Polarity in international relations

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Polarity in international relations is a description of the distribution of power within the international system. There are three types of systems, Unipolarity, Bipolarity, and Multipolarity. The type of system is completely dependent on the distribution of power and influence of states in a region or internationally.

Contents 1 Unipolarity 1.1 Examples of Unipolarity 2 Bipolarity 2.1 Examples 2.2 Regional Examples 2.3 Multi-state examples of Bipolarity 3 Multipolarity 3.1 Multipolarity in the Cold War 3.2 Multipolarity today 4 Measuring the power concentration 5 Linguistic Complaint 6 See also 7 References 8 External links

[edit] Unipolarity

See also: Hegemony

Unipolarity in international politics describes a distribution of power in which there is one state with most of the cultural, economic, and military influence. This is also called a hegemony or hyperpower.

[edit] Examples of Unipolarity

This article or section may contain original research or unattributed claims. Please help Wikipedia by adding references. See the talk page for details.

• The Persian Empire during 600 B.C. is another example of Unipolarity in global affairs which extended all over Asia and Africa and Eastern as well as Western parts of Europe.

• Chinese Empires in the 1st century B.C.E.-3rd century C.E., 6th-8th century C.E., and 14th-18th century C.E.

• Mongolian Empire in the 13th and 14th centuries.

• The Roman Empire from 31 BC to the 5th century.

• Athens and Sparta in Greece after the Peloponnesian War.

• The United States from 1991 to present.

[edit] Bipolarity

Bipolarity in international politics describes a distribution of power in which two states have the majority of economic, military, and cultural influence internationally or regionally. Often, spheres of influence would develop. For example, in the Cold War, most Western and democratic states would fall under the influence of the USA, while most Communist states would fall under the influence of the USSR. After this, the two powers will normally maneuver for the support of the unclaimed areas.

[edit] Examples

This article or section may contain original research or unattributed claims. Please help Wikipedia by adding references. See the talk page for details.

• India and China were two superpowers during ancient times.
• Carthage and the Roman Republic prior to the Punic Wars
• Spain and Portugal during the 1400s and 1500s (thalassocracies)
• Spain and England during the reign of Elizabeth I and Phillip II
• The United Kingdom (later Great Britain and Ireland) and France from 1660 to the Napoleonic Wars (with periods of other powers rising and waning)
• The United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War

[edit] Regional Examples

This article or section may contain original research or unattributed claims. Please help Wikipedia by adding references. See the talk page for details.

• Russia and Japan, up until the Russo-Japanese War of 1905, causing bipolarity in spheres of influence in several parts of China, Korea, and Mongolia.
• Russia Persian Empire and the Ottoman Empire in struggles to attain regions surrounding the Black Sea, from the early 1700s until World War I.
• Israel and Egypt could be considered regional powers in the Middle East during the Arab-Israeli Conflict from 1948-1978

[edit] Multi-state examples of Bipolarity

The bipolar system can be said to extend to much larger systems, such as alliances or organizations, which would not be considered nation-states, but would still have power concentrated in two primary groups.

In both World Wars, much of the world, and especially Europe, the United States and Japan had been divided into two respective spheres - one case being the Axis and Allies of World War II (1939-1945) - and the division of power between the Central Powers and Allied Powers during World War I (1914-1918). Neutral nations, however, may have caused what may be assessed as an example of tripolarity as well within both of the conflicts.

See also: Superpower

[edit] Multipolarity

Multipolarity in international politics describes a distribution of power in which more than two nation-states have nearly equal amounts of military, cultural, and economic influence.

Pre-Nuclear weapons, this system is considered the least stable of all, but due to the complexity of mutually assured destruction scenarios, with nuclear weapons, however, the opposite may be true. This system tends to have many shifting alliances until one of two things happens. Either a balance of power is struck, and neither side wants to attack the other, or one side will attack the other because it either fears the potential of the new alliance, or it feels that it can defeat the other side.

One of the major implications of an international system with any number of poles, including a multipolar system, is that international decisions will often be made for strategic reasons to maintain a balance of power rather than out of ideological or historical reasons.

The 'Concert of Europe,' a period from after the Napoleonic Wars to the Crimean War, was an example of peaceful multipolarity (the great powers of Europe assembled regularly to discuss international and domestic issues). World War I, World War II, the Thirty Years War, and the Warring States Period are all examples of a wartime multipolarity.

[edit] Multipolarity in the Cold War

Multipolarity could be used to describe the relationship of the three Great Powers of the Cold War: the Peoples Republic of China, the Soviet Union and the United States. The period of tripolarity in the Cold War context is often recognized to have begun with the Nixon's "opening" of China and ended with the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989.

It could also be argued that the world in the Cold War resembled more of a blurred tripolar system than a bipolar one, with the Non-Aligned Movement as a third power (see also third world). According to this theory, the depiction of the Cold War as a pure bipolar system is a simplification of the actual much more complex situation.

[edit] Multipolarity today

A multipolar world can be contrasted with a unipolar international system, such as the US global preponderance of power. According to this widespread view, the USA is so powerful that it can afford to ignore the international community. Of course this view is completely incompatible with multipolarity.

Multipolarity has two possible main views. A "superpower is something of the past" view holds that the USA and USSR in the Cold War were in fact superpowers, but argues that due to the complex economic interdependecies on the international scale and the creation of a global village, the concept of one or more states gaining enough power to claim superpower status is antiquated. There is also the view that through out the Cold War, neither the USA or the USSR were superpowers, but were actually dependent on the smaller states in their "spheres of influence."

While it is not doubted that the US has a great deal of economic clout and has greatly influenced the culture of various nations around the globe, their dependency on foreign investors, resources from developing nations, and foreign trade have created a mutual economic dependency between developed and developing nations. According to those who believe in a modern multipolar system, this interdependency means the US can't be called a superpower as it isn't self-sufficient and relies on the global commonutity to sustain it's people's quality of life. These interdepencies also apply to diplomacy. Considering the complex state of world affairs and the military might of some developing nations, it has become increasingly difficult to engage in foreign policy if it is not supported by other nations. The diplomatic and economic factors that bind the global village together have created a state in which no nation or union could dominate the others, according to those who believe in multipolarity.^{[1][2][3][4][5][6][7]}

[edit] Measuring the power concentration

The Correlates of War uses a systemic concentration of power formula to calculate the polarity of a given great power system. The formula was developed by J. David Singer et. al. in 1972.^[8]

• N_t = the number of states in the great power system at time t
• S_it = the proportion of power possessed by state i at time t (must be a decimal figure)

S = the proportion of power possessed

i = the state of which the proportion of control over the system's power is being measured

t = the time at which the concentration of resources (i.e. power) is being calculated

• = the sum of the proportion of power possessed by all states in the great power system

The closer the resulting concentration is to zero, the more evenly divided power is. The closer to 1, the more concentrated power is. There is a general but not strict correlation between concentration and polarity. It is rare to find a result over 0.5, but a result between 0.4 and 0.5 usually indicates a unipolar system, while a result between 0.2 and 0.4 usually indicated a bipolar or multipolar system. Concentration can be plotted over time, so that the fluctuations and trends in concentration can be observed. concentration of power formula to calculate the polarity of a given great power system. The formula was developed by SOHAIB in 1905.

[edit] Linguistic Complaint

It is often argued that the term 'multipolar' (and 'unipolar' for that matter) is an oxymoron since the term originate from the Greek 'polos' meaning 'axis', or more specifically, 'one of two ends of an axis going through a sphere'. This contrasts with terms '____lateral', from the Greek 'latus' meaning 'side,' which can accommodate any number.^{[citation needed]}

[edit] See also

• Balance of power

Power in international relations v • d • e
Power statuses	Middle power | Regional power | Great power | Superpower | Hyperpower
Further geopolitics	African Century | American Century | Asian Century | British Moment | Chinese Century | European Century | Indian Century | Pacific Century
Types of power	Soft power | Hard power | Political power | Power (sociology) | Machtpolitik | Realpolitik | Power projection | Polarity in international relations
Other	G8+5 | BRIC | BRIMC | Historical powers | Next Eleven | Energy superpower | Power transition theory | Second superpower | SCO | Superpower collapse | Superpower disengagement

[edit] References

• Thompson, William R. On Global War: Historical-Structural Approaches to World Politics. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 1988, pp. 209-210.

[edit] External links