Abstract
This introductory chapter explains the aim of the volume and unpacks the shared assumptions and starting points before outlining the structure and content of the book. The chapter provides an overview of the polarity literature, and how it has evolved since the early Cold War. It summarizes the findings of the book and discusses their implications. In particular, the chapter highlights two conclusions from the book: 1) Polarity effects are weaker today than they were for most of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, and consequently international politics are now more regional and less systemic than in the past century; 2) The United States and China stand out as the strongest powers, but regional powers and small states seek to navigate US-China rivalry from their own perspective rather than getting co-opted by one or the other.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abrahamsen, R., Riis Andersen, L., & Sending, O. J. (2019). Special issue: Middle power liberal internationalism in an illiberal world. International Journal, 74(1), 5–134.
Allison, G. (2017). Destined for war: Can America and China escape Thucydides’s trap? Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
Brooks, S. G., & Wohlforth, W. C. (2015/2016). The rise and fall of the great powers in the twenty-first century: China’s rise and the fate of America’s global position. International Security, 40(3), 7–53.
Bueno de Mesquita, B. (1975). Measuring systemic polarity. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 19(2), 187–216.
Bueno de Mesquita, B., & Singer, J. D. (1973). Alliances, capabilities, and war: A review and synthesis. Political Science Annual, 4, 237–280.
Buzan, B. (1991). New patterns of global security in the twenty-first century. International Affairs, 67(3), 431–451.
Buzan, B. (2004). The United States and the great powers: World politics in the twenty-first century. Polity Press.
Buzan, B., Kelstrup, M., Lemaitre, P., Tromer, E., & Wæver, O. (1990). The European security order recast: Scenarios for the post-Cold war era. Pinter.
Buzan, B., & Wæver, O. (2003). Regions and powers. Cambridge University Press.
Copper, J. F. (1975). The advantages of a multipolar international system: An analysis of theory and practice. International Studies, 14(3), 397–415.
De Keersmaeker, G. (2017). Polarity, balance of power and international relations theory: Post-Cold War and the 19th century compared. Springer.
Dean, P. D., Jr., & Vasquez, J. A. (1976). From power politics to issue politics: Bipolarity and multipolarity in light of a new paradigm. Western Political Quarterly, 29(1), 7–28.
Deutsch, K. W., & Singer, J. D. (1964). Multipolar power systems and international stability. World Politics, 16(3), 390–406.
Dunne, T., Hansen, L., & Wight, C. (2013). The end of international relations theory? European Journal of International Relations, 19(3), 405–425.
Finnemore, M. (2009). Legitimacy, hypocrisy, and the social structure of unipolarity: Why being a unipole isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. World Politics, 61(1), 58–85.
Flockhart, T. (2016). The coming multi-order world. Contemporary Security Policy, 37(1), 3–30.
Garzón, J. F. (2017). Multipolarity and the future of economic regionalism. International Theory, 9(1), 101–135.
Gowa, J., & Ramsay, K. W. (2017). Gulliver untied: Entry deterrence under unipolarity. International Organization, 71(3), 459–490.
Grieco, J. M. (2007). Structural realism and the problem of polarity and war. In F. Berenskoetter & M. J. Williams (Eds.), Power in world politics (pp. 64–82). Routledge.
Hansen, B. (2001). Unipolarity and the Middle East. Martin’s Press.
Hansen, B. (2002). Globalization and European state formation 1900–2000. Cooperation and Conflict, 37(3), 303–321.
Hansen, B. (2011). Unipolarity and world politics: A theory and its implications. Routledge.
Hansen, B., & Heurlin, B. (Eds.). (1998). The Baltic States in world politics. St. Martin’s Press.
Hansen, B., Toft, P., & Wivel, A. (2009). Security strategies and American world order: Lost power. Routledge.
Herz, J. H. (1959). International politics in the atomic age. Columbia University Press.
Huntington, S. (1999). The lonely super power. Foreign Affairs, 78(2), 35–49.
Ikenberry, G. J. (2018). The end of liberal international order? International Affairs, 94(1), 7–23.
Ikenberry, G. J., Mastanduno, M., & Wohlforth, W. C. (2009). Unipolarity, state behavior, and systemic consequences. World Politics, 61(1), 1–27.
Jervis, R. (2009). Unipolarity: A structural perspective. World Politics, 61(1), 188–213.
Kaplan, M. A. (1957). System and process in international politics. Wiley.
Kapstein, E. B., & Mastanduno, M. (1999). Unipolar politics: Realism and state strategies after the Cold War. Columbia University Press.
Keohane, R. O., & Nye, J. S. (1977). Power and interdependence. Little Brown.
Krauthammer, C. (1990/1991). The unipolar moment. Foreign Affairs, 70(1), 23–33.
Kristensen, P. M. (2017). After abdication: America debates the future of global leadership. Chinese Political Science Review, 2(4), 550–566.
Kupchan, C. A. (1998). After Pax Americana: Benign power, regional integration, and the sources of a stable multipolarity. International Security, 23(2), 40–79.
Lasswell, H. D. (1945). The interrelations of world organization and society. The Yale Law Journal, 55(5), 889–909.
Layne, C. (1993). The unipolar illusion: Why new great powers will rise. International Security, 17(4), 5–51.
Layne, C. (2012). This time it’s real: The end of unipolarity and the Pax Americana. International Studies Quarterly, 56(1), 203–213.
Lemke, D. (2004). Great powers in the post-Cold War world: A power transition perspective. In T. V. Paul, J. J. Wirtz, & M. Fortmann (Eds.), Balance of power: Theory and practice in the 21st century (pp. 52–75). Stanford University Press.
Lieber, R. J. (2014). The rise of the BRICS and American primacy. International Politics, 51(2), 137–154.
Lobell, S. E. (2016). Realism, balance of power, and power transitions. In T. V. Paul (Ed.), Accommodating rising powers: Past, present, and future (pp. 33–52). Cambridge University Press.
Lynn-Jones, S. M., & Miller, S. E. (Eds.). (1993). The Cold War and after: Prospects for peace. The MIT Press.
Maher, R. (2018). Bipolarity and the future of US-China relations. Political Science Quarterly, 133(3), 497–525.
Mastanduno, M. (1997). Preserving the unipolar moment: Realist theories and US grand strategy after the Cold War. International Security, 21(4), 49–88.
Mearsheimer, J. J. (1990). Back to the future: Instability in Europe after the Cold War. International Security, 15(1), 5–56.
Mearsheimer, J. J. (2014). The tragedy of great power politics (2nd ed.). W. W. Norton & Company.
Monteiro, N. P. (2011). Unrest assured: Why unipolarity is not peaceful. International Security, 36(3), 9–40.
Monteiro, N. P. (2014). Theory of unipolar politics. Cambridge University Press.
Morgenthau, H. J. (1954). Politics among nations: The struggle for power and peace. Alfred Knopf.
Mouritzen, H. (1998). Theory and reality of international politics. Ashgate.
Nogee, J. L., & Spanier, J. W. (1976). The politics of tripolarity. World Affairs, 139(4), 319–333.
Nye, J. S. (2017, January 9). The kindleberger trap. Project Syndicate. https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/kindleberger-trap
Nye, J. S., Jr. (2019). The rise and fall of American hegemony from Wilson to Trump. International Affairs, 95(1), 63–80.
Organski, A. F. (1958). World politics. Knopf.
Paul, T. V. (2018). Restraining great powers: Soft balancing from empires to the global era. Yale University Press.
Platte, W. A. (1978). Reflections on multipolarity. Naval War College Review, 30(3), 33–46.
Pouliot, V. (2016). International pecking orders: The politics and practice of multilateral diplomacy. Cambridge University Press.
Rosecrance, R. N. (1966). Bipolarity, multipolarity, and the future. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 10(3), 314–327.
Sagan, S. D., & Waltz, K. N. (1995). The spread of nuclear weapons: A debate. Norton.
Singer, J. D., Bremer, S., & Stuckey, J. (1972). Capability distribution, uncertainty, and major power war, 1820–1965. In B. Russett (Ed.), Peace, war, and numbers (pp. 19–48). Thousand Oaks.
Tunsjø, Ø. (2018). The return of bipolarity in world politics. Columbia University Press.
Wæver, O. (2017). International leadership after the demise of the last superpower: System structure and stewardship. Chinese Political Science Review, 2(4), 452–476.
Wagner, R. H. (1993). What was bipolarity? International Organization, 47(1), 77–106.
Waltz, K. N. (1964). The stability of a bipolar world. Daedalus, 93(3), 881–909.
Waltz, K. N. (1979). Theory of international politics. Addison-Wesley.
Waltz, K. N. (1981). The spread of nuclear weapons: More may be better, The Adelphi Papers. The International Institute of Strategic Studies.
Waltz, K. N. (1993). The emerging structure of international politics. International Security, 18(2), 44–79.
Waltz, K. N. (2000). Intimations of multipolarity. In B. Hansen & B. Heurlin (Eds.), The new world order (pp. 1–18). Macmillan.
Wayman, F. W. (1984). Bipolarity and war: The role of capability concentration and alliance patterns among major powers, 1816–1965. Journal of Peace Research, 21(1), 61–78.
Wivel, A. (2000). The integration spiral: International security and European integration. University of Copenhagen.
Wivel, A. (2021). When Martians go to Venus: Structural realism in Europe. In I. A. Reichwein & F. Rösch (red.), Realism: A distinctively 20th century European tradition (pp. 133–149). Palgrave Macmillan.
Wohlforth, W. C. (1999). The stability of a unipolar world. International Security, 24(1), 5–41.
Xuetong, Y. (2013). For a new bipolarity: China and Russia vs. America. New Perspectives Quarterly, 30(2), 12–15.
Zala, B. (2013). Rethinking polarity for the twenty-first century: Perceptions of order in international society (Doctoral dissertation, University of Birmingham).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Græger, N., Heurlin, B., Wæver, O., Wivel, A. (2022). Introduction: Understanding Polarity in Theory and History. In: Græger, N., Heurlin, B., Wæver, O., Wivel, A. (eds) Polarity in International Relations. Governance, Security and Development. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-05505-8_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-05505-8_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-05504-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-05505-8
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)