# data[].attributes.body
- Explanation

How to judge a theory?
- Is it useful?
- Is it simplified enough?
- It is not a law

Hypotheses can be derived from theories.

If the theory of the balance of power is true, we would expect that if x than y.

# data[].attributes.headline
We observe state behavior. How can we explain that?

# data[].attributes.subject
We observe state behavior. How can we explain that?

# data[].attributes.body
Last week (imperialism):
- relations of production, capitalism and overproduction, need for new markets

This week (war, arms races, peace):
- countries balancing other countries power through build up of arms or alliances etc.

# data[].attributes.body
What is the theory?
Would we expect stability? --> security dilemma
Problem: interpretation of power, states aim to delay conflict through the balance of power.
Balance of power as power to defend oneself. Security vs power maximizers.
Hegemony: seek power to have majority of power in region or globally, have the ability to dominate.
Each might limit the security dilemma.

US - unipolar world. Where is the balancing of power?  (EU, allies, until it can balance?)

alternative strategies (bandwagoning etc.)

How could we see each of these constellations? What happened to the balance of power? Some states avoid costs of balancing powers.
- some are dominated and tolerated? (hide, be neutral)
- form alliance, or knows the other needs them more (buckpassing, Europe let US pay to secure Europe from the Soviet Union)
- bandwagoning (share spoils of dominance or costs of opposition)

How do we know power of others?
offensive realism (Mearsheimer) striving for hegemony.
Stephen Walt - neoclassical realism, the importance of the perception of power by leaders.
Randall Schweller - how to convert capabilities in actual useful power.

# data[].attributes.body
- Globalization creates interdependence which limits threatening behavior between states.

# data[].attributes.body
- Based on human nature
- Based on structure of the system

How does each explanation differ?

# data[].attributes.body
Means available to secure its interests.
the ability of a state to control or influence its environment

[Baylis, John/Smith, Steve/Owens, Patricia. The Globalization of World Politics]

power as relational concept. in relation to power of other states.

Yet the task of accurately assessing the power of other states is infinitely complex, and is often reduced to lumping a number of factors together, such as gross national product (GNP), military spending, and population size.

Critics argue that realism has been purchased at a discount precisely because its currency, power, has remained under-theorized and inconsistently used. Simply asserting that states seek power provides no answer to multiple crucial questions. Why do states struggle for power? Surely power is a means to an end rather than an end in itself? Is there not a difference between the mere possession of power and the ability to change the behaviour of others?
[Baylis, John/Smith, Steve/Owens, Patricia. The Globalization of World Politics]

striving for power, as a means to what end?

# data[].attributes.headline
What are the main assumptions of the structural realist theory? 

# data[].attributes.subject
What are the main assumptions of the structural realist theory? 

# data[].attributes.body
- Anarchy
- Self-help
- States strive for survival and need power to do so
- statism, sovereignty

And what of classical realism?
- human nature (men's lust for power and lust to dominate)

Are these assumptions correct?
Have international organizations challenged these assumptions?
Has globalization challenged these assumptions?

# data[].attributes.headline
Is another international system imaginable? What might it look like? 

# data[].attributes.subject
Is another international system imaginable? What might it look like? 

# data[].attributes.body
- Like one large country
- City states
- ...

# data[].attributes.headline
How could realism be a self-fulfilling prophecy?

# data[].attributes.subject
How could realism be a self-fulfilling prophecy?

# data[].attributes.body
- we learn to think in those terms and think that others think in those terms, which makes it the reality.

# data[].attributes.headline
Make a drawing of a unipolar, bipolar or multipolar world assigning power to the states. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Make a drawing of a unipolar, bipolar or multipolar world assigning power to the states. 

# data[].attributes.body
ATHENIANS: Then we on our side will use no fine phrases saying, for example, that we have a right to our empire because we defeated the Persians […] you know as well as we do that, when these matters are discussed by practical people, the standard of justice depends on the equality of power to compel and that in fact the strong do what they have the power to do and the weak accept what they have to accept.
MELIANS: […] you should not destroy a principle that is to the general good of all men—namely, that in the case of all who fall into danger there should be such a thing as fair play and just dealing […]
ATHENIANS: This is no fair fight, with honour on one side and shame on the other. It is rather a question of saving your lives and not resisting those who are far too strong for you.
MELIANS: It is difficult […] for us to oppose your power and fortune […] Nevertheless we trust that the gods will give us fortune as good as yours […]
ATHENIANS: Our opinion of the gods and our knowledge of men lead us to conclude that it is a general and necessary law of nature to rule whatever one can. This is not a law that we made ourselves, nor were we the first to act upon it when it was made. We found it already in existence, and we shall leave it to exist forever among those who come after us. We are merely acting in accordance with it, and we know that you or anybody else with the same power as ours would be acting in precisely the same way […] You seem to forget that if one follows one’s self-interest one wants to be safe, whereas the path of justice and honour involves one in danger […] This is the safe rule—to stand up to one’s equals, to behave with deference to one’s superiors, and to treat one’s inferiors with moderation.
MELIANS: Our decision, Athenians, is just the same as it was at first. We are not prepared to give up in a short moment the liberty which our city has enjoyed from its foundation for 700 years.
ATHENIANS: […] you seem to us […] to see uncertainties as realities, simply because you would like them to be so.

[Melian dialogue, Thucydides. Baylis, John/Smith, Steve/Owens, Patricia. The Globalization of World Politics]

# data[].attributes.body
- human nature vs system
- maximizing security vs maximizing power
- about material capabilities vs also about perception and intention (neoclassical realism)
- ...

# data[].attributes.headline
How come we feel so safe in this unipolar world?

# data[].attributes.subject
How come we feel so safe in this unipolar world?

# data[].attributes.body
The US is by far the most militarily dominant country. How come we still feel safe?  (as long as you play US game you are safe. why? The US has nothing to gain maybe from intervening? it can extract short of intervening?)

Some countries do not. Why not?

How should we modify structural realism to account for this?

# data[].attributes.body
https://youtu.be/8IIQW1wk1a4

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What is the dispute between China and India all about? | CNBC Explains

# data[].attributes.body
- What do those small states do? Do they bandwagon? Or remain neutral?
- small states do not bandwagon, but extract economic resources, as China and India are afraid of them forming a coalition with the opponent in the future (but why, isn't China already more powerful?) outbidding the other state. China and India don't form full military alliances, in order not to upset the other. Due to their underlying economic interdependencies.
positives of power struggle. like Marshall plan etc. welfare spreads.
- globalization: no need to choose in return of resources - extracting from both.
- lack of intense balance of power game between China and India. benign conduct, benign response etc.

- India, US, Japan, Australia Quadrilateral talks

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Conversations with History Kenneth Waltz