Balance of Power: Adversarial Pair of Scales or Associational Arch?de Wilde, J. H., 19-Dec-2019, The 1713 Peace of Utrecht and its Enduring Effects. Soons, A. H. A. (ed.). Brill / Nijhoff, p. 31-44 14 p.
Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter › Academic › peer-review
By looking at its intellectual history, this chapter addresses the problem that Balance of Power by most observers is treated one-sidedly in adversarial terms, whereas a balance of power-logic often requires cooperation. The Peace of Utrecht (1713) is an example where the balance can be better compared with an arch than with a pair of scales. Moreover, an adversarial Balance of Power has little to do with weighing power in imaginary scales: 1) there are no objective standards for measuring power, 2) means of power cannot predict outcomes of struggles; and 3) outcomes themselves are discursive tools rather than historic facts. Balance of Power has two specific political functions: the first is to structure an analysis of specific historic episodes; the second is to support specific political argumentations. Using the scales argument is likely to undermine the associational logic.
|Title of host publication||The 1713 Peace of Utrecht and its Enduring Effects|
|Editors||Alfred H.A. Soons|
|Publisher||Brill / Nijhoff|
|Number of pages||14|
|Publication status||Published - 19-Dec-2019|
- balance of power, International Relations theory, peace treaties