DOCSLIB.ORG

The Unipolar Illusion Revisited the Unipolar Illusion Christopher Layne Revisited the Coming End of the United States’ Unipolar Moment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Unipolar Illusion Revisited the Unipolar Illusion Christopher Layne Revisited the Coming End of the United States’ Unipolar Moment The Unipolar Illusion Revisited The Unipolar Illusion Christopher Layne Revisited The Coming End of the United States’ Unipolar Moment The key grand strate- gic issue confronting U.S. policymakers today is whether the United States can escape the same fate that has befallen the other great powers that have con- tended for hegemony since the origin of the modern international state system (circa 1500). Since the early 1990s, U.S. policymakers have embraced primacy and adopted an ambitious grand strategy of expanding the United States’ pre- ponderant power—notwithstanding the seemingly ironclad rule of modern in- ternational history that hegemons always provoke, and are defeated by, the counterhegemonic balancing of other great powers. U.S. primacy also has widespread support in the scholarly community. Primacist scholars claim that U.S. hard-power capabilities are so overwhelming that other states cannot real- istically hope to balance against the United States, nor do they have reason to because U.S. hegemony is benevolent.1 Like their policymaking counterparts, they believe that hegemony advances U.S. interests and that the United States can maintain its preeminence deep into the century. The United States’ hegemonic grand strategy has been challenged by Waltzian balance of power realists who believe that the days of U.S. primacy are numbered and that other states have good reason to fear unbalanced U.S. power.2 More recently, other scholars have argued that, albeit in nontraditional Christopher Layne is Associate Professor at the Bush School of Government and Public Service at Texas A & M University. He is author of The Peace of Illusions: American Grand Strategy from 1940 to the Present (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 2006), on which this article is based in part, and (with Bradley A. Thayer) American Empire: A Debate (New York: Routledge, forthcoming). The author is grateful to Michael Desch and Gabriela Marin Thornton for reading drafts of this ar- ticle and offering very helpful comments. 1. For arguments that the United States can be a successful hegemon, see Joseph S. Nye Jr., The Par- adox of American Power: Why the World’s Only Superpower Can’t Go It Alone (New York: Oxford Uni- versity Press, 2002), especially chaps. 1, 5; Joseph S. Nye Jr., Bound to Lead: The Changing Nature of American Power (New York: Basic Books, 1990); Joseph S. Nye Jr., Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics (New York: PublicAffairs, 2004); Stephen M. Walt, Taming American Power: The Global Response to U.S. Primacy (New York: W.W. Norton, 2005); and William C. Wohlforth, “The Stability of a Unipolar World,” International Security, Vol. 24, No. 1 (Summer 1999), pp. 5–41. See also Ste- phen G. Brooks and William C. Wohlforth, “American Primacy in Perspective,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 81, No. 4 (July/August 2002), pp. 20–33; Michael Mastanduno, “Preserving the Unipolar Moment: Realist Theories and U.S. Grand Strategy,” International Security, Vol. 21, No. 4 (Spring 1997), pp. 49–88; and G. John Ikenberry, “Institutions, Strategic Restraint, and the Persistence of Postwar Order,” International Security, Vol. 23, No. 3 (Winter 1998/99), pp. 43–78. 2. Following the Soviet Union’s demise, Kenneth N. Waltz and I predicted that unipolarity would quickly give way to multipolarity by stimulating the rise of new great powers. See Christopher International Security, Vol. 31, No. 2 (Fall 2006), pp. 7–41 © 2006 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 7 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/isec.2006.31.2.7 by guest on 30 September 2021 International Security 31:2 8 forms, counterbalancing against the United States already is occurring. While many of these scholars favor primacy, they acknowledge that unless the United States wields its preponderant power with restraint, it could fall victim to a counterhegemonic backlash. One of the key questions in the scholarly debate is: What constitutes balanc- ing? Those who cling to a traditional deªnition of balancing, and those who ar- gue that there are new post–Cold War forms of balancing, disagree primarily on two issues: What are the instruments of a balancing strategy, and what mo- tivations drive states to engage in counterhegemonic balancing? Primacists deªne balancing in hard-power terms. Balancing is about using military power, alliances, or both to stop a hegemon. Primacists claim that states bal- ance against a hegemon because they are afraid of being conquered by it. This traditional deªnition of balancing has been challenged by scholars who argue that unipolarity has given rise to new forms of balancing. Unlike states engaged in hard balancing, states that employ these new forms of balancing do not believe that the hegemon poses an existential threat, though it may pose a more subtle kind of threat. Hence, they are searching for strategies to re- strain it peacefully and ameliorate the possibly harmful impact its preemi- nence may have on them. These new forms of balancing employ nonmilitary instruments of power. For example, “soft balancing” involves the use of diplo- macy, international institutions, and international law to constrain and delegit- imize the actions of a hegemonic United States.3 “Economic prebalancing” occupies a middle ground between soft balancing and hard balancing. States that pursue economic prebalancing are trying to avoid the risks of engaging in a premature arms buildup aimed at the United States by concentrating ªrst on closing the economic and technological gap between them and the United Layne, “The Unipolar Illusion: Why New Great Powers Will Rise,” International Security, Vol. 17, No. 4 (Spring 1993), pp. 5–51; and Waltz, “The Emerging Structure of International Politics,” Inter- national Security, Vol. 18, No. 2 (Fall 1994), pp. 44–79. Obviously, these predictions were wrong. I still believe, however, that the analytical case made to support the prediction that unipolarity would cause new great powers to emerge as counterweights was correct. Indeed, with China’s rise we gradually may be seeing the fulªllment of that prediction. For extended discussion, see Chris- topher Layne, The Peace of Illusions: American Grand Strategy from 1940 to the Present (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 2006). 3. For discussions of soft balancing, see Walt, Taming American Power, pp. 126–132; Robert A. Pape, “Soft Balancing against the United States,” International Security, Vol. 30, No. 1 (Summer 2005), pp. 7–45; and T.V. Paul, “Soft Balancing in the Age of U.S. Primacy,” International Security, Vol. 30, No. 1 (Summer 2005), pp. 46–71. For counterarguments, see Keir A. Lieber and Gerard Alexander, “Waiting for Balancing: Why the World Is Not Pushing Back,” International Security, Vol. 30, No. 1 (Summer 2005), pp. 109–139; and Stephen G. Brooks and William C. Wohlforth, “Hard Times for Soft Balancing,” International Security, Vol. 30, No. 1 (Summer 2005), pp. 72–108. Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/isec.2006.31.2.7 by guest on 30 September 2021 The Unipolar Illusion Revisited 9 States. Successful economic prebalancing lays the foundation for hard balanc- ing in the future.4 Because soft balancing and economic prebalancing have been ably discussed and debated elsewhere, I do not discuss them further in this article.5 Instead, I contribute to the debate about what constitutes balancing by focusing on an- other new form of counterbalancing, which I call “leash-slipping.”6 States en- gaging in leash-slipping do not fear being attacked by the hegemon. Rather, they build up their military capabilities to maximize their ability to conduct an independent foreign policy. In this article I address three fundamental questions. First, is the United States insulated from challenge because of its alleged status as a nonthreaten- ing, or benevolent, hegemon? Second, since the Cold War’s end, have other states balanced against the United States? The answers to these two questions hold the key to answering a third: How long is U.S. hegemony likely to last? My central arguments are threefold. First, there are strong reasons to doubt the claim that other states view U.S. primacy as nonthreatening. Second, uni- polarity has not altered the fundamental dynamics of international politics: other states always have compelling incentives to offset the preponderant capabilities of the very powerful, even if the hegemon does not pose an exis- tential threat to them. Third, because the United States’ expansionist grand strategy reinforces other states’ perceptions that U.S. unipolar power is threat- ening, the United States must adopt a different grand strategy: an offshore bal- ancing strategy of self-restraint. This article unfolds as follows. First, I examine the reasons why Waltzian balance of power realists erred in predicting that the era of unipolarity would be only a brief transitional period between those of bipolarity and multi- polarity. Second, I deªne “hegemony” and describe the United States’ post– Cold War hegemonic grand strategy. Third, I critique arguments advanced by primacists to support their claim that U.S. hegemony will be long-lasting. Fourth, I demonstrate that in a unipolar world, the deªnition of “balancing” 4. China is following an economic prebalancing strategy. Beijing’s attempt to spin its great power emergence as a “peaceful rise” is strong evidence that Chinese leaders fear that the United States could act preventively against them before they can develop China’s full economic potential and convert it into hard military power. See Mark Brawley, “The Political Economy of Balance of Power Theory,” in T.V. Paul, James J. Wirtz, and Michel Fortmann, eds., Balance of Power: Theory and Practice in the Twenty-ªrst Century (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 2004), pp. 110– 111. 5. For my views on these two forms of balancing, see Layne, The Peace of Illusions, chap.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • John J. Mearsheimer: an Offensive Realist Between Geopolitics and Power
    John J. Mearsheimer: an offensive realist between geopolitics and power Peter Toft Department of Political Science, University of Copenhagen, Østerfarimagsgade 5, DK 1019 Copenhagen K, Denmark. E-mail: [email protected] With a number of controversial publications behind him and not least his book, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, John J. Mearsheimer has firmly established himself as one of the leading contributors to the realist tradition in the study of international relations since Kenneth Waltz’s Theory of International Politics. Mearsheimer’s main innovation is his theory of ‘offensive realism’ that seeks to re-formulate Kenneth Waltz’s structural realist theory to explain from a struc- tural point of departure the sheer amount of international aggression, which may be hard to reconcile with Waltz’s more defensive realism. In this article, I focus on whether Mearsheimer succeeds in this endeavour. I argue that, despite certain weaknesses, Mearsheimer’s theoretical and empirical work represents an important addition to Waltz’s theory. Mearsheimer’s workis remarkablyclear and consistent and provides compelling answers to why, tragically, aggressive state strategies are a rational answer to life in the international system. Furthermore, Mearsheimer makes important additions to structural alliance theory and offers new important insights into the role of power and geography in world politics. Journal of International Relations and Development (2005) 8, 381–408. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jird.1800065 Keywords: great power politics; international security; John J. Mearsheimer; offensive realism; realism; security studies Introduction Dangerous security competition will inevitably re-emerge in post-Cold War Europe and Asia.1 International institutions cannot produce peace.
    [Show full text]
  • Balance of Power
    BALANCE OF POWER BALANCE OF POWER Theory and Practice in the 21st Century Edited by T. V. Paul, James J. Wirtz, and Michel Fortmann Stanford University Press, Stanford, California 2004 Stanford University Press Stanford, California © 2004 by the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system without the prior written permission of Stanford University Press. Printed in the United States of America on acid-free, archival-quality paper Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Balance of power : theory and practice in the 21st century / edited by T.V. Paul, James J. Wirtz, and Michel Fortmann. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-8047-5016-5 (cloth : alk. paper)—ISBN 0-8047-5017-3 (pbk : alk. paper) 1. Balance of power. 2. International relations. I. Paul, T.V. II. Wirtz, James J., 1958– III. Fortmann, Michel. JZ1313.B35 2004 327.1'01—dc22 2004011433 Designed by Janet Wood Typeset by BookMatters in 11/14 Garamond Original Printing 2004 Last figure below indicates year of this printing: 13 12 11 10 09 08 07 06 05 04 Contents List of Tables vii Acknowledgments ix About the Editors and Contributors xi Introduction: The Enduring Axioms of Balance of Power Theory and Their Contemporary Relevance T. V. Paul 1 Part I: Theories of Balance of Power and Major Powers 1. What Do Great Powers Balance Against and When? 29 Jack S.
    [Show full text]
  • THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY of AMERICA the Christian, The
    THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA The Christian, the Church, and Causes of War: A Systematic Analysis of the World Council of Churches’ Ecumenical Call to Just Peace A DISSERTATION Submitted to the Faculty of the School of Theology and Religious Studies Of The Catholic University of America In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree Doctor of Philosophy © Copyright All Rights Reserved By Tapani Kristian Saarinen Washington, D.C. 2016 The Christian, the Church, and Causes of War: A Systematic Analysis of the World Council of Churches’ Ecumenical Call to Just Peace Tapani Saarinen, Ph.D. Director: Michael Root, Ph.D. The World Council of Churches’ (WCC) Decade to Overcome Violence between 2001-2010 included theological reflection and work to overcome all violence. The results can be read in a document called Ecumenical Call to Just Peace (ECJP). ECJP presents a call to overcome violence and establish Just Peace in four distinct contexts: community, ecology, economy and international politics. As causes of violence differ depending on context, however, can such a holistic approach provide a workable solution for various contexts and their specific challenges? My study focuses on the possible contributions of ECJP’s teaching for the states as actors in international politics. The purpose of my study is to analyze and assess ECJP from the perspective of the causes of war, especially as such causes have been investigated by realist theories of international relations (IR). I transfer the IR approach which unites work for peace and analysis of the causes of war to the study of ecumenical teaching in ECJP.
    [Show full text]
  • The South Atlantic Conflict of 1982: a Test for Anglo-American Relations
    The South Atlantic conflict of 1982: a test for Anglo-American relations Michael PARSONS Université de Pau et des Pays de l’Adour In the early morning of April 2 1982 Argentine armed forces invaded the Falkland Islands1 in the South Atlantic. Taken very much by surprise, the British government, under the determined leadership of Margaret Thatcher, dispatched a substantial naval task force to repossess the islands and return them to British administration. American support was assiduously sought — the government was acutely aware of the need to avoid a repeat of the Suez crisis of 1956 — and this support was given, though it was only announced after almost a month of official neutrality. The Pentagon in particular provided logistic support and military equipment without which the war would probably have been much longer and the casualties much heavier, and this support began well before the President finally “tilted” in Britain’s favour. American assistance was thus immensely valuable and perhaps even decisive, though the extent of this help was not fully appreciated at the time. Nor could it be taken for granted. The United States administration was seriously divided on the issue, and indeed the conflicting signals sent to the Argentine junta by some sections of the administration may have encouraged the Argentines to think that their coup de main might go unchallenged, and might be accepted, if not condoned, by the United States2. So while there is some justification for seeing the South Atlantic conflict of 1982 as compelling evidence in favour of the existence of an Anglo-American special relationship, there is also a case to be made for seeing it as a revealing example of the tensions within Washington over foreign policy priorities.
    [Show full text]
  • Spectacular Malaise: Art & the End of History
    Martin Lang University of Lincoln Spectacular Malaise: Art & the End of History Abstract This article makes two main claims: that Debord’s concept of the ‘integrated spectacle’ is related to end of History narratives; and that the related concept of ‘disinformation’ is manifested in new forms of media-driven warfare. These claims are substantiated through a comparative analysis between Debord’s texts and contemporary politics, primarily as described by Adam Curtis and by the RETORT collective. The resulting understanding of our contemporary politics is a situation where subjects who appear to be free, are in fact only free to choose between competing brands of neo-liberalism that manipulate and baffle in order to obfuscate their true agendas. This situation is termed a ‘spectacular malaise’. The article then critiques post-Marxist claims to a re-birth of History and therefore a potential end to the spectacular malaise. It argues that the Arab Spring and Occupy movement did not signal an end to the end of History, as they were unable to articulate an alternative vision. This situation is compared to the last days of the Soviet Union, when change also seemed unimaginable. It identifies Mark Fisher’s call for activists to demonstrate alternative possibilities and reveal contingency in apparently natural orders to counter the spectacular malaise. Three art collectives are considered as potential candidates to take up this challenge: Women on Waves, Voina, and Superflex. The article concludes that while making actual social and political change is useful for demonstrating alternative possibilities, it is art’s symbolic value that reveals contingency and strikes at the heart of the spectacular malaise.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Policy in the South China Sea
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Wits Institutional Repository on DSPACE Balancing the Rise of China: United States Policy in the South China Sea Kevin Thomas Marincowitz A research report submitted to the Faculty of Humanities, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, in the fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Johannesburg, 2013. Abstract The threat of a rising China to the U.S. led international system has resulted in the increase in competition and tension between the two states. The disputed South China Sea (SCS) is one of the theatres in which this developing competition takes place. Utilizing Offensive Realism theory as a framework, the SCS is examined as a potential flashpoint for the escalation of an international incident into conflict between the U.S. and China. The political/security context in which Sino-U.S. relations occur is established through an analysis of the law of claims at sea and the disputes claimants. The theoretical framework provides a means to interpret the actions of both China and the U.S. in the context of a competition for power, by establishing the causes of war and the strategies utilized by rising and status quo powers against each other. The conduct of China and the U.S. both generally and regionally are then examined on three levels: national opinion, strategy and tactics. The results of each level are then juxtaposed to determine their effect on tension and thus the likelihood of conflict occurring. It is determined that the national opinion and strategy levels have a net effect of decreasing tension, whilst the tactical level dramatically increases tension within the region.
    [Show full text]
  • Exponential Capacity of Power and Its Impact on the Military Alliance Dynamics Nikoloz G
    Florida International University FIU Digital Commons FIU Electronic Theses and Dissertations University Graduate School 10-26-2016 Exponential Capacity of Power and Its Impact on the Military Alliance Dynamics Nikoloz G. Esitashvili Florida International University, [email protected] DOI: 10.25148/etd.FIDC001203 Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/etd Part of the International Relations Commons Recommended Citation Esitashvili, Nikoloz G., "Exponential Capacity of Power and Its Impact on the Military Alliance Dynamics" (2016). FIU Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 3030. https://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/etd/3030 This work is brought to you for free and open access by the University Graduate School at FIU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in FIU Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of FIU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY Miami, Florida EXPONENTIAL CAPACITY OF POWER AND ITS IMPACT ON THE MILITARY ALLIANCE DYNAMICS A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS by Nikoloz Gabriel Esitashvili 2016 To: Dean John F. Stack, Jr. Steven J. Green School of International and Public Affairs This dissertation, written by Nikoloz Gabriel Esitashvili, and entitled Exponential Capacity of Power and its Impact on the Military Alliance Dynamics, having been approved in respect to style and intellectual content, is referred to you for judgment. We have read this dissertation and recommend that it be approved. _______________________________________ Ronald Cox _______________________________________ Shlomi Dinar _______________________________________ Rebecca Friedman _______________________________________ Félix E. Martín, Major Professor Date of Defense: October 26, 2016 The dissertation of Nikoloz Gabriel Esitashvili is approved.
    [Show full text]
  • Scotland the Brave? US Strategic Policy in Scotland 1953-1974
    Scotland the Brave? US Strategic Policy in Scotland 1953-1974 D G MACKAY SCOTLAND THE BRAVE? US STRATEGIC POLICY IN SCOTLAND 1953-1974 To April and Lorraine i Scotland the Brave? US Strategic Policy in Scotland 1953-1974 ABSTRACT During the Cold War, American strategic policy was exercised and implemented on a worldwide basis; decisions taken by Presidents and their advisers were eventually implemented at some other location. Scotland was one of these other locations and this research project will examine the implementation of the US strategic doctrine and its eventual delivery in Scotland. The research covers the following four questions. Why were the Americans present in Scotland during this period in such strength? What were they doing there? How did this change over time? How does this study of policy implementation help us to understand the American motives? The research is split into six separate chapters. The first chapter sets the scene and poses the research questions noted above. The purpose of the remaining chapters is to examine activities that had a physical presence in Scotland and interrogate the research sources to find answers to the contextual questions. Chapter Two examines how the US established and maintained an intelligence gathering system at Edzell and Thurso, apparently regardless of any larger strategic imperatives. Chapter Three deals with the creation of the US Polaris submarine base at Holy Loch, the most high profile base in the UK. Chapter Four, anti-submarine warfare (ASW) strategy addresses the strategic importance of the Scottish base at Thurso for this purpose. Chapter Five concentrates on the communications, navigation and logistics tasks carried out by the US forces in the UK, and especially in Scotland.
    [Show full text]
  • Grand Strategy Analysis: a Proto-Theoretical Approach Patrick Magee Old Dominion University
    Old Dominion University ODU Digital Commons Graduate Program in International Studies Theses & Graduate Program in International Studies Dissertations Spring 2005 Grand Strategy Analysis: A Proto-Theoretical Approach Patrick Magee Old Dominion University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/gpis_etds Part of the International Relations Commons, Political Theory Commons, and the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Magee, Patrick. "Grand Strategy Analysis: A Proto-Theoretical Approach" (2005). Doctor of Philosophy (PhD), dissertation, International Studies, Old Dominion University, DOI: 10.25777/09n2-hn21 https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/gpis_etds/67 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Program in International Studies at ODU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Program in International Studies Theses & Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ODU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. GRAND STRATEGY ANALYSIS: A PROTO-THEORETICAL APPROACH by Patrick Magee B.A. May 1996, University of Virginia M.A. December 2000, Old Dominion University A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of Old Dominion University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL STUDIES OLD DOMINION UNIVERSITY May 2005 pproyedby: imon SerfatyVDirector) ResInaTCarp (Member) ember) Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ABSTRACT GRAND STRATEGY ANALYSIS: A PROTO-THEORETICAL APPROACH Patrick Magee Old Dominion University, 2005 Director: Dr. Simon Serfaty International relations scholarship begins and ends with assumptions - about human nature; about human interaction; about starting points, relative information, and outcomes. Such assumptions are necessary to further the intellectual coherence and development of scholarly work.
    [Show full text]
  • Qmhjv8e1 [Pdf 1268Kb]
    Queen Mary Undergraduate History Journal A note from the Editor Welcome to the first edition of the 2018/2019 QMUL Undergraduate History Journal! The theme of this issue is Superpowers. This is my first note to you as the new Editor-In-Chief, and I must give a big thank you to Jasmin Bath, who ran the Journal last year wonderfully. The Journal team would also like to give a big thank you to all the students that contributed to the journal by submitting in their essays for this theme. Every single essay we received was informative, and a great read. Our editors worked hard to narrow these essays into just six essays which will be published in this essay. I would like to thank every member of the QMUL History Journal, without whom the Journal could not survive and flourish. Thank you to all those who worked on the committee, your had work is inspiring and it shows in the wonderful Journals that you have put out these past two years. I’d also like to welcome the new members to the committee. I look forward to working with you all! You can find us on Twitter @QMULHJ, Facebook under ‘Queen Mary History Journal’ and by email at [email protected]. Should you have pieces that you wish to submit, or any general enquiries, please contact us. Graciously Yours, Iman Mustafa (Editor and Chief) ~ 2 ~ Contents What role did Britain Play in Kennedy’s management of the Cuban Missile Crisis? 4 Billie Rainer Was the ‘special relationship’ between Britain and America a marriage of convenience? 24 Olivia Martin To what extent has class proved more
    [Show full text]
  • EURINT 2016 Editura.Pdf
    Gabriela Carmen PASCARIU | Teodor Lucian MOGA | Loredana Maria SIMIONOV (editors) THE EASTERN PARTNERSHIP UNDER STRAIN ___________________________________________ Time for a rethink? EURINT 2016 This volume was published with the European Commission support. "The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi-ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein." Coperta: Manuela OBOROCEANU Tehnoredactor: Ciprian ALUPULUI ISBN 978-606-714-311-9 ISSN 2393-2384 ISSN-L 2392-8867 © Editura Universităţii „Alexandru Ioan Cuza”, 2016 700109 – Iaşi, str. Pinului, nr. 1A, tel. /fax: (0232) 314947 http://www. editura.uaic.ro, e-mail: [email protected] Gabriela Carmen PASCARIU | Teodor Lucian MOGA | Loredana Maria SIMIONOV (editors) THE EASTERN PARTNERSHIP UNDER STRAIN ____________________________________ Time for a rethink? EURINT 2016 EURINT CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS May 20-21, 2016 EDITURA UNIVERSITĂŢII „ALEXANDRU IOAN CUZA” IAŞI 2016 CONTENT FOREWORD 7 EUROPEAN UNION STRATEGIC NARRATIVE TOWARDS THE EASTERN PARTNERSHIP COUNTRIES AND THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION’S ESCALATION: STOP, SLOW OR GO? 9 Nikita LOBANOV RUSSIA’S POST-CRIMEA LEGITIMIZATION DISCOURSE AND ITS CHALLENGES FOR THE EAP COUNTRIES 27 Vasile ROTARU THE RUSSIAN REVISIONISM AND THE FATE OF THE EUROPEAN NEIGHBOURHOOD POLICY 45 David MATSABERIDZE THE EUROPEAN UNION AND THE ‘NEW WAR’ FROM ITS EASTERN BORDERS 54 Miruna TRONCOTĂ THE EU DEMOCRACY PROMOTION UNDER SCRUTINY: THE DOUBLE STANDARDS IN THE CASE OF BELARUS AND AZERBAIJAN 79 Ewa ŻUKOWSKA DE FACTO STATES IN THE EUROPEAN NEIGHBOURHOOD: BETWEEN RUSSIAN DOMINATION AND EUROPEAN (DIS)ENGAGEMENT.
    [Show full text]
  • The Preemptive Paradox: the Rise of Great Powers & Management of The
    Syracuse University SURFACE Dissertations - ALL SURFACE December 2017 The Preemptive Paradox: The Rise of Great Powers & Management of the International System Jeffrey Treistman Syracuse University Follow this and additional works at: https://surface.syr.edu/etd Part of the Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Treistman, Jeffrey, "The Preemptive Paradox: The Rise of Great Powers & Management of the International System" (2017). Dissertations - ALL. 809. https://surface.syr.edu/etd/809 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the SURFACE at SURFACE. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations - ALL by an authorized administrator of SURFACE. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Abstract: Since the beginning of the modern state system only a few select nations have achieved great power status. But what can account for their rise? The presence of existing great powers would suggest that aspiring states should encounter formidable obstacles that would render their success implausible. In some cases extant great powers sought to counter the rise of a new peer, but the historical record also reveals that incumbents sometimes did not contest the rise of potential competitors. Thus, great powers have pursued two divergent strategies: contestation and nonintervention. How then do great powers decide on which policy to implement? This dissertation advances the argument that a great power’s military strategy is premised on its national interests. It argues that the reason incumbent powers rarely preempt the rise of aspiring powers is because of the low level of threat they pose to states. Incumbent great powers are far more concerned about contemporary rival powers since they possess the immediate capacity to undermine a state’s interests.
    [Show full text]