened the categories and demonstrated that states often bandwagon, hide, or "transcend" rather than balance (see also Arquilla, 1992), andSchweller (1994) argued that while status quo states balance to preserve their security, revisionist states often bandwagon with the strong in order to secure economic gains and otherwise expand their influence.2 Others argued that some behavior often associated with balancing is actually something else: states often fight powerful aggressors not because they balance against these aggressors but rather because they are directly attacked (Schroeder, 1994;Rosecrance and Lo, 1996; 2 Vasquez, 1997).These new perspectives on balancing have been supported with historical illustrations from the last four centuries and with more detailed historical case studies. While some of these individual studies are convincing, either in support or criticism of the balancing proposition, they do not constitute, individually or collectively, anything approaching a systematic empirical test of the proposition that states systematically balance against hegemonic threats.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Hegemonic Threats and Great-Power Balancing in Europe, 1495-1999

Levy¹,

Thompson²

2005

Security Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The balance of power is a venerable concept in international relations theory, but it is plagued by ambiguities about what the concept means and what the theory purports to explain, and the key proposition that states balance against concentrations of power or hegemonic threats is rarely if ever subjected to systematic empirical test. We argue that despite these ambiguities and disagreements, there is one proposition that nearly all balance of power theorists and their critics as well would accept as an accurate reflection of the theory and that provides the basis for a "most-likely" test of the theory: great powers have balanced against extreme concentrations of land-based military power in Europe, concentrations that have created the potential for hegemony over the continent.We develop and test several hypotheses linking military concentration, capability changes, and alliance responses for the European system from 1495-1999 using the Rasler and Thompson (1994) data on army concentrations and developing a new data base of great power alliances for the last five centuries. We find that European great powers have demonstrated a strong propensity to balance against the leading state when one state acquired a third or more of the total military capabilities in the system. Lower concentrations of power have been less likely to generate balancing coalitions. Not all available great powers have joined these balancing coalitions, however, so that the size of the typical balancing coalition is smaller than balance of power theory might lead us to believe.While our overall findings provide considerable support for hypotheses about balancing against high concentrations of military power in Europe, we emphasize that this is the "most likely" case for the balancing proposition, given the longstanding great power and Eurocentric biases of the balance of power tradition in international relations theory. Consequently, our findings cannot necessarily be generalized to other systems. We are particularly skeptical as to the validity of our findings for international systems dominated by maritime or global powers. 1 HEGEMONIC THREATS AND BALANCING IN EUROPE, 1495-1999The balance of power is one of the oldest and most fundamental concepts in the study of international relations. Hume regarded the balance of power as a scientific law, and Waltz argued that "if there is any distinctively political theory of international politics, balance of power is it." Although there are many variations of balance of power theory, and although there is considerable disagreement about the meaning of its key concepts and even about what the theory purports to explain (Haas, 1953;Claude, 1962), the central proposition of nearly all balance of power theories is that states tend to balance against concentrations of power or hegemonic threats. Indeed, this is one of the most widelyheld propositions in the international relations field. Even this proposition is quite ambiguous, however, and it is rarely if ever subjected to systematic empirical test. O...

show abstract

“…В частности, американский историк Пол Шрёдер на примерах из внеш-неполитической практики европейских стран, а также США и Японии в период с 1648 по 1945 г. продемонстрировал регу-лярные попытки государств уклониться от балансирования более сильных игроков и даже наладить сотрудничество с ними [Schroeder 1994]. …”

unclassified

Western Theory of International Military Alliances

Istomin¹

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

РезюмеМеждународные альянсы представляют собой соглашения между государствами, описывающие параметры их военно-политического взаимодействия в случае вооружённого конфликта, а также практики сотрудничества на основе таких договорённостей. Осмысление вопросов их создания, функционирования и влияния на среду международной безопасности находилось в тематическом фокусе теории международных отношений на протяжении всего периода «холодной войны». В то же время в 1990-2010-х годах исследования этой проблематики обрели новый импульс к развитию в результате более последовательного структурирования исторического опыта, накопления масштаб-ных объёмов данных и активного внедрения количественных методик анализа. Настоящий аналити-ческий обзор призван определить основные достижения теории международных альянсов, позволив-шей на основе анализа обширного исторического опыта выявить основные закономерности эволю-ции подобных объединений. В нём последовательно систематизированы современные представления о функциях и причинах создания международных альянсов; о степени надёжности формальных союзов; об обстоятельствах пересмотра или прекращения обязательств государств. В статье оценива-ется влияние такого рода объединений на международную конфликтность, а также противоречия в их функционировании. На основе проведённой работы автор выявил сохраняющиеся лакуны и возмож-ные направления дальнейшего развития исследований военно-политических альянсов. По итогам проведённого анализа можно заключить, что в предметной области сложилось разделяемое ядро представлений, позволяющее говорить о появлении зрелой исследовательской программы. В то же время наращивание представлений относительно динамики развития международных союзов в 1990-2010-х годах происходило за счёт существенного ограничения области исследования. С учётом особенностей существующих баз данных анализ был сфокусирован преимущественно на изучении формальных альянсов через классификацию доступных документов по ним. Как следствие, за пре-делами рассмотрения остаются не только неформальные коалиции, но и феномен тайных союзов, а также значение секретных обязательств в рамках документально оформленных объединений.

show abstract

Historical Reality vs. Neo-Realist Theory

Cited by 233 publications

References 81 publications

Theories of International Balancing, the Rise of China, and Political Alignments in the Asia Pacific

Theories of International Balancing, the Rise of China, and Political Alignments in the Asia Pacific

Hegemonic Threats and Great-Power Balancing in Europe, 1495-1999

Western Theory of International Military Alliances

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About