Winter 2005/06
"Correspondence: Striking the Balance"
Journal Article, International Security, issue 3, volume 30
By Robert Art, Former Research Fellow, International Security Program, 1974-1977, 1978-1979; Editorial Board, Quarterly Journal: International Security, Stephen Brooks, Former Fellow, International Security Program, 2003-2004, William Wohlforth, Keir A. Lieber and Gerard Alexander
Some scholars argue that the balance of power theory that explained the bipolar and multipolar systems of the past is irrelevant in a unipolar world. These letters debate the possibility of expanding the traditional definition of "balancing" to account for policies that states are pursuing today.
Summer 2005
"Waiting for Balancing: Why the World Is Not Pushing Back"
Journal Article, International Security, issue 1, volume 30
By Keir A. Lieber and Gerard Alexander
There is little credible evidence that major powers are engaging in either hard or soft balancing against the United States. The absence of hard balancing is explained by the lack of underlying motivation to compete strategically with the United Statesunder current conditions. Soft balancing is much ado about nothing: the concept is difficult to define or operationalize; the behavior seems identical to traditional diplomatic friction; and, regardless, specific predictions of soft balancing are not supported by the evidence. Balancing against theUnited Statesis not occurring because contemporaryU.S.grand strategy, despite widespread criticism, poses a threat to only a very limited number of regimes and terrorist groups.
