Ðóñ Eng Cn Translate this page:
Please select your language to translate the article


You can just close the window to don't translate
Library
Your profile

Back to contents

Politics and Society
Reference:

Penkovtsev, R. V., Hedayati Shahidani, M. “Soft Balancing” and Asymmetrical Regional Balancing in International Policy

Abstract: The authors of the article analyzes the relation between the strategies of “soft balancing” and asymmetrical balancing under the conditions of multipolarity. This structure is denoted by the 0+Õ equation where “0” mean the absence of a dominating actor or hegemon (great power) in the international system. In this structure none of the actors may influence all aspects of the international order. The letter “X” here shows the number of “great powers’ playing their roles for each actor. Quite naturally, this system also determines and assigns new roles for each actor. One of the most significant factors is the relation between great powers and different geopoligical regions. In order to understand this problem and aspects thereto, the authors of the article analyze the foreign policy of Barack Obama administration. The authors make an assumption that the when solving different regional problems, Obama’s external affairs team uses the strategy that is based on the approaches of “soft balancing” and asymmetrical balancing. “Balancing” means the country’s ability not to allow the political domination of other countries through internal mobilization or strengthening of unions. In conclusion, the authors show that in this day and age it is possible to define the five main patterns of behavior of Americans in regional conflicts and their control over opposing actors.


Keywords:

multipolarity, Soft Balancing, Asymmetrical Balancing, foreign policy, USA, Great Powers, Regional Actors, world policy, balance of power, regional conflicts.


This article can be downloaded freely in PDF format for reading. Download article

This article written in Russian. You can find original text of the article here .
References
1. Pechatnov. V., Manykin. A.S. Istoriya vneshney politiki SShA.-Moskva. MGIMO. 2012.
2. Skriba A.S. Perspektivy balansirovaniya vo vneshney politike Ukrainy v usloviyakh sblizheniya s regional'nymi integratsionnymi ob'edineniyami // Politika i Obshchestvo.-2013.-7.-C. 931-941. DOI: 10.7256/1812-8696.2013.7.8947.
3. Walt S. M. Origins of Alliances Ithaca. –New York: Cornell University Press. 1987.
4. Walt S. M. Alliances in a Unipolar World // World Politics. 2009. ¹ 01(61) P. 86-120.
5. Rosenau J. along the Domestic-Foreign Frontier: Exploring Governance in a Turbulent World. – Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1997.
6. Richard L. the Balance of Power in International Relations: Metaphors, Myths and Models, – Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2007.
7. Cole I. Engaging the Muslim World.-New York: Palgrave MacMillan. 2009.
8. Mottaghi I. Development of Balance of Power in a regional order: identialism against structuralism // Rahbord Quarterly. 2013. 22, ¹. 67(22). P 165-192.
9. Ghasemi F. Theories of International Relations and regional studies. – Tehran: Mizan Legal Foundation. 2011.
10. Pual T.V., James J. Writz, and Michael Fortmann, (eds). Balance of Power Theory and Practice in the 21st Century.-Stanford: Stanford University Press. 2004.
11. Waltz K. Theory of international Politics Reading. – Illinois: Addison Wesley. 2010.
12. Shweller R. L. Unanswered Threats: Political Constraints on the Balance of Power.-Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. 2004.
13. Horowitz Sh. The Balance of Power: formal Perfection and Practical flaws // Journal of peace research. 2001. ¹ 6(38). P. 705-722.
14. Nicole G. Kerry, Congress Agree: Superpower Status Not What It Was. [Elektronnyy resurs]. URL: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-04-08/kerry-congress-agree-superpower-status-not-what-it-was.html (data obrashcheniya 20.09.2014)
15. What Does National Security Mean Today?. [Elektronnyy resurs]. URL: http://www.sais-jhu.edu/events/2013-10-22-160000-2013-10-22-183000/what-does-national-security-mean-today (data obrashcheniya 23.05.2014).
16. Zakaria F. The Post American World.-New York: W. W. Norton & Company. 2006.
17. Kupchan Ch. A. The World in 2050: When the 5 Largest Economies is the he BRICs and Us. [Elektronnyy resurs]. URL: http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/02/the-world-in-2050-when-the-5-largest-economies-are-the-brics-and-us/253160/ (data obrashcheniya 06.07.2014).
18. Global Trends 2030: Alternative Worlds, [Elektronnyy resurs]. URL: http://globaltrends2030.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/global-trends-2030-november2012.pdf (data obrashcheniya 29.08.2014).
19. Walt S. M. Taming American Power: The Global Response to U.S. Primacy.-New York: W. W. Norton & Company. 2006.
20. Kovalev N.A. Politicheskaya arkhitektonika sistemy mezhdunarodnykh otnosheniy: fenomen polyarnosti v sovremennom mire // Politika i Obshchestvo.-2013.-11.-C. 1381-1388. DOI: 10.7256/1812-8696.2013.11.10150.
21. Albright M. K. Pew Global Attitudes Project: Views of a Changing World.-Washington, D.C.: Pew research Centre for the People and the Press. 2003.
22. Pape. R. Soft Balancing against the United States // International Security, 2005. ¹ 01(30). P .7-45.
23. Buzan B., Waever O. Regions and Powers: The Structure of International Security. – Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. . 2003.
24. O.G. Karpovich Antiglobalizm i sovremennye kontseptsii
25. global'nogo upravleniya // Politika i Obshchestvo. - 2013. - 3. - C. 305 - 314. DOI: 10.7256/1812-8696.2013.03.6.