International Relations 101: International Security - Traditional Security Military Power Balance of Power Alliances NATO Collective Security

What This Is

Traditional security refers to the use of military power and alliances to ensure state survival and security in an anarchic international system. This concept is crucial for understanding global affairs as it shapes the behavior of states, influences international relations, and impacts global stability. For instance, the creation of NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) in 1949 was a response to the balance-of-power logic, where the United States and its European allies formed a collective defense alliance to counter the Soviet Union's military power.

Key Theories, Concepts & Thinkers

• Realism (Morgenthau, Waltz): States are the main actors in an anarchic system, and their primary concern is survival and power – explains why arms races persist despite peace talks.
• Balance of Power Theory: The distribution of power among states determines the likelihood of war and peace – underpins the concept of collective defense and deterrence.
• Collective Security (League of Nations, UN): States pool their resources to provide mutual security and prevent aggression – explains the creation of the United Nations and its role in maintaining international peace and security.
• Alliance Theory (Walt): States form alliances to balance power, deter aggression, and achieve security – explains the formation of NATO and other military alliances.
• Security Dilemma (Jervis): States' efforts to increase their security can lead to a decrease in security for others – explains the arms race between the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War.
• Hard Power (Mearsheimer): Military power and coercion are essential for achieving security and influence – underpins the concept of military intervention and regime change.
• Soft Power (Nye): Attracting and influencing others through culture, ideology, and economic power – explains the role of the United States in promoting democracy and human rights.
• Democratic Peace Theory: Democracies rarely fight each other – underpins foreign policy doctrines of democracy promotion and NATO enlargement.
• Neorealism (Waltz): States are unitary actors that prioritize their own security and power – explains the behavior of states in the international system.
• Liberal Institutionalism (Keohane): International institutions and norms can promote cooperation and stability – underpins the creation of the World Trade Organization and other international organizations.

Step-by-Step Analysis

1. Identify the key actors and their interests: Who are the main states involved in the conflict or issue? What are their security concerns and interests?
2. Analyze the security dilemma: How do the actions of one state affect the security of others? Can the security dilemma lead to an arms race or increased tensions?
3. Evaluate the balance of power: How does the distribution of power among states influence the likelihood of war and peace? Are there any power vacuums or imbalances that could lead to conflict?
4. Assess the role of alliances: Are there any alliances or collective defense agreements that could influence the behavior of states? How do these alliances impact the balance of power?
5. Consider the impact of international institutions: Are there any international institutions or norms that could promote cooperation and stability? How do these institutions influence the behavior of states?
6. Conduct a cost-benefit analysis: What are the potential costs and benefits of different security strategies or actions? How do these costs and benefits impact the security of states?

Common Misconceptions

• Misconception: The United Nations is a world government.
• Correction: The UN is an international organization that promotes cooperation and stability, but it does not have the authority to make laws or impose its will on member states.
• Example: The UN's role in maintaining international peace and security is limited to recommending actions to member states, which can choose to implement or ignore these recommendations.
• Misconception: Sovereignty means absolute freedom to do anything.
• Correction: Sovereignty refers to a state's independence and autonomy, but it does not imply that states are free to act without consequences or accountability.
• Example: The concept of sovereignty is often used to justify state actions, but it can also be used to criticize human rights abuses or other forms of state behavior that violate international norms.
• Misconception: All conflicts are about religion or culture.
• Correction: Conflicts can be caused by a variety of factors, including economic, political, and security concerns.
• Example: The conflict in Ukraine is often framed as a clash between Russian and Ukrainian cultures, but it is also influenced by economic and security concerns, including the presence of NATO troops in Eastern Europe.

Exam / Essay Tips

• Typical question patterns: IR exams often ask students to apply theoretical concepts to real-world cases or to evaluate the effectiveness of different security strategies.
• Deploying theories: IR theories can be used to explain and predict state behavior, but they must be applied carefully and in context.
• Tricky distinctions: IR students must be able to distinguish between different concepts and theories, such as anarchy and chaos, balance of power and bandwagoning, and hard power and soft power.
• Integrating historical and current examples: IR students must be able to draw on a range of historical and current examples to support their arguments and illustrate theoretical concepts.

Quick Practice Scenario

Scenario: Two rising powers in the Asia-Pacific engage in a naval buildup. Using realism, explain the likely outcome. Which other IR theory would predict a different outcome and why?

Answer: Realism would predict an arms race and increased tensions between the two rising powers, as each state seeks to increase its military power and security. Neoliberalism, on the other hand, would predict cooperation and stability, as the two states engage in economic and security dialogue to address their common interests and concerns.

Last-Minute Cram Sheet

• Key theorists: Morgenthau, Waltz, Jervis, Mearsheimer, Nye, Keohane
• Treaties: Treaty of Versailles, Treaty of Westphalia, Treaty of Paris (1783), Treaty of Berlin (1878)
• Dates: 1648 (Westphalia), 1914 (World War I), 1945 (UN Charter), 1991 (end of the Cold War)
• Acronyms: NATO, UN, EU, ASEAN, OPEC
• Trap distinctions: "NATO" is a collective defense organization, not a collective security organization – Article 5 is triggered only when a member is attacked, not every threat.
• Key concepts: Anarchy, balance of power, collective security, hard power, soft power, security dilemma, democratic peace theory, neoliberalism, realism.