In international relations, the concept of balancing derives from the balance of power theory, the most influential theory from the realist school of thought, which assumes that a formation of hegemony in a multistate system is unattainable since hegemony is perceived as a threat by other states, causing them to engage in balancing against a potential hegemon.Jack S. Levy, "What do Great Powers Balance Against and When?" in T.V. Paul, J.J. Wirtz and M. Fortmann (eds) Balance of Power: Theory and Practice in the 21st Century (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2004), 37.
Balancing encompasses the actions that a particular state or group of states take in order to equalise the odds against more powerful states; that is to make it more difficult and hence less likely for powerful states to exert their military advantage over the weaker ones.
According to the balance of power theory, states, motivated primarily by their desire for survival and security, will develop and implement military capabilities and hard power mechanisms in order to constrain the most powerful and rising state that can prove a potential threat.Kenneth N. Waltz, "Realism and International Politics" (New York: Routledge, 2008), 137.Stephen G. Brooks and William C. Wohlforth, "World out of Balance" (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008), 22. This idea illustrates the concept of internal balancing, which is opposed to external, under which states come together and form an alliance to balance and gain more leverage over a dominant or rising power. In recent years, soft-balancing has emerged as a new concept of illustrating how states balance powerful actors, which advocates the use of economic and diplomatic tools to constrain the most powerful state and inhibit their exertion of power and dominance.
Theoretical origins Balancing behaviour of states is prompted by the structural characteristics of the balance of power system itself. This belief is strongly perpetrated by theorists of neorealism or structural realism, namely Kenneth Waltz who is one of the earliest and most significant contributors to neorealism and balance of power theory.Kenneth N. Waltz, "Theory of International Relations" (Addison-Wesley Publishing, 1979).
Neorealist theory makes a few assumptions about the system, the interests and motives of the actors within it and the constraints that all states face, which ultimately lead to behaviours such as balancing.Waltz, "Theory of International Relations", 122.
The first assumption is that the international order is anarchic, which is a primary cause of the balancing behaviour of states. Anarchy, or the lack of an overarching law enforcing body, inevitably forces states to rely on their individual resources and actions to assure their welfare,Kenneth N. Waltz, "Man, the State and War" (New York: Columbia University Press, 1959), 188.John J. Mearsheimer "The Tragedy of the Great Power Politics", in Anarchy and the Struggle for Power (New York: Norton, 2001), 30. whereby it becomes a responsibility and a requirement of each state to look out for its own survival and security and show readiness in countering force and aggression from other actors.Waltz, "Man, the State and War", 160.
The second assumption is that the primary goal of all actors is their own survival. At a minimum, they simply strive for their own preservation, while others may have more expansionist motives and seek universal domination. Balancing, hence, becomes a tool by which states use the means available to them to achieve their goals and interests; that is to protect themselves from a more threatening actor or to further their power and capability.Waltz, "Theory of International Relations", 118. This leads to the notion of self-help which is labelled the principal action of all actors under the anarchic order.Waltz, "Theory of International Relations", 111. States must rely on their own means and arrangements in order to assure their security - that is act in their own self-interest in order to avoid falling victim to a more powerful state. This inevitably leads states to behave in ways prescribed by the balance of power.
The third assumption is the relative nature of power. The key to security and survival of each state is power, not as an absolute concept, but rather in relations to that of other states,Waltz, "Man, the State and War", 210. and balancing can often be used as a mechanism of gaining a greater share of power or decreasing the share of power possessed by another state.
Traditional forms Balancing can be carried out through internal or external efforts and means. Internal balancing involves efforts to enhance state's power by increasing one's economic resources and military strength in order to be able to rely on independent capabilities in response to a potential hegemon and be able to compete more effectively in the international system.Waltz, "Theory of International Relations", 16815. William C. Wohlforth, Stuart J. Kaufman and Richard Little, "Introduction: Balance and Hierarchy in International System", in William C. Wohlforth, Stuart J. Kaufman and Richard Little (eds) The Balance of Power in World History, (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007), 9-10. In a self-help, anarchic system, mechanisms of internal balancing are believed to be more reliable and precise than external balancing since they rest on independent strategies and actions.Waltz, "Theory of International Relations", 168.
External balancing involves strengthening and enlarging one's alliances and interstate cooperation in order to prevent a hegemon or counter a rising power. In face of a common threat and a single dominant state with a potential to jeopardise collective security and survival, states are expected to put aside their secondary disputes and join a balancing alliance.Wohlforth et al. "Introduction", 9. External balancing represents an alliance arrangement whereby states join in opposition to a stronger state that is perceived as a source of danger, making this kind of balancing a measure of assuring security through combined opposition to an aggressor or a potential hegemon who can endanger the wellbeing and survival of smaller powers.
In the balance of power system, balancing is opposed to the concept of bandwagoning, whereby smaller states seek to achieve their security by allying with the major power or a dominant actor. As tempting as this option may be for smaller powers, it can essentially undermine the security of the international system because by joining an alliance with a rising, potentially expansionist state, aggression and expansionist motives are being rewarded and accepted.Dylan Motin, Bandwagoning in International Relations: China, Russia, and Their Neighbors (Wilmington: Vernon Press, 2024), 19–25.Stephen Walt, "Alliance Formation and the Balance of World Power", International Security, 9: 4 (1985): 4. It is in the interest of states to form coalitions with others with similar or lesser power in order to build their defensive and deterrent capabilities and through this discourage and prevent a growing power from becoming too strong and dominant.Thazha Varkey Paul, "Soft Balancing in the Age of U.S. Primacy", International Security, 30: 1 (2005): 52. After all, as Waltz summed it up, "states... flock to the weaker side, for it is the stronger side that threatens them".Waltz, "Theory of International Relations", 127.
Why states balance States balance in order to avoid being dominated by stronger powers.Walt, "Alliance Formation", 5. It is in the interest of states to curb a potential hegemon before it becomes too powerful so that they avoid falling victim to its rule once it achieves a dominant power status. It becomes a safer alternative to either improve one's own capabilities through self-help mechanisms or join alliances with states who cannot readily dominate in order to restrain and curb the one who can potentially dominate the system and undermine the survival of actors within it.
Another reason why states in a majority of instances choose to balance and not bandwagon is because joining the balancing alliance allows them to have more influence and play a more important role in that alliance, whereas the alliance with a major power would not allow them opportunities for a great deal of contribution and decisive capability as they would inevitably be dominated by their powerful ally. States prefer to preserve their freedom of action in an alliance rather than have orders imposed on them by aligning with a potential hegemon. If states are extremely vulnerable and insignificant, bandwagoning may be their only choice, however middle powers and states that have something to contribute and protect will always balance in face of a rising power and a potential hegemonWalt, "Alliance Formation", 15.
There are a number of factors that influence the decision of states to balance or bandwagon, as proposed by Stephen WaltWalt, "Alliance Formation and the Balance of World Power". in his account on alliance formation. First is aggregate power, which constitutes state's resources and capabilities.Walt, "Alliance Formation", 9. This particular factor can provoke balancing, in that a state with high aggregate power is a potential threat and can evoke fears of domination in smaller powers, but it can just as easily lead to bandwagoning as smaller states might be attracted to power and protection from a strong ally. The second factor is proximate power, whereby geographically close states pose a greater threat than distant ones as the ability to project power declines with distance.Walt, "Alliance Formation", 10. Once again, an aggressive and increasingly powerful neighbouring state is likely to alarm other states to engage in balancing strategies against it, however small, weak and vulnerable states neighbouring a great power are often prone to balancing due to the lack of viable alternatives, inability to balance independently or contribute to a balancing alliance. Offensive power is the third factor, which conveys that states with large and growing offensive capabilities are likely to provoke other to balance against them.Walt, "Alliance Formation", 11. The fourth factor concerns offensive intentions, where perceived aggressive or expansionist goals or motives of a state lead others to balance against it.Walt, "Alliance Formation", 12.
Traditionally, balancing prevailed in understanding the behaviour of states in face of hegemony, as well as in understanding how alliances come together. However, it is tough to dispute the growing trend towards bandwagoning rather than balancing exhibited over the recent decades of United States (U.S.) prevalence. This trend has shown that, whether for purposes of seeking protection or out of fear, states are choosing to ally with the superpower and accept the conditions its inflicts onto the international system.Walt, "Alliance Formation", 7.
Failures and criticisms