Someone recently bought our

students are currently browsing our notes.


Power In International Relationes Notes

Politics Notes > International Relations Notes

This is an extract of our Power In International Relationes Notes document, which we sell as part of our International Relations Notes collection written by the top tier of University Of Oxford, Balliol College students.

The following is a more accessble plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our International Relations Notes. Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting:

---Power Notes
Important note: it is a sub-topic of the 'competing approaches to the study of IR topic',
meaning that competing approaches should be addressed in terms of how they discuss power.
Weber: power is 'the opportunity to have one's will prevail within a social relationship'
Analysing power requires very specific analysis that is case by case, there is no universal index for measuring power
If we were to measure power based on how well states achieve their outcomes, this is difficult because it is based on the assumption that states have complete consensus in their motivations - states instead have very broad guidelines
Power under classical realism is set up with a narrow view, power = military capability
Understandings of power:
o Classical Realism - Morgenthau on power: 'Power may comprise anything that establishes and maintains the control of man over man. Thus, power covers all social relationships which serve that end, from physical violence to the most subtle psychological ties by which one mind controls another.'
o Fallacy of the single factor
Hard vs. soft power:
o Hard: using material capabilities to get other states to do what you want

Soft: using ideas, identities and values to get other states to do what you want
Changing power dynamics:
o Syria, Ukraine, North Africa, South East Asia: America forced to adapt to will of the
EU and China, as well as Russia, can't just unilaterally exert influence, globalisation has collided with this

Rising powers: Russia, China and India, veto players but do not have agenda-setting power (Narlikar), they strive for agenda other institutions bring. Eg. Russian focus upon G8 primary, Chinese opposition to UNSC P5 which would weaken their relative importance

Fall of US hegemony is not a movement towards the fall of institutions as a site of power, instead reconfiguration of this platform with plurilateral world

Rising powers are in opposition to US hegemony, eg. Chinese and Russian challenges to US involvement in Asia and Eastern Europe respectively
Different dimensions of power:
o Power through material gains/coercion
 First dimension of power, compulsory power
 Dahl: A getting B to do what they would otherwise not do
 Realism: incentives to build military dominance, and pursue hegemony in anarchy

Power through structures: the direct relations of states through established social constructions.
 Most prominent example is power through Marxism: global capitalist system determines capacities of state actors and shapes how actors understand their own interests
 This type of power reinforces itself, and it fundamentally very difficult to change
 Often those subject to this type of power are increasingly unaware of how this power is dictating their decisions and processes

Power through institutional agenda setting: ability to control the actions of a socially distant other
 IR is enmeshed in a web of institutions, norms and rules, ability to achieve will in this context is fundamental through agenda setting

Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our International Relations Notes.