CEVAP:

For realists, “within this anarchical environment [international system] various distributions of capabilities or power among states emerge in dynamic, competitive relations among states. Indeed, anarchy plus the distribution of capabilities among states define for many realists the international system at any one time, described by them typically as unipolar, bipolar, or multipolar. Balances of power and alliances among states are the means realists conceive for sustaining international order” (Viotti and Kauppi, 2012: 59). Therefore, in the international system, the power of some states is intended to be balanced by the power of others and this is what generates the balance of power. Depending on the number of poles (power centers) in the system it might take the shape of a struggle between two alliances, two states or, a group of states against one hegemon.

In this regard, classical realists, unlike their structural counterparts, build their analysis on the idea that balance of power, in international politics, is a construction or creation by statesmen. Desire for power of every state that tries either to reverse or maintain status quo leads inevitably to a balance of power. This balance that does not appear automatically, serves ultimately to a temporary stability and peace at international level. In that sense, vast majority of classical realists adopt, regarding to the concept of balance of power, a voluntarist approach. However, one must remember that this balance can be very effective to avoid war as well as to provoke one. In other words, as generally accepted by classical realists, military power and alliances are double-edged swords; they are as likely to provoke as to prevent conflict. Thus, “at the international level, the balance of power has contradictory implications for peace. It might deter war if status quo powers outgun imperialist challengers and successfully demonstrate their resolve to go to war in defence of the status quo. Balancing can also intensify tensions and make war more likely because of the impossibility of accurately assessing the motives, capability and resolve of other states” (Lebow, 2010: 64). However, even if balance of power fails to prevent conflict between international actors, it plays a considerable role to limit its scope and means employed for desired victory. In this regard, the most important and primary responsibility of a statesman who is in charge of state behavior in international environment is to ensure and/ or maintain a balance of military power among actors that are considered to be the great powers to prevent any one of them to shape the system solely in its own favor and to impose its political and military will on the others. “Thus, in classical realist thinking, the balance of power is a valued political objective that promotes national security, upholds order among great powers, and makes independence of states and their people possible” (Jackson and Sorensen, 2013: 85).