Lucrecia GarcĂa Iommi
ISA 2005Annual Conference
1
Balancing in the Aftermath of the Cold War
An Answer to the Unipolar Stability Puzzle
A stable unipolar system greatly conflicts with the predictions of the Neorealist School. The systemic
approach of Balance of Power theory does not explain the stability of the unipolar world or the current
pattern of balancing behavior. On the other hand, Balance of Threat theory, which moves to the state level,
has a stronger explanatory power, particularly through the dimension Offensive Intentions. It is proposed
here that Offensive intentions can be considered a function of domestic political arrangements. Ceteris
paribus, the more a potential challenger is domestically organized like the liberal democratic hegemon, the
less likely it is to balance this hegemon, and the more stable (absence of confrontation among great powers)
the present configuration becomes.
From 1990 onwards the world has only one superpower.
1
The unprecedented combination
of quantitative and qualitative advantages translates into a unique geopolitical position.
After 1990 the US is alone at the top in the distribution of power attributes as traditionally
defined (size, population and territory; resource endowment; economic capabilities;
military strength; and competence) (Waltz 1979: 131), but this unparalleled power
preponderance remains basically unchallenged.
Sudden unipolarity gave practitioners and scholars of International Relations (IR) a serious
headache. The presumed stability of the bipolar configuration, ended up in an unforeseen
burst, old alliances remained stable, and not multipolarity but a stable unipolarity was
established. Historical experience and predominant theoretical perspectives, had led many
to a clear expectation of balancing and renewed conflict among allies (Mearsheimer 1990,
Krauthammer 1992, Layne, 1993, Waltz 2000). The international system abhors vacuum,
thus either unilaterally or through alliances great powers - namely the major EU countries,
1
There are minority views that deny the fact of unipolarity. Mearsheimer (Mearsheimer, 2001), for example,
would disagree with this description, arguing, instead, that there is regional unipolarity but not global
unipolarity. Others would refer to economic multipolarity considering the EU and Japan’s economic strength;
this is, indeed, an interesting argument, especially in light of the difficulty in defining what balance is, but still
it does not change the fact that there is only actor with all the attributes of a superpower. States, because they
are in a self-help system, have to use their combined capabilities in order to serve their interests. The
economic, military, and other capabilities of nations cannot be sectored and separately weighed: the rank the
states have depend on how they score on size of population, territory, resource endowment, economic
capability, military strength, political stability and competence.
Page 1 of 27 
Convention