Balanced Realism helps to explain how states think and act in the 21st century

Balanced Realism: A 21st Century Approach to International Relations Theory

Balanced Realism offers a new perspective on international relations, specifically designed to address the complexities of the 21st century. This theory bridges the gap between the power-centric view of offensive realism and the security-focused approach of defensive realism, presenting a more nuanced framework that captures the multifaceted nature of modern state behavior. By integrating Mearsheimer’s emphasis on power and Waltz’s focus on security, Balanced Realism proposes a strategy where states pursue power with prudence, aiming to enhance their security while avoiding unnecessary conflicts. In this exploration, we will define the core principles of Balanced Realism and examine its practical applications through both historical and contemporary case studies, highlighting its enduring relevance in today’s rapidly evolving geopolitical landscape.

“Balanced Realism offers a nuanced approach to understanding how states think and act on the international stage. It recognizes that the extremes of Offensive and Defensive Realism can be limiting, and instead, it proposes that state behavior exists on a spectrum. By balancing power accumulation with strategic restraint, states can better navigate the complexities of global politics, pursuing their interests while minimizing unnecessary conflicts.” — Brian Reese

Core Principles

Anarchic International System:

• Like both offensive and defensive realism, Balanced Realism starts with the assumption that the international system is anarchic, meaning there is no central authority above states. This anarchy compels states to prioritize their security and survival above all else. However, states will also seek to increase their power to help maximize their security.

Rational Actors:

• States are rational actors aiming to maximize their security and ensure their survival. To achieve this, they balance the need for increased power with the imperative to avoid unnecessary risks. They make strategic decisions based on a careful calculation of benefits and risks, weighing potential gains against the possible threats and costs.

Balancing Security Objectives with Power Ambitions:

• Balanced Realism contends that states must balance their security objectives with the pursuit of power. Unlike offensive realism, which asserts that states perpetually seek to maximize power for security, and defensive realism, which emphasizes maintaining sufficient power to avoid provocation, Balanced Realism advocates a nuanced approach. States should pursue power strategically, prioritizing gains that do not provoke unnecessary conflicts or trigger counterbalancing coalitions from other states. This approach ensures that states can enhance their security while maintaining stability within the international system.

Key Assumptions

Moderate Aggression:

• States will adopt a moderately aggressive stance, pursuing opportunities to increase power and influence when the risks are manageable, and the potential gains are significant. However, they will avoid reckless expansion that could lead to costly conflicts or trigger counterbalancing alliances.
• Example: Japan’s post-war economic strategy, focusing on becoming a global economic leader through technological innovation and trade relationships, while maintaining a defensive military posture.

Strategic Restraint:

• Recognizing the dangers of overreach, states will practice strategic restraint. They will assess the potential responses of other states and avoid actions that could provoke strong counterbalancing coalitions or long-term antagonisms.
• Example: The U.S. practicing restraint in the Cold War through arms control agreements like SALT to avoid direct military confrontation with the Soviet Union.

Security Dilemma Management:

• States will actively seek to manage the security dilemma by engaging in diplomatic efforts, forming alliances, and using economic and soft power tools to reduce the perception of threat among potential adversaries.
• Example: China’s use of economic partnerships through the BRI to build strategic relationships, reducing the perception of threat among participating countries.

Adaptive Strategies:

• States will employ adaptive strategies, shifting between offensive and defensive postures based on the evolving international environment. They will be flexible in their approach, responding to changes in power dynamics, technological advancements, and shifts in alliances.
• Example: The U.S. adapting its strategy in response to the rise of China by strengthening alliances in the Asia-Pacific region.

Theoretical Propositions

Power Accumulation with Caution:

• States will pursue opportunities to increase their relative power, but they will do so with caution, ensuring that their actions do not provoke overwhelming opposition or lead to unsustainable commitments.
• Example: Germany’s integration into the EU, increasing its influence through economic means without provoking military conflicts.

Balance of Power Considerations:

• States will constantly evaluate the balance of power and seek to prevent any single state from achieving dominance. They will engage in balancing behavior through alliances and countermeasures, when necessary, but they will also recognize the benefits of aligning with stronger powers in certain situations.
• Example: NATO’s expansion to include Eastern European countries as a balancing measure against potential Russian aggression.

Economic and Soft Power Integration:

• Balanced Realism emphasizes the integration of economic and soft power into state strategies. States will leverage economic interdependence, cultural influence, and diplomatic engagements to enhance their security and reduce the likelihood of military confrontations.
• Example: The U.S. using economic sanctions and diplomatic pressure to influence Iran’s nuclear program.

Dynamic Threat Perception:

• States’ threat perceptions are dynamic and context-dependent. Balanced Realism asserts that states will continuously reassess threats and opportunities, adjusting their strategies to reflect changes in the international system.
• Example: The shifting U.S. policy towards North Korea, moving between sanctions and diplomatic engagements based on the changing threat landscape.

Policy Implications

Prudent Foreign Policy:

• States should adopt a prudent foreign policy that balances power-seeking with restraint. They should avoid unnecessary provocations and focus on achievable objectives that enhance their security without triggering adverse reactions.
• Example: Canada’s foreign policy, emphasizing diplomatic engagements and multilateralism to enhance its security and influence without provoking conflicts.

Flexible Alliances:

• States should maintain flexible alliances, forming partnerships based on specific strategic needs rather than rigid commitments. This allows for adaptability in response to changing international dynamics.
• Example: The formation of temporary coalitions, such as the coalition against ISIS, to address specific security threats.

Emphasis on Diplomacy:

• Diplomatic efforts should be prioritized to manage the security dilemma and mitigate conflicts. States should use diplomacy to build trust, reduce misperceptions, and create cooperative frameworks.
• Example: The Iran Nuclear Deal (JCPOA) as a diplomatic effort to mitigate the threat of nuclear proliferation.

Investment in Soft Power:

• Investing in soft power resources, such as cultural diplomacy, economic aid, and international institutions, can provide states with additional tools to influence others and achieve their security goals without resorting to military means.
• Example: South Korea’s use of cultural diplomacy through K-pop and other cultural exports to enhance its global influence.

Strengths of Balanced Realism

Comprehensive Approach:

• Integration of Multiple Perspectives: Balanced Realism incorporates elements of offensive realism, defensive realism, and aspects of liberalism and constructivism. This allows for a more nuanced understanding of state behavior, combining power dynamics with the importance of international institutions and norms.
• Flexibility and Adaptability: The theory’s emphasis on adaptive strategies allows states to shift between offensive and defensive postures, making it more applicable to the fluid nature of international relations.

Emphasis on Strategic Restraint:

• Avoiding Overreach: By advocating for strategic restraint, Balanced Realism helps prevent states from engaging in reckless actions that could provoke strong counterbalancing coalitions or lead to unsustainable commitments.
• Stability and Security: The focus on balancing power accumulation with risk aversion promotes stability in the international system, as states are encouraged to avoid unnecessary conflicts and maintain regional balance.

Recognition of Economic and Soft Power:

• Comprehensive Power Integration: Balanced Realism acknowledges the importance of economic and soft power alongside traditional military means. This reflects the reality of contemporary international relations where economic influence and cultural diplomacy play significant roles.
• Strategic Use of Economic Tools: The theory’s inclusion of economic interdependence and soft power allows for a broader range of strategies for states to enhance their security without resorting to military conflict.

Weaknesses of Balanced Realism

Ambiguity in Decision-Making:

• Balancing Act: The requirement for states to balance power accumulation with strategic restraint can lead to ambiguity in decision-making. It might be challenging for states to determine the right mix of aggression and caution, especially under pressure or in rapidly changing circumstances.
• Potential for Inconsistency: The theory’s flexibility might result in inconsistent policies, where states oscillate between aggressive and restrained behaviors, potentially undermining long-term strategic goals.

Dependence on Rational Actors:

• Assumption of Rationality: Balanced Realism assumes that states are rational actors making strategic decisions based on cost-benefit analyses. However, this might not always be the case, as states can act irrationally due to domestic politics, leadership idiosyncrasies, or misperceptions.
• Underestimation of Non-Rational Factors: The theory might underestimate the influence of non-rational factors such as nationalism, ideological commitments, or historical grievances that can drive state behavior.

Limited Predictive Power:

• Generalized Framework: While Balanced Realism provides a broad framework for understanding state behavior, it might lack the specificity needed to predict particular actions in specific contexts. The theory’s flexibility can make it difficult to generate precise predictions or policy prescriptions.
• Difficulty in Measuring Restraint: Quantifying strategic restraint and the balance between power accumulation and risk aversion can be challenging, making it hard to empirically test the theory.

Conclusion

Balanced Realism presents a new and adaptive framework for analyzing international relations in the 21st century. By integrating the power-centric focus of offensive realism with the security-oriented perspective of defensive realism, it provides a balanced approach that reflects the complexities of modern state behavior. The theory emphasizes the importance of strategic restraint and the integration of economic and soft power, advocating for a careful balance between power accumulation and risk management.

Balanced Realism’s strengths lie in its ability to offer a comprehensive view that includes both traditional military power and non-traditional forms of influence. It encourages states to pursue their security objectives prudently, avoiding unnecessary conflicts while strategically enhancing their power. This approach not only helps maintain stability within the international system but also allows for flexibility and adaptability in the face of evolving geopolitical landscapes. Despite its robust framework, Balanced Realism faces challenges, particularly in ensuring consistent application and addressing non-rational factors influencing state behavior.

Ultimately, Balanced Realism provides valuable insights and practical guidelines for policymakers, emphasizing prudent decision-making and the strategic use of diverse forms of power. By recognizing the dynamic nature of international relations, it offers a relevant and enduring framework for navigating the complexities of global politics today and in the future.

Historical Context and Case Studies

The Cold War Era:

• Context: During the Cold War, both the United States and the Soviet Union engaged in power accumulation but with strategic restraint. They sought to expand their influence through proxies, economic aid, and soft power, avoiding direct military confrontation to prevent mutual destruction.
• Balanced Realism Application: The U.S. practiced Balanced Realism by using diplomatic strategies like the Marshall Plan to strengthen Western Europe economically and politically against Soviet expansion. Additionally, managing the security dilemma through arms control agreements like the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT) exemplified a balanced approach, leveraging power accumulation with strategic restraint to avoid direct conflict.

China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI):

• Context: China’s BRI aims to expand its economic influence globally through infrastructure investments and economic partnerships.
• Balanced Realism Application: China’s approach reflects moderate aggression by expanding its influence without direct military intervention. By using economic and soft power to build strategic partnerships, China practices strategic restraint, ensuring its growth does not provoke significant counterbalancing alliances. This method promotes stability while allowing for substantial power accumulation.

The U.S. Invasion of Iraq (2003):

• Context: The decision by the United States to invade Iraq in 2003 was based on the perceived threat posed by weapons of mass destruction and the desire to reshape the Middle East geopolitically.
• Balanced Realism Analysis: The invasion exemplified a failure in prudence, as the U.S. overestimated the benefits and underestimated the risks. The prolonged conflict strained resources and fostered anti-American sentiment, illustrating the consequences of overreach and the importance of balanced power accumulation with strategic restraint.

Putin’s Invasion of Ukraine (2022):

• Context: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was driven by strategic desires to reassert influence over its near abroad and prevent Ukraine from aligning with Western powers, particularly NATO. After numerous diplomatic efforts failed, the West crossed what Putin considered his red line.
• Balanced Realism Analysis: Putin’s decision reflects moderate aggression but lacked strategic restraint. The invasion led to severe international backlash, including economic sanctions and increased NATO unity, highlighting the dangers of aggressive power accumulation without considering potential counterbalancing responses.

The Rise of Germany Post-World War II:

• Context: After World War II, West Germany focused on economic recovery and growth, becoming an economic powerhouse in Europe.
• Balanced Realism Application: Germany’s strategy of integrating into the European Economic Community (EEC) and later the European Union (EU) represents balanced power accumulation through economic means and strategic restraint. Germany avoided military build-up and instead focused on economic strength and political influence within a cooperative framework.

Japan’s Post-War Economic Strategy:

• Context: Following its defeat in World War II, Japan pursued economic development as a means of regaining national power.
• Balanced Realism Application: Japan’s focus on becoming a global economic leader through technological innovation and trade relationships exemplifies moderate aggression in economic terms. Japan exercised strategic restraint by limiting its military capabilities, relying instead on its alliance with the United States for security, thereby avoiding provoking neighboring countries.

Clarification of Key Concepts

Moderate Aggression:

• Definition: A stance where states seek to increase their power and influence when the risks are manageable, and the potential gains are significant, but avoid reckless actions that could lead to costly conflicts or provoke strong counterbalancing coalitions.
• Example: A state expanding its influence through economic investments in developing countries, rather than through military invasions.

Strategic Restraint:

• Definition: The practice of carefully assessing the potential responses of other states and avoiding actions that could provoke significant opposition or long-term antagonism. This involves recognizing the limits of power and the importance of maintaining stability.
• Example: A state refraining from military intervention in a neighboring country to avoid sparking a regional conflict or arms race, instead opting for diplomatic pressure and economic sanctions.

Comparison with Other Theories

Offensive Realism:

• Comparison: Offensive realism posits that states are always seeking to maximize their power to ensure security.
• Contrast: Balanced Realism agrees that power is crucial but argues for a more cautious approach. States should seek power while avoiding unnecessary conflicts and the formation of counterbalancing coalitions.

Defensive Realism:

• Comparison: Defensive realism suggests states seek enough power to maintain security and avoid provoking others.
• Contrast: Balanced Realism balances between power accumulation and risk aversion, advocating for strategic gains without unnecessary provocation or escalation.

Liberalism:

• Comparison: Liberalism emphasizes the role of international institutions, cooperation, and economic interdependence in fostering peace and stability.
• Contrast: While Balanced Realism acknowledges the importance of international institutions and economic ties, it maintains a focus on power dynamics and strategic restraint rather than an inherent optimism about enduring cooperation.

Constructivism:

• Comparison: Constructivism focuses on the impact of ideas, norms, and identities in shaping state behavior.
• Contrast: Balanced Realism incorporates the importance of material power and security, arguing that while norms and identities matter, the primary drivers are strategic calculations of power and security.

Neoclassical Realism:

• Comparison: Neoclassical realism integrates internal factors such as state leadership, national institutions, and societal influences with traditional realist concepts.
• Contrast: Balanced Realism similarly recognizes the importance of these internal factors but places a stronger emphasis on balancing power acquisition with strategic restraint on the international stage.

Balanced Realism: Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

What is Balanced Realism?

• Balanced Realism is a 21st-century approach to international relations theory that synthesizes elements of offensive realism and defensive realism. It posits that states seek to maximize their security through power accumulation but do so with strategic prudence to avoid unnecessary conflicts and the formation of balancing coalitions against them.
• Definition: Balanced Realism argues that states act rationally to enhance their security, balancing power accumulation and risk aversion, and integrating economic and soft power strategies alongside traditional military means.

Who Developed the Theory of Balanced Realism?

Balanced Realism is a theory of international relations developed by Air Force veteran Brian Reese. It synthesizes elements of offensive realism and defensive realism to provide a nuanced framework for understanding state behavior in the 21st century. The theory emphasizes the importance of strategic restraint and the integration of economic and soft power, advocating for a balanced approach to power accumulation that avoids unnecessary conflicts while enhancing security.

How Does Balanced Realism Relate to Other Theories of International Relations?

Balanced Realism bridges the gap between offensive realism and defensive realism while also incorporating aspects of liberalism and constructivism.

Comparisons:

• Offensive Realism: Emphasizes the continuous pursuit of power for security.
• Balanced Realism Similarity: Acknowledges the importance of power for security.
• Balanced Realism Difference: Advocates for cautious power accumulation to avoid provoking counterbalancing coalitions.
• Defensive Realism: Focuses on maintaining enough power to secure the state without provoking others.
• Balanced Realism Similarity: Recognizes the need to avoid provoking strong adversaries.
• Balanced Realism Difference: Encourages power accumulation but with strategic restraint.

How is Balanced Realism the Same as Other Theories?

Similarities:

• Anarchic International System: Like both offensive and defensive realism, Balanced Realism assumes the international system is anarchic, compelling states to prioritize security.
• Rational Actors: States are rational actors seeking to maximize security and make strategic decisions based on cost-benefit analyses.
• Power and Security: Acknowledges the significance of power for state security, similar to realism in general.

How Does Balanced Realism Differ from Other Theories?

Differences:

• Strategic Restraint: Balanced Realism emphasizes the importance of strategic restraint, unlike offensive realism, which focuses solely on power maximization.
• Integration of Soft Power: Unlike traditional realism, Balanced Realism incorporates economic and soft power as vital components of state strategy.
• Adaptive Strategies: Balanced Realism promotes flexibility in state strategies, shifting between offensive and defensive postures as needed, unlike the static nature of some realist theories.
• Example: China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI): Reflects Balanced Realism through economic expansion and soft power, avoiding direct military confrontation.

How Does Balanced Realism View the Role of International Institutions?

Balanced Realism acknowledges the utility of international institutions in mitigating conflicts and fostering cooperation among states.

Application:

• Engagement: States engage with international institutions to manage disputes, build alliances, and legitimize their actions.
• Multilateralism: Promotes the use of multilateral platforms to address global challenges and enhance security through collective action.
• Example: United Nations: Plays a vital role in peacekeeping, conflict resolution, and fostering international cooperation.

How Does Balanced Realism Address Technological Advancements?

Balanced Realism considers technological advancements, such as cyber warfare and artificial intelligence, as critical factors in modern international relations.

Application:

• Adapting Strategies: States adapt their strategies to incorporate new technologies, enhancing their security and influence.
• Cyber Security: Recognizes the importance of cybersecurity measures and international cooperation to prevent cyber threats.
• Example: Cyber Warfare: States enhancing their cyber capabilities to protect national security and deter cyber-attacks.

How Does Balanced Realism Handle Economic Sanctions?

Balanced Realism views economic sanctions as a strategic tool for influencing state behavior without resorting to military force.

Application:

• Targeted Sanctions: Implementing targeted sanctions to pressure adversaries while minimizing collateral damage.
• Multilateral Sanctions: Prefers multilateral sanctions to increase effectiveness and legitimacy.
• Example: Sanctions on North Korea: Targeted sanctions aimed at curbing North Korea’s nuclear program while engaging in diplomatic negotiations.

How Does Balanced Realism Approach Regional Conflicts?

Balanced Realism suggests managing regional conflicts through power projection, diplomacy, and economic influence.

Application:

• Regional Stability: Great powers seek to maintain stability through alliances, military presence, and diplomatic initiatives.
• Conflict Mediation: States act as mediators to resolve regional conflicts, leveraging their influence for peace agreements.
• Example: The Middle East Peace Process: U.S. involvement in mediating peace agreements between Israel and its neighbors.

How Does Balanced Realism View Humanitarian Interventions?

Balanced Realism supports humanitarian interventions when they align with national interests and broader security objectives.

Application:

• Selective Interventions: Engaging in humanitarian interventions selectively, considering benefits and risks.
• Multilateral Approaches: Prefers multilateral interventions through international organizations to share the burden and legitimacy.
• Example: NATO’s Intervention in Libya (2011): Aimed at protecting civilians during the Libyan Civil War while considering strategic interests.

What is the Role of Small and Medium Powers in Balanced Realism?

Balanced Realism acknowledges the roles of small and medium powers, recognizing their strategic importance despite their subordinate status to great powers, especially those with nuclear weapons. These smaller states can exert influence through regional alliances, economic diplomacy, and strategic partnerships. While they often align with great powers for security and economic benefits, they also have agency in shaping regional dynamics and can leverage their positions to balance against or support the interests of larger states. This approach reflects their ability to navigate complex geopolitical landscapes, making them crucial players in the international system.

Application:

• Strategic Alliances: Forming alliances with great powers for security and influence.
• Economic Diplomacy: Leveraging economic diplomacy to enhance their strategic position without direct confrontations.
• Example: Vietnam’s Foreign Policy: Balances relations between China and the United States to ensure security and economic growth.

How Does Balanced Realism View Non-Traditional Security Threats?

Balanced Realism expands its scope to include non-traditional security threats such as terrorism, cyber warfare, and pandemics.

Application:

• Comprehensive Security: States adopt comprehensive security strategies that integrate traditional military capabilities with measures to address non-traditional threats.
• International Cooperation: Collaborating through international frameworks to combat global challenges that transcend national borders.
• Example: Global Counterterrorism Efforts: International cooperation in counterterrorism operations, intelligence sharing, and capacity-building.

How Does Balanced Realism View Dynamic Threat Perception?

Balanced Realism asserts that states’ threat perceptions are dynamic and context-dependent, requiring continuous reassessment of threats and opportunities.

Application:

• Adaptive Strategies: States adjust their strategies to reflect changes in the international system, power dynamics, and technological advancements.
• Contextual Analysis: Constant evaluation of global and regional developments to inform strategic decisions.
• Example: Shift in U.S. Focus from Counterterrorism to Great Power Competition: Reflects the dynamic reassessment of threats and strategic priorities in response to changing global conditions.

What is the Role of Non-State Actors in Balanced Realism?

Balanced Realism recognizes the significant impact of non-state actors, such as multinational corporations and international NGOs, on international relations.

Application:

• Influence on State Behavior: Non-state actors can shape state policies through advocacy, economic pressure, and public opinion.
• Strategic Partnerships: States can form strategic partnerships with non-state actors to achieve their security and economic objectives.
• Example: The role of NGOs in the global climate change agenda, influencing state policies and international agreements.

About the Author

Air Force Veteran Brian Reese

Brian Reese is a leading VA disability benefits expert and the #1 bestselling author of VA Claim Secrets and You Deserve It. Frustrated with the VA claim process, Brian founded VA Claims Insider to help disabled veterans win their VA disability compensation faster. He has served over 10 million military members and veterans since 2013. A former Air Force officer, Brian deployed to Afghanistan in 2011. He is a Distinguished Graduate from the U.S. Air Force Academy and holds an MBA from Oklahoma State University, where he was a National Honor Scholar.