- Explaining third world alliances balance of power theory
- Balance of power theory
o Explaining third world
- David offers corrective: looking at how states behave acorss global south, a lot of time shift
focus and analysis
- Classic assumptions of BOP limited in explanatory
- Bop theory, predicts threats will be resisted
- State as unit of analysis
- States according to BOP, predict that states counter other states power by balancing
- Which entails creating alliances with other states and arming themselves to balance against
threat from other states
- WWI AND WWII example, how did france behave?
- Offset threat through alliance building and program of arming themselves
- Alignment is determined by te structure of the intl system
- Gives rise to alignemtn pattern^
- Actual and potential external threats that a states face, how strong alliance will be...
- David says that BOP has shortcomings to explain how global south behave, using egypt and
ethiopia
- Ex: african state engaged in seucrity ecosystem
- Ethiopia, david’s observation
- He comes up with omnibalance
- What happens in global south, they face external and internal threats
- For authoritarian regimes in global south, domestic political environment is as least as unstable
and dagernous as intl one
- David shifts unit of analysis, unlike IR theory, unit of analysis then becomes the state leader
- Wants to safeguard personal power and survivial
- Coups could cost them their life
- Element of leaders survivial and their regime against potential attackers
- When coup detat occur, where do they almost always originate from? The army, military,
seucirty forcees, people with guns
- Military as the center of gravity of countrys power
- IR: vis a vis neighbours
- Omniblanacing teaches us that military forces become primary source of threat and instability
Comparison
- BOP: leaders of state align with secondary adversaires to focus on resources on prime
adversaries
- Making defence paths
- Britain and france allies in WWII, shared system of democratic war, but eventually alliance with
soviet, up until then it was a rival, but at the time, secondary rival, adversary, interest in
confronting primary adversary germany, clasiic balance of power behavioir
- Omnibalancing: some of same principles but rebalance for global south
- Same holds true but secondary threats other states, primary often domestic
- Goal of third world leaders to stay in power, protect themselves over state interests
, - Why weaken security forces? Makes sense if you consider it a primary threat, focus on that first,
might even aligh external powers for stability of regimes
- Dictators often afriad of own armed forces than external
- Sometimes will weaken their own militaries power to make sure no one overthrows them
- Authoritorian leaders ^
- External enemies not what they most fear, fear more the threat
Theoretical implications
- In accordance with realism
- Omnibalancing argues that intl politics on power, interests and rationality
- BUT unlike realism, states are not unitary actors
- Leaders of state rather than state itsel, is level of analysis
- Realism argues that state can be untiary actor, founding scholar of neo realism kenneth, state
can be compared to a black box, or a billiard ball
- Balls banging against each other
- Neo relist, like states act, unitary actors, black box more valuable, implies that all states are the
same, don’t need to look a=internally, what matters is the result. All states behave the same no
matter which country you’re dealing with, not useful to open black bozxto see mechanisms
within
- States functioning as same way
- Omnibalance says no, have to look in the state
- To proceed with outcomes u need to look at processes differently
Case study not david example
- Uganda in east africa
- Fast forward to idi amin, dictator of uganda 1971-79
- Behavious as dictator
- For a while, extent he was known, upheld as quintissential african dictator
- Killed so many people
- Didn't make sense to ugandan politics
- Idi amin seized power in military coup in 1971
- Countries would support coup d’etat to get more power
- Idi served in britishi imperial military
- His coup sponsored by british and israelis
- He embodied the interests of Britian, groomed him
- Israel saw this as a strategic move to gian power
- Amin deposed Milton Obote, who replaced him after Amin was overthrown In 1979
- Obote was in exile until his overthrowing
- Balance of power theory
o Explaining third world
- David offers corrective: looking at how states behave acorss global south, a lot of time shift
focus and analysis
- Classic assumptions of BOP limited in explanatory
- Bop theory, predicts threats will be resisted
- State as unit of analysis
- States according to BOP, predict that states counter other states power by balancing
- Which entails creating alliances with other states and arming themselves to balance against
threat from other states
- WWI AND WWII example, how did france behave?
- Offset threat through alliance building and program of arming themselves
- Alignment is determined by te structure of the intl system
- Gives rise to alignemtn pattern^
- Actual and potential external threats that a states face, how strong alliance will be...
- David says that BOP has shortcomings to explain how global south behave, using egypt and
ethiopia
- Ex: african state engaged in seucrity ecosystem
- Ethiopia, david’s observation
- He comes up with omnibalance
- What happens in global south, they face external and internal threats
- For authoritarian regimes in global south, domestic political environment is as least as unstable
and dagernous as intl one
- David shifts unit of analysis, unlike IR theory, unit of analysis then becomes the state leader
- Wants to safeguard personal power and survivial
- Coups could cost them their life
- Element of leaders survivial and their regime against potential attackers
- When coup detat occur, where do they almost always originate from? The army, military,
seucirty forcees, people with guns
- Military as the center of gravity of countrys power
- IR: vis a vis neighbours
- Omniblanacing teaches us that military forces become primary source of threat and instability
Comparison
- BOP: leaders of state align with secondary adversaires to focus on resources on prime
adversaries
- Making defence paths
- Britain and france allies in WWII, shared system of democratic war, but eventually alliance with
soviet, up until then it was a rival, but at the time, secondary rival, adversary, interest in
confronting primary adversary germany, clasiic balance of power behavioir
- Omnibalancing: some of same principles but rebalance for global south
- Same holds true but secondary threats other states, primary often domestic
- Goal of third world leaders to stay in power, protect themselves over state interests
, - Why weaken security forces? Makes sense if you consider it a primary threat, focus on that first,
might even aligh external powers for stability of regimes
- Dictators often afriad of own armed forces than external
- Sometimes will weaken their own militaries power to make sure no one overthrows them
- Authoritorian leaders ^
- External enemies not what they most fear, fear more the threat
Theoretical implications
- In accordance with realism
- Omnibalancing argues that intl politics on power, interests and rationality
- BUT unlike realism, states are not unitary actors
- Leaders of state rather than state itsel, is level of analysis
- Realism argues that state can be untiary actor, founding scholar of neo realism kenneth, state
can be compared to a black box, or a billiard ball
- Balls banging against each other
- Neo relist, like states act, unitary actors, black box more valuable, implies that all states are the
same, don’t need to look a=internally, what matters is the result. All states behave the same no
matter which country you’re dealing with, not useful to open black bozxto see mechanisms
within
- States functioning as same way
- Omnibalance says no, have to look in the state
- To proceed with outcomes u need to look at processes differently
Case study not david example
- Uganda in east africa
- Fast forward to idi amin, dictator of uganda 1971-79
- Behavious as dictator
- For a while, extent he was known, upheld as quintissential african dictator
- Killed so many people
- Didn't make sense to ugandan politics
- Idi amin seized power in military coup in 1971
- Countries would support coup d’etat to get more power
- Idi served in britishi imperial military
- His coup sponsored by british and israelis
- He embodied the interests of Britian, groomed him
- Israel saw this as a strategic move to gian power
- Amin deposed Milton Obote, who replaced him after Amin was overthrown In 1979
- Obote was in exile until his overthrowing
