Soft Balancing, Institutions, and Peaceful Change
Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Standard
Soft Balancing, Institutions, and Peaceful Change. / Wivel, Anders; Paul, T.V.
In: Ethics and International Affairs, Vol. 34, No. 4, 2020, p. 473-485.Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Soft Balancing, Institutions, and Peaceful Change
AU - Wivel, Anders
AU - Paul, T.V.
PY - 2020
Y1 - 2020
N2 - This essay examines the role of institutional soft balancing in bringing forth peaceful change in international relations. Soft balancing is understood as attempts at restraining a threatening power through institutional delegitimization, as opposed to hard balancing, which relies on arms buildup and formal alignments. We argue that soft balancing through international institutions can be an effective means to peaceful change, spanning minimalist goals, which aim at incremental change without the use of military force and war, and maximalist goals, which seek more profound change and transformation in the form of continuous interstate cooperation aimed at a more peaceful and just world order. However, the success of soft-balancing strategies in fostering peaceful change varies widely, even in today's globalized and institutionalized international environment. We explore these variations and identify three conditions for success that can inform both academic analysis and political practice: inclusion, commitment, and status recognition. We draw lessons from two historical examples: the Concert of Europe in the early nineteenth century and the League of Nations in the early twentieth century, and discuss how current threats to the liberal international order challenge soft balancing for peaceful change.
AB - This essay examines the role of institutional soft balancing in bringing forth peaceful change in international relations. Soft balancing is understood as attempts at restraining a threatening power through institutional delegitimization, as opposed to hard balancing, which relies on arms buildup and formal alignments. We argue that soft balancing through international institutions can be an effective means to peaceful change, spanning minimalist goals, which aim at incremental change without the use of military force and war, and maximalist goals, which seek more profound change and transformation in the form of continuous interstate cooperation aimed at a more peaceful and just world order. However, the success of soft-balancing strategies in fostering peaceful change varies widely, even in today's globalized and institutionalized international environment. We explore these variations and identify three conditions for success that can inform both academic analysis and political practice: inclusion, commitment, and status recognition. We draw lessons from two historical examples: the Concert of Europe in the early nineteenth century and the League of Nations in the early twentieth century, and discuss how current threats to the liberal international order challenge soft balancing for peaceful change.
KW - Faculty of Social Sciences
KW - soft balancing
KW - institutions
KW - Peaceful Change
KW - international organizations
KW - status
KW - commitment
KW - inclusion
KW - Concert of Europe
KW - League of Nations
KW - Iran Nuclear Deal
KW - Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action
KW - soft balancing
KW - institutions
KW - peaceful change
KW - commitment
KW - inclusion
U2 - 10.1017/S089267942000057X
DO - 10.1017/S089267942000057X
M3 - Journal article
VL - 34
SP - 473
EP - 485
JO - Ethics and International Affairs
JF - Ethics and International Affairs
SN - 0892-6794
IS - 4
ER -
ID: 253734731