Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Odd Axis: Germany, Italy, and Japan as Awkward Great Powers

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Awkward Powers: Escaping Traditional Great and Middle Power Theory

Part of the book series: Global Political Transitions ((GLPOTR))

  • 927 Accesses

Abstract

Despite the increasing multipolarity of the 21st century, the list of great powers is still anachronistically limited to the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (P5s), thus not acknowledging the redistribution of power in a global order in flux. Through a national power analysis, this chapter argues that Germany, Italy, and Japan are three exemplary “awkward great powers”, by virtue of their top-10 military and economic capabilities, political and diplomatic rankings, and cultural influence, even though they lack a permanent seat at the UN Security Council. Since a hierarchy of powers requires a comprehensive assessment of states’ capabilities in all fields, this research aims to rethink great powers’ definitional criteria in a multipolar century, while assessing the international status of three influential and yet understudied members of the global community.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    An earlier version of this research was presented at the 2019 Australian Political Science Association conference, for the panel titled “Escaping IR Theory? The Case for Awkward Powers.”

  2. 2.

    John J. Mearsheimer, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics (New York, USA: W. W. Norton, 2001), 168–233.

  3. 3.

    Andrea Boltho, “Italy, Germany, Japan: From Economic Miracles to Virtual Stagnation,” in The Oxford Handbook of the Italian Economy Since Unification, ed. G. Toniolo (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013), 108–133.

  4. 4.

    Due to this theoretical uncertainty, German and Italian foreign policies have been sporadically described as employing “middle power diplomacy” due to their multilateralism, and Japan has been occasionally defined as a middle power by Japanese scholars. For German middle power diplomacy, see Jan-Werner Müller, “Verfassungspatriotismus Revisited Eine liberale politische Kultur für Deutschland (und Europa)” [Constitutional Patriotism Revisited A Liberal Political Culture for Germany (and Europe)], in Deutschland denken: Beiträge für die reflektierte Republik, eds. Undine Ruge and Daniel Morat (Berlin: Springer, 2015), 83; Helga A. Welsh, “Germany: Ascent to Middle Power,” in European Foreign Policies: Does Europe Still Matter? eds. R. Tiersky and J. Van Oudenaren (Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010), 211–234. For Italian middle power diplomacy, see Carlo Maria Santoro, La politica estera di una media potenza: L'Italia dall'Unità ad oggi [A Middle Power’s Foreign Policy: Italy from National Unification to the Present Day] (Bologna: Il Mulino, 1991); Marco Siddi, “Italy’s ‘Middle Power’ Approach to Russia,” The International Spectator 54, no. 2 (2019): 123–138. For Japan as a middle power, see Yoshihide Soeya, Nihon no “Midoru Pawa” Gaiko: Sengo Nihon no Sentaku to Koso [Japan’s Middle Power Diplomacy: Postwar Japan’s Choices and Plans] (Tokyo: Chikuma Shinsho, 2005); Yoshihide Soeya, “A ‘Normal’ Middle Power: Interpreting Changes in Japanese Security Policy in the 1990s and After,” in Japan as a ‘Normal Country’? A Nation in Search of Its Place in the World, eds. Y. Soeya, D. A. Welch, and M. Tadokoro (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2011), 72–97.

  5. 5.

    Gabriele Abbondanza, “The Historical Determination of the Middle Power Concept,” in Rethinking Middle Powers in the Asian Century: New Theories, New Cases, eds. T. Struye de Swielande, D. Vandamme, D. Walton, and T. Wilkins (London: Routledge, 2019), 32–44.

  6. 6.

    Gabriele Abbondanza and Thomas Wilkins, “The Case for Awkward Powers,” in Awkward Powers: Escaping Traditional Great and Middle Power Theory, eds. Gabriele Abbondanza and Thomas Wilkins (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2021), 3–39.

  7. 7.

    George Modelski, Principles of World Politics (New York: Free Press, 1972); John Mearsheimer, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics (New York: W. W. Norton, 2001), 5.

  8. 8.

    Kenneth Waltz, Theory of International Politics (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1979), 131; Barry Buzan and Ole Wæver, Regions and Powers: The Structure of International Security (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 11; Barry R. Posen and Andrew L. Ross, “Competing Visions for U.S. Grand Strategy,” International Security 21, no. 3 (1996): 5–53.

  9. 9.

    Randall L. Schweller, “Realism and the Present Great Power System: Growth and Positional Conflict Over Scarce Resources,” in Unipolar Politics: Realism and State Strategies After the Cold War, eds. E. B. Kapstein and M. Mastanduno (New York: Columbia University Press, 1999), 28–68; Samuel P. Huntington, “The Lonely Superpower,” Foreign Affairs 78, no. 2 (1999): 35–49; Jack S. Levy, War in the Modern Great Power System: 1495–1975 (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2015), 11.

  10. 10.

    Risto E. J. Penttilä, The Role of the G8 in International Peace and Security (London: Routledge, 2013), 17–32; Andreas Wenger and Daniel Möckli, “Power Shifts and New Security Needs: NATO, European Identity, and the Reorganization of the West, 1967–75,” in The Routledge Handbook of Transatlantic Security, eds. J. Hanhimäki, G.-H. Soutou, and B. Germond (London: Routledge, 2010), 103–122; Congyan Cai, “New Great Powers and International Law in the 21st Century,” European Journal of International Law 24, no. 3 (2013): 755–795.

  11. 11.

    Laura Neack, The New Foreign Policy: Complex Interactions, Competing Interests (Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2014), 148–152.

  12. 12.

    Robert W. Cox, “Middlepowermanship, Japan, and Future World Order,” International Journal 44, no. 4 (1989): 823–862.

  13. 13.

    Gabriele Abbondanza, “Middle Powers and Great Powers Through History: The Concept from Ancient Times to the Present Day,” History of Political Thought 41, no. 3 (2020): 397–418.

  14. 14.

    Barry Buzan, The United States and the Great Powers: World Politics in the Twenty-First Century (Cambridge: Polity, 2004), 69–70.

  15. 15.

    Kenneth Waltz, Theory of International Politics (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1979), 131.

  16. 16.

    Joseph S. Nye, “Soft Power,” Foreign Affairs 80, no. 5 (1990): 153–171.

  17. 17.

    Joseph S. Nye, Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics (New York: Public Affairs, 2004), 5.

  18. 18.

    John J. Mearsheimer, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics (New York, USA: W. W. Norton, 2001), 42–43.

  19. 19.

    Torbjørn L. Knutsen, The Rise and Fall of World Orders (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1999), 280–281.

  20. 20.

    Stephen M. Walt, “Alliance Formation and the Balance of World Power,” International Security 9, no. 4 (1985): 3–43.

  21. 21.

    The Military Balance 2019 (Abingdon on Thames: Taylor & Francis, 2019), 110–280.

  22. 22.

    Nan Tian, Aude Fleurant, Alexandra Kuimova, Pieter D. Wezeman, and Siemon T. Wezeman, Trends in World Military Expenditure 2018 (Stockholm: SIPRI, 2019), 1–12.

  23. 23.

    Hans M. Kristensen and Matt Korda, “Worldwide Deployments of Nuclear Weapons, 2017,” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 73, no. 5 (2017): 289–297.

  24. 24.

    The Future of NATO and European Defence: Ninth Report of Session 2007–08. Report, Together with Formal Minutes, Oral and Written Evidence (London: House of Commons Defence Committee, 2008), 208.

  25. 25.

    Italy has phased out nuclear power for electricity production following the 1987 referendum, Japan has decreased the use of it after the 2011 Fukushima disaster, and Germany plans to shut down its last reactor in 2022. See: Thazha Varkey Paul, Power Versus Prudence: Why Nations Forgo Nuclear Weapons (Montreal: McGill-Queen’s Press, 2000), 3.

  26. 26.

    All three countries have national nuclear research centres. Additionally, Italy and Germany are among the leading countries within CERN, the European Organisation for Nuclear Research, whose current director is an Italian scientist.

  27. 27.

    Leopoldo Nuti, “Italy as a Hedging State? The Problematic Ratification of the Non-Proliferation Treaty,” in Nuclear Italy: An International History of Italian Nuclear Policies During the Cold War, eds. E. Bini and I. Londero (Trieste: Edizioni Università di Trieste, 2017), 139.

  28. 28.

    James W. Davis and Ursula Jasper, “Non-Strategic Nuclear Weapons as a ‘Trojan Horse’: Explaining Germany’s Ambivalent Attitude,” European Security 23, no. 1 (2014): 15–30.

  29. 29.

    There are more than three military indexes, although only these three are developed with a clear and publicly-available methodology.

  30. 30.

    The End of Globalization or a More Multipolar World? (Zurich: Credit Suisse, 2015), 41.

  31. 31.

    “2019 Military Strength Ranking,” Global Firepower, accessed January 21, 2020, http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing.asp.

  32. 32.

    Elcano Global Presence Report 2018 (Madrid: Real Instituto Elcano, 2018), 45–48.

  33. 33.

    Edward H. Carr, The Twenty Years’ Crisis: 1919–1939: An Introduction to the Study of International Relations (London: Macmillan, 1939), 113.

  34. 34.

    “World Economic Outlook Database 2019—GDP,” International Monetary Fund, accessed January 21, 2020, https://bit.ly/35PJFET.

  35. 35.

    Global Wealth Databook 2019 (Zürich: Credit Suisse, 2019).

  36. 36.

    “GDP Growth (Annual %),” World Bank, accessed January 21, 2020, https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG?year_high_desc=true.

  37. 37.

    Martin Schulz, “Ageing, Debt, and Growth Crises: Two Forerunners,” in Italy and Japan: How Similar Are They? A Comparative Analysis of Politics, Economics, and International Relations, eds. S. Beretta, A. Berkofsky, and F. Rugge (Berlin: Springer, 2014), 205–233.

  38. 38.

    Richard J. Samuels, Machiavelli’s Children: Leaders and Their Legacies in Italy and Japan (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2005).

  39. 39.

    William E. Peterson, “Britain’s Singular Other: Germany and the Brexit Crisis,” in Brexit and Beyond: Rethinking the Futures of Europe, eds. B. Martill and U. Staiger (London: UCL Press, 2018), 88–96.

  40. 40.

    Robert O. Keohane, “Twenty Years of Institutional Liberalism,” International Relations 26, no. 2 (2012): 125–138.

  41. 41.

    “Lowy Institute Global Diplomacy Index 2019 Country Ranking,” Lowy Institute, accessed January 21, 2020, https://globaldiplomacyindex.lowyinstitute.org/country_rank.html.

  42. 42.

    David Chandler, “The Responsibility to Protect? Imposing the ‘Liberal Peace’,” International Peacekeeping 11, no. 1 (2004): 59–81.

  43. 43.

    Kristoffer Lidén, “Building Peace Between Global and Local Politics: The Cosmopolitical Ethics of Liberal Peacebuilding,” International Peacekeeping 16, no. 5 (2009): 616–634.

  44. 44.

    Elisabeth Braw, “Europe’s Military Maestros: Italy,” Politico, August 23, 2017, https://www.politico.eu/article/europes-military-maestros-italy-troops-mediterranean-migrants-libya-refugees.

  45. 45.

    Gabriele Abbondanza, “The West’s Policeman? Assessing Italy’s Status in Global Peacekeeping,” The International Spectator 55, no. 2 (2020): 127–141.

  46. 46.

    Jennifer Chan, “From Global Issues to National Interests: The Role of Non-State Actors in Redefining Japanese Diplomacy,” in The SAGE Handbook of Asian Foreign Policy, ed. T. Inoguchi (Thousand Oaks: Sage, 2019), 203–217.

  47. 47.

    Annual Report 2018 (Geneva: World Trade Organisation, 2019), 200–201.

  48. 48.

    “Regular Budget 2019,” United Nations General Assembly, accessed January 21, 2020, http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=ST/ADM/SER.B/992.

  49. 49.

    “Member Countries’ Budget Contributions,” OECD, accessed January 21, 2020, http://www.oecd.org/about/budget/member-countries-budget-contributions.htm.

  50. 50.

    “EU Expenditure and Revenue 2014–2020,” European Union Commission, accessed January 21, 2020, http://ec.europa.eu/budget/figures/interactive/index_en.cfm.

  51. 51.

    “Funding NATO,” NATO, accessed January 21, 2020, https://www.nato.int/cps/ic/natohq/topics_67655.htm.

  52. 52.

    OSCE Annual Report 2018 (Vienna: OSCE, 2019), 99.

  53. 53.

    “Budget,” Council of Europe, accessed January 21, 2020, https://www.coe.int/en/web/about-us/budget.

  54. 54.

    Peter Nadin, UN Security Council Reform (London: Routledge, 2016), 43–71.

  55. 55.

    Given their actions under the Rome-Berlin-Tokyo Axis, it is easy to understand why they were not original members of the UN.

  56. 56.

    Mario Biggeri and Franco Volpi, Teoria e politica dell'aiuto allo sviluppo (Milan: FrancoAngeli, 2006), 49–58.

  57. 57.

    Günther Fink and Silvia Redaelli, “Determinants of International Emergency Aid—Humanitarian Need Only?” World Development 39, no. 5 (2011): 741–757.

  58. 58.

    “Official Development Assistance,” OECD, accessed January 21, 2020, https://www2.compareyourcountry.org/oda?cr=oecd&lg=en.

  59. 59.

    Global Humanitarian Assistance Report 2019 (Bristol: Development Initiatives, 2019), 36.

  60. 60.

    Elcano Global Presence Report 2018 (Madrid: Real Instituto Elcano, 2018), 44.

  61. 61.

    Elcano Global Presence Report 2018 (Madrid: Real Instituto Elcano, 2018), 45–48.

  62. 62.

    “Most Influential Countries 2019,” U.S. News, Y&R’s BAV, and the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, accessed January 21, 2020, https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/best-international-influence.

  63. 63.

    Joseph S. Nye, “Soft Power,” Foreign Affairs 80, no. 5 (1990): 153–171.

  64. 64.

    Alexander Wendt, “Anarchy Is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics,” International Organization 46, no. 2 (1992): 391–425.

  65. 65.

    Laura Neack, The New Foreign Policy: Complex Interactions, Competing Interests (Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2014), 18.

  66. 66.

    To an extent, cultural and societal factors incorporate countries’ technological achievements—including patents, Nobel prize winners, and scientific publications—and as such have been assessed by some of the indexes presented here. For discussions of the importance of cultural influence broadly understood, see: Randall L. Schweller, “Realism and the Present Great Power System: Growth and Positional Conflict Over Scarce Resources,” in Unipolar Politics: Realism and State Strategies After the Cold War, eds. E. B. Kapstein and M. Mastanduno (New York: Columbia University Press, 1999), 28–68; Stephen G. Brooks and William C. Wohlforth, “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, no. 3 (2015): 7–53; Samuel P. Huntington, “The Lonely Superpower,” Foreign Affairs 78, no. 2 (1999): 35–49.

  67. 67.

    Peter J. Katzenstein, “Introduction: Alternative Perspectives on National Security,” in The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in World Politics, ed. Peter J. Katzenstein (New York: Columbia University Press, 1996), 7.

  68. 68.

    Jeffrey S. Lantis, “Strategic Culture: From Clausewitz to Constructivism,” in Strategic Culture and Weapons of Mass Destruction: Culturally Based Insights into Comparative National Security Policymaking, eds. Jeannie L. Johnson, Kerry M. Kartchner, and Jeffrey A. Larsen (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009), 33–52.

  69. 69.

    Randall L. Schweller, “Realism and the Present Great Power System: Growth and Positional Conflict Over Scarce Resources,” in Unipolar Politics: Realism and State Strategies After the Cold War, eds. Ethan B. Kapstein and Michael Mastanduno (New York: Columbia University Press, 1999), 28–68.

  70. 70.

    U.S. News, Y&R’s BAV, and the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, “Cultural Influence,” accessed January 21, 2020, https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/influence-rankings.

  71. 71.

    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, “World Heritage List,” accessed January 21, 2020, https://whc.unesco.org/en/list.

  72. 72.

    The Nobel Foundation. “All Nobel Prizes,” accessed September 11, 2020. https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/lists/all-nobel-prizes.

  73. 73.

    Scopus, “SJR—International Science Ranking,” accessed September 11, 2020, https://www.scimagojr.com/countryrank.php.

  74. 74.

    Gabriele Abbondanza, “Middle Powers and Great Powers Through History: The Concept from Ancient Times to the Present Day,” History of Political Thought 41, no. 3 (2020): 397–418.

  75. 75.

    Jack S. Levy, War in the Modern Great Power System: 1495–1975 (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2015), 16–18; Gadi Heimann, “What Does It Take to Be a Great Power? The Story of France Joining the Big Five,” Review of International Studies 41, no. 1 (2015): 185–206.

  76. 76.

    Generally with the exclusion of Canada, which is considered a traditional middle power alongside Australia.

  77. 77.

    Congyan Cai, “New Great Powers and International Law in the 21st Century,” European Journal of International Law 24, no. 3 (2013): 755–795.

  78. 78.

    Richard J. B. Bosworth, Italy, the Least of the Great Powers (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979).

  79. 79.

    Gabriele Abbondanza, Italy as a Regional Power: The African Context from National Unification to the Present Day (Rome: Aracne, 2016), 278.

  80. 80.

    Hans W. Maull, “Germany and Japan: The New Civilian Powers,” Foreign Affairs 69 (1991): 91–106.

  81. 81.

    Shogo Suzuki, “Seeking ‘Legitimate’ Great Power Status in Post-Cold War International Society: China’s and Japan’s Participation in UNPKO,” International Relations 22, no. 1 (2008): 45–63.

  82. 82.

    Andrew Hurrell, “Hegemony, Liberalism and Global Order: What Space for Would-Be Great Powers?” International Affairs 82, no. 1 (2006): 1–19.

  83. 83.

    Achin Vanaik, “Capitalist Globalisation and the Problem of Stability: Enter the New Quintet and Other Emerging Powers,” Third World Quarterly 34, no. 2 (2013): 194–213.

  84. 84.

    Matthew Stephen, “The Concept and Role of Middle Powers During Global Rebalancing,” Seton Hall Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations 14, no. 2 (2013): 36–52.

  85. 85.

    Thomas Wilkins and Lucas Rezende, “A Liminal and Transitional Awkward Power : Brazil Betwixt the Great and Middle Powers,” in Awkward Powers: Escaping Traditional Great and Middle Power Theory, eds. Gabriele Abbondanza and Thomas Wilkins (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2021), 95–128.

  86. 86.

    Emilian Kavalski, “India: An Awkward Great Power?” in Awkward Powers: Escaping Traditional Great and Middle Power Theory, eds. Gabriele Abbondanza and Thomas Wilkins (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2021), 73–94.

Bibliography

  • Abbondanza, Gabriele, and Thomas Wilkins. “The Case for Awkward Powers.” In Awkward Powers: Escaping Traditional Great and Middle Power Theory, edited by G. Abbondanza and T. Wilkins, 3–39. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2021.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abbondanza, Gabriele. “Middle Powers and Great Powers Through History: The Concept from Ancient Times to the Present Day.” History of Political Thought 41, no. 3 (2020): 397–418.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abbondanza, Gabriele. “The West’s Policeman? Assessing Italy’s Status in Global Peacekeeping.” The International Spectator 55, no. 2 (2020): 127–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abbondanza, Gabriele. “The Historical Determination of the Middle Power Concept.” In Rethinking Middle Powers in the Asian Century: New Theories, New Cases, edited by T. Struye de Swielande, D. Vandamme, D. Walton, and T. Wilkins, 32–44. London: Routledge, 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abbondanza, Gabriele. Italy as a Regional Power: The African Context from National Unification to the Present Day. Rome: Aracne, 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  • Annual Report 2018. Geneva: World Trade Organisation, 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biggeri, Mario, and Franco Volpi. Teoria e politica dell'aiuto allo sviluppo. Milan: FrancoAngeli, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boltho, Andrea. “Italy, Germany, Japan: From Economic Miracles to Virtual Stagnation.” In The Oxford Handbook of the Italian Economy Since Unification, edited by G. Toniolo, 108–133. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bosworth, Richard J. B. Italy, the Least of the Great Powers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braw, Elisabeth. “Europe’s Military Maestros: Italy.” Politico, August 23, 2017. https://www.politico.eu/article/europes-military-maestros-italy-troops-mediterranean-migrants-libya-refugees.

  • Brooks, Stephen G., and William C. Wohlforth. “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, no. 3 (2015): 7–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buzan, Barry. The United States and the Great Powers: World Politics in the Twenty-First Century. Cambridge: Polity, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buzan, Barry, and Ole Wæver. Regions and Powers: The Structure of International Security. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cai, Congyan. “New Great Powers and International Law in the 21st Century.” European Journal of International Law 24, no. 3 (2013): 755–795.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carr, Edward H. The Twenty Years’ Crisis: 1919–1939: An Introduction to the Study of International Relations. London: Macmillan, 1939.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan, Jennifer. “From Global Issues to National Interests: The Role of Non-State Actors in Redefining Japanese Diplomacy.” In The SAGE Handbook of Asian Foreign Policy, edited by T. Inoguchi, 203–217. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chandler, David. “The Responsibility to Protect? Imposing the ‘Liberal Peace’.” International Peacekeeping 11, no. 1 (2004): 59–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Council of Europe. “Budget.” Accessed October 5, 2020. https://www.coe.int/en/web/about-us/budget.

  • Cox, Robert W. “Middlepowermanship, Japan, and Future World Order.” International Journal 44, no. 4 (1989): 823–862.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, James W., and Ursula Jasper. “Non-Strategic Nuclear Weapons as a ‘Trojan Horse’: Explaining Germany’s Ambivalent Attitude.” European Security 23, no. 1 (2014): 15–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elcano Global Presence Report 2018. Madrid: Real Instituto Elcano, 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Union Commission. “EU Expenditure and Revenue 2014–2020.” Accessed October 5, 2020. http://ec.europa.eu/budget/figures/interactive/index_en.cfm.

  • Fink, Günther and Silvia Redaelli. “Determinants of International Emergency Aid—Humanitarian Need Only?” World Development 39, no. 5 (2011): 741–757.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Global Firepower. “2019 Military Strength Ranking.” Accessed October 5, 2020. http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing.asp.

  • Global Humanitarian Assistance Report 2019. Bristol: Development Initiatives, 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  • Global Wealth Databook 2019. Zürich: Credit Suisse, 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heimann, Gadi. “What Does It Take to Be a Great Power? The Story of France Joining the Big Five.” Review of International Studies 41, no. 1 (2015): 185–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huntington, Samuel P. “The Lonely Superpower.” Foreign Affairs 78, no. 2 (1999): 35–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurrell, Andrew. “Hegemony, Liberalism and Global Order: What Space for Would‐Be Great Powers?” International Affairs 82, no. 1 (2006): 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Monetary Fund. “World Economic Outlook Database 2019—GDP.” Accessed October 5, 2020. https://bit.ly/35PJFET.

  • Katzenstein, Peter J. “Introduction: Alternative Perspectives on National Security.” In The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in World Politics, edited by Peter J. Katzenstein, 1–27. New York: Columbia University Press, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kavalski, Emilian. “India: An Awkward Great Power?” In Awkward Powers: Escaping Traditional Great and Middle Power Theory, edited by G. Abbondanza and T. Wilkins, 73–94. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2021.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keohane, Robert O. “Twenty Years of Institutional Liberalism.” International Relations 26, no. 2 (2012): 125–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knutsen, Torbjørn L. The Rise and Fall of World Orders. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kristensen, Hans M., and Matt Korda. “Worldwide Deployments of Nuclear Weapons, 2017.” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 73, no. 5 (2017): 289–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lantis, Jeffrey S. “Strategic Culture: From Clausewitz to Constructivism.” In Strategic Culture and Weapons of Mass Destruction: Culturally Based Insights into Comparative National Security Policymaking, edited by Jeannie L. Johnson, Kerry M. Kartchner, and Jeffrey A. Larsen, 33–52. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levy, Jack S. War in the Modern Great Power System: 1495–1975. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lidén, Kristoffer. “Building Peace Between Global and Local Politics: The Cosmopolitical Ethics of Liberal Peacebuilding.” International Peacekeeping 16, no. 5 (2009): 616–634.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowy Institute. “Lowy Institute Global Diplomacy Index 2019 Country Ranking.” Accessed October 5, 2020. https://globaldiplomacyindex.lowyinstitute.org/country_rank.html.

  • Maull, Hans W. “Germany and Japan: The New Civilian Powers.” Foreign Affairs 69 (1991): 91–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mearsheimer, John J. The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. New York, USA: W. W. Norton, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Modelski, George. Principles of World Politics. New York: Free Press, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller, Jan-Werner. “Verfassungspatriotismus Revisited Eine liberale politische Kultur für Deutschland (und Europa)” [Constitutional Patriotism Revisited A Liberal Political Culture for Germany (and Europe)]. In Deutschland denken: Beiträge für die reflektierte Republik, edited by Undine Ruge and Daniel Morat, 83–95. Berlin: Springer, 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nadin, Peter. UN Security Council Reform. London: Routledge, 2016.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • NATO. “Funding NATO.” Accessed October 5, 2020. https://www.nato.int/cps/ic/natohq/topics_67655.htm.

  • Neack, Laura. The New Foreign Policy: Complex Interactions, Competing Interests. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nuti, Leopoldo. “Italy as a Hedging State? The Problematic Ratification of the Non-Proliferation Treaty.” In Nuclear Italy: An International History of Italian Nuclear Policies During the Cold War, edited by E. Bini and I. Londero, 119–139. Trieste: Edizioni Università di Trieste, 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nye, Joseph J. Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics. New York: Public Affairs, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nye, Joseph J. “Soft Power.” Foreign Affairs 80, no. 5 (1990): 153–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. “Official Development Assistance.” Accessed October 5, 2020. https://www2.compareyourcountry.org/oda?cr=oecd&lg=en.

  • OECD. “Member Countries’ Budget Contributions.” Accessed October 5, 2020. http://www.oecd.org/about/budget/member-countries-budget-contributions.htm.

  • OSCE Annual Report 2018. Vienna: OSCE, 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paul, Thazha Varkey. Power Versus Prudence: Why Nations Forgo Nuclear Weapons. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s Press, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • Penttilä, Risto E. J. The Role of the G8 in International Peace and Security. London: Routledge, 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, William E. “Britain’s Singular Other: Germany and the Brexit Crisis.” In Brexit and Beyond: Rethinking the Futures of Europe, edited by B. Martill and U. Staiger, 88–96. London: UCL Press, 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posen, Barry R., and Andrew L. Ross. “Competing Visions for U.S. Grand Strategy.” International Security 21, no. 3 (1996): 5–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samuels, Richard J. Machiavelli’s Children: Leaders and Their Legacies in Italy and Japan. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santoro, Carlo Maria. La politica estera di una media potenza: L'Italia dall'Unità ad oggi [A Middle Power’s Foreign Policy: Italy from National Unification to the Present Day]. Bologna: Il Mulino, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulz, Martin. “Ageing, Debt, and Growth Crises: Two Forerunners.” In Italy and Japan: How Similar Are They? A Comparative Analysis of Politics, Economics, and International Relations, edited by S. Beretta, A. Berkofsky, and F. Rugge, 205–233. Berlin: Springer, 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schweller, Randall L. “Realism and the Present Great Power System: Growth and Positional Conflict Over Scarce Resources.” In Unipolar Politics: Realism and State Strategies After the Cold War, edited by E. B. Kapstein and M. Mastanduno, 28–68. New York: Columbia University Press, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scopus. “SJR—International Science Ranking.” Accessed October 5, 2020. www.scimagojr.com/countryrank.php.

  • Siddi, Marco. “Italy’s ‘Middle Power’ Approach to Russia.” The International Spectator 54, no. 2 (2019): 123–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soeya, Yoshihide. “A ‘Normal’ Middle Power: Interpreting Changes in Japanese Security Policy in the 1990s and After.” In Japan as a ‘Normal Country’? A Nation in Search of Its Place in the World, edited by Y. Soeya, D. A. Welch, and M. Tadokoro, 72–97. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2011.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Soeya, Yoshihide. Nihon no “Midoru Pawa” Gaiko: Sengo Nihon no Sentaku to Koso [Japan’s Middle Power Diplomacy: Postwar Japan’s Choices and Plans]. Tokyo: Chikuma Shinsho, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephen, Matthew. “The Concept and Role of Middle Powers During Global Rebalancing.” Seton Hall Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations 14, no. 2 (2013): 36–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suzuki, Shogo. “Seeking ‘Legitimate’ Great Power Status in Post-Cold War International Society: China’s and Japan’s Participation in UNPKO.” International Relations 22, no. 1 (2008): 45–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The End of Globalization or a more Multipolar World? Zurich: Credit Suisse, 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Future of NATO and European Defence: Ninth Report of Session 2007–08. Report, Together with Formal Minutes, Oral and Written Evidence. London: House of Commons Defence Committee, 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Military Balance 2019. Abingdon on Thames: Taylor & Francis, 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Nobel Foundation. “All Nobel Prizes.” Accessed October 5, 2020. https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/lists/all-nobel-prizes.

  • Tian, Nan, Aude Fleurant, Alexandra Kuimova, Pieter D. Wezeman, and Siemon T. Wezeman. Trends in World Military Expenditure 2018. Stockholm: SIPRI, 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. “World Heritage List.” Accessed October 5, 2020. https://whc.unesco.org/en/list.

  • United Nations General Assembly. “Regular Budget 2019.” Accessed October 5, 2020. http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=ST/ADM/SER.B/992.

  • U.S. News, Y&R’s BAV, and the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. “Cultural Influence.” Accessed January 21, 2020. https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/influence-rankings.

  • U.S. News, Y&R’s BAV, and the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. “Most Influential Countries 2019.” Accessed October 5, 2020. https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/best-international-influence.

  • Vanaik, Achin. “Capitalist Globalisation and the Problem of Stability: Enter the New Quintet and Other Emerging Powers.” Third World Quarterly 34, no. 2 (2013): 194–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walt, Stephen M. “Alliance Formation and the Balance of World Power.” International Security 9, no. 4 (1985): 3–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waltz, Kenneth. Theory of International Politics. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  • Welsh, Helga A. “Germany: Ascent to Middle Power.” In European Foreign Policies: Does Europe Still Matter? edited by R. Tiersky and J. Van Oudenaren, 211–234. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wendt, Alexander. “Anarchy Is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics.” International Organization 46, no. 2 (1992): 391–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, Andreas, and Daniel Möckli. “Power Shifts and New Security Needs: NATO, European Identity, and the Reorganization of the West, 1967–75.” In The Routledge Handbook of Transatlantic Security, edited by J. Hanhimäki, G.-H. Soutou, and B. Germond, 103–122. London: Routledge, 2010.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wilkins, Thomas, and Lucas Rezende. “A Liminal and Transitional Awkward Power: Brazil Betwixt the Great and Middle Powers.” In Awkward Powers: Escaping Traditional Great and Middle Power Theory, edited by G. Abbondanza and T. Wilkins, 95–128. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2021.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Bank. “GDP Growth (Annual %).” Accessed October 5, 2020. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG?year_high_desc=true.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Government and International Relations, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Gabriele Abbondanza

Authors
  1. Gabriele Abbondanza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gabriele Abbondanza .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Government and International Relations, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Gabriele Abbondanza

  2. Department of Government and International Relations, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Thomas Stow Wilkins

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Abbondanza, G. (2022). The Odd Axis: Germany, Italy, and Japan as Awkward Great Powers. In: Abbondanza, G., Wilkins, T.S. (eds) Awkward Powers: Escaping Traditional Great and Middle Power Theory. Global Political Transitions. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-0370-9_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation