1 / 34

Re Regional Powers

Re Regional Powers. Global Leader. Major Powers Regions and Regional Powers.

loring
Download Presentation

Re Regional Powers

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Re Regional Powers Global Leader Major Powers Regions and Regional Powers

  2. Which States Belong in the Club? The Attribution of Major Power Status in International Politics.Thomas J. Volgy, Renato Corbetta, Keith A. Grant, and Ryan G. BairdPresented at the International Political Science Association Conference, Santiago Chile, July 2009, and the Dartmouth Conference on Rising Powers and Status, October 2010.

  3. “. . . since you know as well as we do that right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must” (Thucydides, 1951: 331).

  4. Two assumptions • Anarchy (absence of central governmental structures; • + • 2) Inequality between states Salience of major powers and their status in international politics

  5. BUT: As inequality produces major powers, both systemic and domestic conditions can create hierarchy in the midst of anarchy

  6. Theory and Empirical literature: States with major power status = Global leadership in development of rules, norms, governance mechanisms and primary actors in most forms of major conflict and cooperation processes in international affairs. So say realists; neorealists; liberal-institutionalists; power transition theorists; long cycle theorists, some constructivists, and some liberal theorists = MAJOR POWER STATUS MATTERS

  7. COW Major Power Status Designation, 1816-2002. State Years Lost Status Regained Austria-Hungary 1816-1918 Yes (dissolved) No China 1950-2002 France 1816-1940 Yes 1941-44 Yes 1945-2002 Germany/Prussia 1816-1918 Yes 1919-1924 Yes 1925-1945 Yes 1946-1990 Yes 1991-2002 Italy 1860-1943 Yes 1944- No Japan 1895-1945 Yes 1946-1990 Yes 1991-2002 Russia/USSR 1816-1917 Yes 1918-1921 Yes 1922-2002 United Kingdom 1816-2002 No United States 1898-2002 No

  8. OUR TASKS • Underscore the value of status; • Differentiate between • a) status consistent and status inconsistent powers; and • b) between underachieving versus overachieving status inconsistent powers; • 3) Create a new database (MPS) for identifying major power status and status inconsistencies; • 4) Test predictions related to the varying effects of differential status attribution to propensities for conflict involvement

  9. Three Forms of Status Attribution: • What is Status? • =========== • Self Ascription • Community based attribution • In-Group based attribution

  10. Major Powers Japan U.S. UK Russia France PRC Germany BRICS Regional Powers G-8 Powers UNSC Veto Powers Nuclear Powers A Variety of Status Clubs In International Politics

  11. Mechanisms of Major Power Status Attribution Opportunity Military Strength Military Reach Economic Size Economic Reach Status Attribution Willingness Active global engagement in conflict and cooperation Constraints -major power independence -lead power influence on global norms

  12. But why is Status Important if you have Major Power Capabilities and Intentions? The attribution of major power status by other states = additional capacity + and legitimacy for major powers (both domestically and externally) for their activism Status underachieving states incentives to demonstrate activism to generate more status and/or to change status quo to generate more status than provided by status quo conditions.

  13. So, it should matter in two ways: Status = Soft power generation to complement hard power Status inconsistency = motivation to increase or stabilize status attributed to state

  14. Status Types • No Major Power Status (includes all other states) • +++++++++++++++++++++ • Major Power Status Club Membership • which includes: • Status Consistent Major Powers • and • Status Inconsistent Major Powers • which includes: • Overachievers • Underachievers

  15. Figure 2: Threshold Criteria for Inclusion in Major Power Status Club

  16. Validation Scheme: Comparing what we know: U.S. versus India

  17. Validation for the U.S.

  18. Validation Scheme for India as Major Power

  19. So Which States Are Members of the Major Power Status Club in Recent International Politics?

  20. Major Power Status: Early Cold War Period Major Powers Status States and Time Frames 1951-55 1956-60 1961-65 Status Consistent US US US ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Underachievers USSR USSR USSR UK France France ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Overarchievers ------------------------------------------------------------------------- N = 3 3 3

  21. Major Power Status: Late Cold War Period Major Powers Status States and Time Frames 1976-80 1981-85 1986-90 Status ConsistentUS US US ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Underachievers USSR UK UK UK ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Overarchievers USSR USSR France France France ----------------------------------------------------------------------- N = 4 4 4

  22. Major Power Status: Post Cold War Period Major Powers Status States and Time Frames 1991-95 1996-2000 2001-2005 Status Consistent US US US France France UK Japan ==================================================== Underachievers UK Germany UK France Japan ===================================================== Overachievers Russia/USSR Russia Russia China China China Japan --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- N= 6 7 6

  23. Why Would We Care?

  24. Testing Four Hypotheses 1) Fully status consistent major powers most likely to intervene in ongoing conflicts; 2) There should be substantial differences between status inconsistent and status consistent major powers’ intervention behavior; 3) Underachievers should be more likely to intervene in ongoing conflicts than overachievers ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 4) Overachievers most likely to contest through institutions of cooperation.

  25. Tabulations of Joining MIDS by Status Type, 1950-2001. * The unit of analysis is country year.

  26. Major Power Status and MID Joining, 1950—2001

  27. The Flip Side: Which States Are Most Likely to Pursue Structured Cooperation? Answer: Overachieving Major Powers* * Although not as likely to be successful

  28. Major Powers Japan U.S. UK Russia France PRC Germany BRICS Regional Powers Brazil, India, S. Africa, Australia, Nigeria G-8 Powers UNSC Veto Powers Nuclear Powers A Variety of Status Clubs In International Politics

  29. The Future: Whose Coming? Whose Leaving?

  30. COMING: India and Brazil? GOING: Germany and Japan?

More Related