003 Causes of War Lecture 9 Hegemonic Stability Theory Part 1

Summary

This lecture explores hegemonic cycles and their impact on warfare, challenging traditional balance of power and deterrence theories. It delves into the concept that a hegemon's decline can trigger large-scale wars and discusses the significance of general wars, which have historically accounted for the majority of war deaths. The lecture also examines the rise and fall of various hegemonic powers, the influence of naval dominance on global trade, and the potential implications for the current international system, with a focus on the United States and the emerging power of China.

Takeaways

• 🌟 Hegemonic Cycles Theory suggests that a single powerful state (hegemon) organizes the international system and its decline can lead to large-scale wars.
• 📊 Hegemonic Cycles Theory rejects the balance of power and rational deterrence theory, emphasizing the accumulation of rivalries over time.
• 🏰 The lecture discusses major systemic wars, highlighting the importance of general wars which account for 90% of war deaths from 1494 to 2001.
• 🛳️ European states, with their colonies, have historically controlled the world's naval power, enabling them to dominate global trade and influence.
• 🔄 The script explores the concept of power transitions, where the rise of a new power challenges the existing hegemon, potentially leading to war.
• 🚢 Naval power is a critical factor in determining hegemony, with control over the seas allowing states to shape international trade and security.
• 🌍 The lecture provides historical examples of hegemonic shifts, including the rise and fall of powers like the Portuguese, Dutch, British, and current U.S. dominance.
• ⚔️ General wars are identified as prolonged and costly due to the balancing of power, multiple fronts of conflict, and the complexity of achieving a unified settlement.
• 🕊️ Pax Britannica exemplified a period of peace under British hegemony, suggesting that peace is more likely during the reign of a single dominant power.
• 🔧 The script discusses various theories of hegemonic cycles and war, including Organski's power transition theory and the long cycle theory.
• 🏛️ The Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 is noted as a turning point in political science, marking the birth of modern sovereign states with a monopoly on the legitimate use of force.

Q & A

What is the main premise of hegemonic cycles theory in relation to war?

Hegemonic cycles theory posits that a particularly powerful state, or hegemon, organizes the international system and leads the main coalition. The decline of the hegemon leads to challenging powers, and it's the actions of these powers that can lead to large-scale war.

Why does hegemonic cycles theory reject the balance of power concept?

Hegemonic cycles theory rejects the balance of power because it assumes that there is always a hegemon that organizes the international system, rather than a balance of powers maintaining stability.

How does hegemonic cycles theory relate to enduring rivalries?

Hegemonic cycles theory fits with the enduring rivalries perspective as it views disputes and crises as being chained together over time, similar to how rivalries accumulate and escalate.

What is the significance of general wars in the context of war deaths?

General wars are significant because the 10 identified general wars account for 90% of all war deaths, compared to thousands of other interstate conflicts and disputes between 1494 and 2001.

What is the definition of general wars as mentioned in the script?

General wars are defined as wars which include most of the world's major powers, defined as states that constitute at least 10 percent of the world's total power.

What was the role of the European states in shaping the world's naval power dynamics?

European states, particularly through their colonies, have controlled the world's naval power due to heavy state financing and key technologies such as ocean-going ships, the compass, and chronometers. They continue to control this power today.

How did the Chinese naval explorations in the 15th century impact global naval power?

Chinese naval explorations led by Admiral Zheng He were extensive but were later abandoned due to a shift in political ideology and power structure. This abandonment is seen as a missed opportunity for China to potentially colonize regions like Australia and the Americas before Europe.

What is the concept of 'status inconsistency theory' in the context of war?

Status inconsistency theory measures the differences between national aspirations and the distribution of benefits. It suggests that this distinction can lead to war, as countries may demand more respect or power relative to their perceived status.

What is the power transition theory as proposed by Organski?

Power transition theory, proposed by Organski, suggests that wars between the most powerful states occur as two states pass or are about to pass each other in total power. It implies that war happens when one state is in relative decline.

Can you explain the significance of the War of Dutch Independence in the context of hegemonic cycles?

The War of Dutch Independence was significant as it involved three of the five great powers at the time and marked a shift in power dynamics. The Dutch revolted against Spanish rule, and with British intervention, they eventually emerged as challengers, taking over international shipping and beginning their period as a maritime hegemon.

What are the key factors that lead to long and costly general wars according to Belani?

According to Belani, general wars are long and costly due to several factors: the balancing phenomenon that creates evenly balanced sides leading to military stalemate, the disappearance of neutral states that could restrain disputes, the fighting on multiple fronts that makes victory unlikely, and the difficulty in reaching settlements within and between coalitions due to the multitude of interests.

What does the script suggest about the future of international institutions if the US were to decline?

The script suggests that if the US were to decline, institutions like the United Nations, the World Bank, and the World Trade Organization might fail or be replaced. These institutions are seen as having been set up for America's benefit during its period of hegemony and may not persist without its influence.

How did the Thirty Years War contribute to the concept of modern sovereign states?

The Thirty Years War led to the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648, which is considered the birth of modern sovereign states. It established the concept of a state having a monopoly on the legitimate use of force, shifting allegiance from the church and local potentates to the state.

What was the impact of the naval power on the control of world trade during the Dutch hegemony?

During the Dutch hegemony, naval power allowed the Dutch to shape and control world trade. They were able to stop trade where they didn't want it to happen and replace the Spanish and Portuguese as maritime hegemons, thus dominating global commerce.

Outlines

00:00

🌍 Hegemonic Cycles and the Causes of War

This lecture introduces the concept of hegemonic cycles and their impact on warfare. It challenges the balance of power theory by suggesting that a single powerful state, or hegemon, organizes the international system and leads coalitions. The decline of the hegemon can prompt challenges from other powers, leading to large-scale wars. The lecture also critiques rational deterrence theory, arguing that disputes in rivalries are longitudinal and accumulate over time, aligning with the enduring rivalries perspective. The focus is on systemic wars, particularly world wars, which are defined by the involvement of most of the world's major powers. The lecture aims to explore the causes of these general wars within the context of hegemonic cycles.

05:01

🛳 Naval Power and the Shifting Geopolitics

The second paragraph delves into the significance of naval power in global military strategy, noting the control of about 90 percent of the world's naval military power by the US, its European allies, and Russia, with the Chinese, Japanese, and Indian navies as significant non-European forces. It discusses historical large-scale naval operations, such as those by the Chola dynasty and the Chinese fleet under Admiral Zheng He, and how technological and strategic shifts led to the decline of naval powers like China during the Ming dynasty. The paragraph highlights the enduring influence of European naval dominance from the time of Albuquerque and the importance of naval power in shaping global trade and geopolitical landscapes.

10:04

🏰 The Italian Wars and the Emergence of Systemic Conflicts

This section discusses the Italian Wars as the first systemic conflict and general war, spanning from 1494 to 1517. It involved King Charles VIII of France's invasion of Italy and the subsequent formation of a counter coalition including the Holy Roman Empire, Spain, England, and others, which eventually defeated the French. The paragraph also covers the rise of the Habsburg Empire and the impact of the Italian Wars on the balance of power in Europe. Additionally, it touches on the exploration and conquest led by figures like Vasco de Gama and Christopher Columbus, which brought immense wealth and power to the Iberian states, setting the stage for their dominance in global commerce.

15:05

🌐 Power Transition Theory and its Implications for War

The fourth paragraph explores AFK Organski's power transition theory, which posits that wars between the most powerful states occur as they pass each other in total power. Wars are more likely when a challenger state is stronger than the hegemon but loses due to a weaker coalition. The theory also includes status inconsistency theory, which suggests that a discrepancy between national aspirations and the distribution of benefits can lead to war. The paragraph provides examples from history, such as the rise of the US as a challenger state and the peaceful transition of power from Britain after World War II, highlighting the conditions under which power transitions can lead to war or peaceful succession.

20:08

📊 Power Transitions and the Correlation with War

This section presents a detailed analysis of power transitions and their correlation with the onset of wars. It discusses the findings from the Correlates of War dataset, which show that a small number of states have been involved in a disproportionate number of conflicts. The paragraph challenges the distinction between revisionist and status quo states, suggesting that these categories do not consistently predict conflict initiation or targeting. It emphasizes the significant increase in the likelihood of war during periods of rapid relative power shifts and highlights the power transition as a strong predictor of war, with examples from various historical power transitions.

25:08

🏛 The Dutch and the Rise of Hegemonic Naval Powers

The sixth paragraph examines the rise and fall of hegemonic powers, particularly focusing on the Dutch during the 17th century. It discusses the Dutch's dominance in international shipping and their eventual decline in the 18th century, which allowed the French and English to rise. The paragraph introduces long cycle theory, which seeks to explain the periodic dominance of a single powerful state, or hegemon, in the international system. It also touches on the importance of naval power in maintaining a hegemon's influence and the economic and technological factors that contribute to the rise and fall of these powers.

30:09

🚤 Naval Power and the Dynamics of Hegemonic Stability

This section delves into the research by Modelski and Thompson on naval power and its role in hegemonic stability. It discusses the outcomes of challenges to a hegemon by land powers versus maritime powers and the subsequent shifts in hegemony. The paragraph outlines the historical waves of hegemonic powers, from the Portuguese and Spanish to the Dutch, English, and finally the United States, highlighting the naval dominance each held during their respective periods. It also considers potential future challengers to the current hegemon, possibly China or India.

35:09

🌐 The Concentration and Deconcentration of Naval Power

The seventh paragraph discusses the importance of naval power concentration and its decline as indicators of a hegemon's strength. It presents a chart showing the rise and decline of naval power concentration, reflecting the dominance and subsequent challenges faced by various hegemonic powers throughout history. The paragraph also considers the implications of a new hegemon's victory, such as the restructuring of the international system, the establishment of new international institutions, and the shift in trade structures.

40:10

🛡️ The Thirty Years War and the Birth of Modern States

The eighth paragraph explores the Thirty Years War as a systemic conflict that involved multiple great powers and resulted in significant changes to the political landscape of Europe. The war, which began as a religious conflict within Germany, expanded to include broader territorial disputes and efforts to dominate Europe. The paragraph discusses the high casualty rate, the involvement of various European powers, and the conclusion of the war with the Treaty of Westphalia, which marked the emergence of modern sovereign states with a centralized monopoly on the use of force.

45:10

🏹 The Wars of Louis XIV and the Struggle for European Dominance

This section examines the wars of Louis XIV, which included six of the seven great powers of the time. Louis XIV's ambition to dominate Europe, particularly given France's large population, led to conflicts with the Dutch, Spanish, Austrians, Germans, and English. The paragraph covers the British naval dominance and the wars over control of India and North America. It also discusses the military strategies and alliances of the period, including the Battle of Blenheim and the role of key figures like the Duke of Marlborough.

🏛️ The War of Spanish Succession and the Balance of Power

The tenth paragraph discusses the War of the Spanish Succession, which involved five of the six great powers. The conflict centered on the succession in Spain and the opposition of the English, Dutch, Germans, Austrians, Prussians, and Portuguese against France. The British expanded their empire in North America during this time, securing territories and engaging in conflicts with the French. The paragraph highlights key figures, military engagements, and the strategic importance of naval power in the Caribbean and the Mediterranean.

Keywords

💡Hegemonic Cycles

Hegemonic Cycles refer to the rise and fall of dominant states, or hegemons, in the international system. These cycles are central to the video's theme, illustrating how the decline of a hegemon can lead to large-scale wars as challenging powers rise. The script discusses the theory's rejection of the balance of power and rational deterrence, emphasizing the longitudinal nature of disputes in rivalries.

💡General Wars

General Wars are conflicts that involve most of the world's major powers, defined as states constituting at least 10 percent of the world's total power. The video focuses on these wars as they account for 90% of all war deaths, highlighting their significance in the study of hegemonic cycles and their impact on the international system.

💡Power Transition

Power Transition Theory posits that wars occur when a rising state's power approaches or surpasses that of the existing hegemon. The video script describes how this theory was updated to suggest that war is more likely when a challenger is stronger than the hegemon but loses due to a weaker coalition, exemplified by Germany's position relative to Britain in the early 20th century.

💡Naval Power

Naval Power is identified in the script as a key determinant of hegemonic status, with control over the seas allowing states to dominate trade and project influence globally. The video discusses how various powers, such as the Portuguese, Dutch, and British, rose and fell based on their naval capabilities and how the current U.S. naval dominance reflects its hegemonic position.

💡Status Inconsistency

Status Inconsistency Theory, as mentioned in the script, measures the differences between national aspirations and the distribution of benefits, suggesting that this discrepancy can lead to war. The video uses this concept to explain how countries like China might engage in conflicts to assert their status and gain greater respect on the international stage.

💡Long Cycle Theory

Long Cycle Theory is a set of theories that explain the periodic dominance of a single powerful state, or hegemon, in the international system and the transitions of power that typically occur through general wars. The script outlines the historical succession of hegemonic powers from the rise of Europe around 1500 to the present day, emphasizing the role of naval power in maintaining this dominance.

💡World Wars

The World Wars are highlighted in the script as essential puzzles in understanding why such large-scale conflicts occur within the context of hegemonic cycles. The video discusses the impact of these wars on the international system, including the restructuring that follows the victory of a new hegemon and the establishment of new international institutions and trade structures.

💡Free Trade

Free Trade is presented in the script as a policy typically pursued by hegemonic states to shape the structure of the international system, especially commerce. The video explains how free trade can be predatory, with the hegemon using its naval power to enforce trade advantages, as seen in the historical examples of the Dutch and British empires.

💡European Hegemony

European Hegemony refers to the period from around 1500 when European states, particularly those with naval power, began to dominate world affairs. The script discusses how this hegemony was established through the control of trade routes and the conquest of other regions, leading to a shift in the world's population and power dynamics.

💡Coalition Warfare

Coalition Warfare is a concept discussed in the script in the context of general wars, where multiple states form alliances to oppose a common enemy. The video explains how the formation of coalitions can lead to prolonged and costly wars due to the complexity of coordinating interests and the difficulty of achieving a unified victory.

💡Technological Advantage

Technological Advantage is a key factor in the rise and fall of hegemonic powers, as discussed in the script. It refers to the superior technology that allows a state to dominate in naval power, commerce, and warfare. The video provides examples of how states like the British and Dutch maintained their hegemony through technological advancements in naval power and trade.

Highlights

Hegemonic Cycles Theory posits that a hegemon organizes the international system and its decline leads to challenges and large-scale wars.

Balance of Power and Rational Deterrence Theory are rejected by Hegemonic Cycles Theory due to the longitudinal nature of rivalries and disputes.

General Wars are defined by the involvement of most of the world's major powers and account for 90% of war deaths.

The significance of World Wars in the context of General Wars and the puzzle of their occurrence.

Historical examples of large-scale conflicts that were not coordinated, such as the Chinese and Roman wars against the Persians.

The Mongol conquest as a potential global war, despite the lack of coordination among opponents.

The shift in naval power from China to Europe and the impact on global exploration and colonization.

The importance of European state financing and key technologies in establishing naval dominance.

The concept of 'winner takes all' in naval power and its implications for global trade domination.

Power Transition Theory by Organski, linking wars to shifts in power between the most powerful states.

The role of coalitions in the outcomes of power transitions and the impact on the international order.

Status Inconsistency Theory and its link to the initiation of wars due to unmet national aspirations.

The War of Dutch Independence as a significant systemic conflict and its impact on European power dynamics.

The Thirty Years War as a complex conflict involving religious, political, and territorial disputes among major powers.

The Treaty of Westphalia and its role in defining modern sovereign states and the concept of state allegiance.

The Wars of Louis XIV as a series of conflicts aimed at French domination in Europe and the resulting opposition.

The significance of naval power in maintaining hegemony and the transition of naval dominance over time.

The impact of economic and demographic forces on the shifting of global power and influence.

Transcripts

hegemonic cycles and war

one this is the first of two lectures

on hegemonic cycles and war there is

hegemonic cycles in war two which

follows this so make sure you see

both

lectures here you can see at the bottom

a review of french soldiers by luke the

14th and you can see in the top right

corner a picture of the

john churchill the duke of marlborough

who defeated

louis xiv troops at the battle of

blenheim

so hegemonic cycles theory rejects

balance of power

because it has the underlying assumption

that at all times

you have a hegemon

or a particularly powerful state that

organizes the international system and

leads the main coalition

and that it's the decline of the hegemon

that leads to

challenging powers

and it's

the actions of those challenging powers

that leads to large-scale war

hegemonic cycles theory also rejects

rational deterrence theory

because

disputes that occur

in rivalries are longitudinal they

accumulate over time

so hegemonic cycles fits in

with the enduring rivalries perspective

of how disputes and crises are chained

together

so

we're going to survey in this lecture

every major systemic war the general

wars the world wars

and there's an essential puzzle here

which is why do world wars occur

general wars matter as we saw earlier

because the 10 general wars that have

been identified account for 90 of all

the war deaths

compared to the thousands of other

interstate conflicts disputes in the

period between 1494 in 2001

what we mean by general wars are wars

which include most of the world's major

powers defined as states that constitute

at least 10 percent of the world's total

power

of course it's a complicated definition

there are some different causes for

general wars and we're going to look at

some of these causes in the context of

hegemonic cycles

some or all of these theories apply to

some extent to all general wars

now there were wars before that in some

sense could be described as world wars

because they occurred on different

geographic

continents

but these were never coordinated

chinese general panchao

and

the romans

the roman military under vespasian

were both engaged in the war against the

persians led by valigases at the same

time

around 100 in the common era 8100

but this attack was not coordinated

here you can see a picture of emperor

vespasian of the roman empire

the chinese had been to central asia

around this time

the mongol conquest could also

constitute

a global war the mongols attacked

simultaneously egypt the dalmatian coast

in the adriatic

india they conquered java and indonesia

they made a landing in japan

and they basically secured everything

else in between

yet those that opposed the mongols were

not particularly coordinated although

they might have sent embassies to each

other

for example the crusaders cooperated

with the mongols against the mamluks in

egypt

so there have been 10 general wars there

is some dispute

of the identity of the 10 general or

world wars

these wars are all dated from about 80

1500 100 because it was at this time

that the europeans came to dominate the

world's oceans far beyond the capacity

of any non-european state to resist and

this rendered the european states

invulnerable to foreign or non-european

conquest

the europeans were seeking to trade with

eastern asia by bypassing the heavily

taxed caravan roots dominated by the

muslim states particularly the turks

european capability was based on the

convergence of heavy state financing

and key technologies such as ocean-going

ships the compass and various mechanical

chronometers and mathematical means to

navigate

the european states and their colonies

continue to control

to this day

though they may not forever the us and

its european allies plus the russians

control about 90 percent of the world's

naval military power

the chinese and japanese navies are the

only significant non-european naval

powers plus maybe the indian navy

there were earlier large scale

naval operations that occurred across

continents

chola which is here

sent a fleet

down to java the indonesian empire of

majapahit

and destroyed it

in ad-1025

this here is a depiction of

a ship from that era

at the pyramid at borobudur

at the foot of mount merapi outside

yogyakarta in java

which was when

zhang

the chinese eunuch admiral

led the chinese fleet in its attempt

to explore the world using naval power

in the period 1405 and 1433

and these included

landings and

basically kidnappings of of hostages and

the king in sri lanka

so it had a military aspect to it and it

carried large numbers of soldiers for

landings

but when china shifted to

neo-confucianism and away from unix

towards

family control of the bureaucracy

the attack on

the eunuch

power structure led to the destruction

of the ships the ships were burned and

further attempts to engage in naval

exploration were abandoned

china has ever since

regretted

abandoning

this program

it can be imagined that if china had

kept up its naval explorations it would

have been china not europe that would

have colonized australia and north and

south america 50 years after

the chinese ships were burned

albuquerque showed up in the indian

ocean

and took over control of the oceans that

last to this day

here's a comparison of some of the

chinese ships compared

to the ships that columbus had

that discovered north america it should

be qualified though that the chinese

ships were not very durable and didn't

last very long

whereas some of the european ships of

that age

would last almost a century

so

a size comparison is not the only issue

that matters there's other components of

technology

and this is just to show that over time

geographies shift

power

now the white band which is indicated as

me is middle east and it indicates that

the about about a quarter of the world's

population lived in the middle east

around uh 400 years before christ or 400

years before the common era

but over time other regions

became more agricultural and their

populations grew enormously so we have a

constant historical shifting

that is caused

in an underlying fashion by economic and

demographic forces

so this is the world

when the europeans took over when

albuquerque entered the indian ocean and

took control

of the world's ocean surface

you have a fairly large population in

europe india and china

and japan

and smaller populations in the rest of

the world

this was the political division

europe was very divided but you can see

the ming empire

you can see the empire muslim

assaulting it at delhi

uh the timurid turks the white sheep

turks

the mongols

and empires elsewhere so this is the

political map

into which

uh the world

began in 1500 and and this is where the

story begins for these general wars

so the first war was the italian wars

this is the first systemic conflict

and the first general war of world war

it went from 1494 to 1517 french valois

king charles viii invaded italy and

occupied naples in a first step to

reconquer constantinople in jerusalem

it provoked a counter coalition of the

maximilian first of the holy roman

empire in germany spain england venice

milan the swiss and pope alexander vi

and they eventually defeated the french

the spanish commander was gonzalo de

cordoba in italy and you can see him uh

depicted here the soldiers fought with

an act boos which is a form of hand

cannon which you can see uh

at the top of the page and yet the

introduction of the spanish square in

which pikeman and akbusier were able to

coordinate

this would later be vulnerable to canon

but at this time and with this type of

technology when canon were not that

mobile the spanish square dominated the

battlefield

so here you have the habsburg empire in

yellow which united the territories of

spain

austria

the netherlands and what is today

belgium and southern italy and made it a

major power in europe

and the italian wars occurred in the top

right map and you can see here the

different sub-states over which the

spanish and the french fought

now on the world's oceans the genovese

financed

uh the portuguese

sponsored vasco de gama's discovery of

the route to india in 1498

and the spanish sponsored columbus's

discovery of the american mainland in 14

uh 1490s

and this brought tremendous wealth and

power to the iberian states

now the geneves were obviously trying to

outdo the venetians who traded directly

with the turks and the arabs

alfonso albuquerque

was the portuguese sailor who led a

small flotilla with small cannons

and his conquest of asian trade between

1507 and 1515 in which he defeated the

african muslim egyptian persian indian

and the southeast asian fleets and he

seized control of world trade

portuguese strategy as early as 1415

was to seize control of the slavery

routes that were coming out of west and

east africa and so they seized sautome

on the west african coast and zanzibar

in the east african coast and then the

indian ocean and then the maluca islands

where much of the spice trade

originated in the world

and through this they were able to

dominate the world fiscally here you can

see where the

fleets

from portugal went and you can see in

the blue dots where they set up

bases

here you can see the spanish and

portuguese

coastal empires and in the americas

where the spanish landed in mexico

central america

and in the andes

so there was for at least a century

significant domination by the spanish

and portuguese of global commerce and

they were nevertheless

english and in this case dutch raids

that eroded it near the end of the

century

now it's been a very peculiar phenomenon

that at sea there's been a winner take

all phenomenon in which the strongest

naval state typically dominates almost

all of the world's oceans at the same

time

this has been because of the ease of

movement across the world's oceans and

this has permitted rapid accumulation of

domination of them by navies with only a

slight technological advantage over

their opponents if one navy is only

slightly more powerful than the other

it'll take it only a short amount of

time to complete the conquest after

which it will dominate trade and make it

difficult for its opponents to

accumulate the resources in order to

oppose it and build a navy

if you lose your navy and the trade that

goes along with it it could take you up

to a hundred years to recover

economically

the chinese bayang fleet was destroyed

by the japanese in 1895 and china did

not begin rebuilding its fleet until the

1990s and it wasn't until really 2000

and the 2010s that china had rebuilt a

fleet that was respectively strong

russia lost their fleet in 1905 to the

japanese and they didn't rebuild their

fleet

to a respectable strength until the

1970s

so each naval state imposes a system of

free trade in which they use force to

obtain permission to sell goods in the

markets of other states and because the

state tends to be economically and

financially stronger it generally

sells these goods at an advantage in

1842 the british east india company

attacked china and compelled it to seed

hong kong and permit the british to sell

goods within the chinese market which

included textiles and opium

in 1868 admiral perry of the u.s navy

threatened to shell tokyo if the

japanese did not grant the u.s trade

access to the japanese market

so we have our first theory and this

comes from

afk organski's power transition theory

this is

the principle hegemonic stability theory

of war so it unites a hegemonic

stability theory and the phenomenon of

war

organski conducted statistical tests and

found that wars between the most

powerful states of any period occur

as the two states pass or are about to

pass each other in total power in other

words war happens when one of the states

is in relative decline

in every power transition there is a

status quo state which is the

established power which is in relative

decline and which has an interest in

preserving the current international

order

there's also a challenger or revisionist

state which seeks to overturn the

international system and defeat the

status quo power

the challenger state is normally rising

rapidly in power in comparison with the

status quo states and wants therefore to

take over the international system

now in 1980

this

study was updated and it was found that

war starts when a challenger is stronger

than the hegemon

but it tends to lose because it has a

weaker coalition

so germany grew very quickly and

surpassed the english economy at the

beginning of the 20th century but

germany ultimately lost because it

couldn't create a coalition

to resist

uh the british

now a satisfied challenger state will

inherit and not overturn the

international system

after world war ii the english were too

weak

to be a global hegemon they basically

couldn't

continue to dominate the system

after two world wars against germany

the americans were a challenger state

they wanted to replace england

but there was no war the americans

inherited the system from the english

because in general the us was satisfied

with the commercial structure that the

british had set up

so here you would see

the type of coalition structure between

the dominant and the dissatisfied states

or the status quo power the satisfied

powers and their challenger or

revisionist states so the dominant

states on top

most of the great powers and many of the

middle powers and some of the small

powers are associated with the dominant

state

the dissatisfied states are led by a

great power

and some of the middle powers and the

smaller powers

now one of the aspects of organski's

theory is status inconsistency theory

this measures differences between

national aspirations and the

distribution of benefits and it's been

found that this distinction or this

difference has been found to lead to war

so you can imagine a country like china

today

demanding more respect particularly in

the south china sea reclaiming

its status

as a recipient of tribute

in the several hundred kilometers around

its borders

so war occurs during the power

transition when a challenger state

almost approximates the power level of

the dominant status quo state and its

allies however before the challenger

state surpasses the status quo state the

status quo state typically begins a

preventative war

to defeat the challenger before the

transition actually occurs by this

conception we would expect a war started

by the us against china

war is more likely in a power transition

during abrupt downward or upward shifts

in power changes

a rapid rise of power like

resulting from industrialization which

is what made the us powerful between say

1870 and 1910 leads to externalization

of domestic dissatisfaction

so very often countries when they're

changing domestically if they have some

desire to satisfy a domestic goal they

very often focus outward

now outcomes vary sometimes the status

quo state retains power and sometimes

the challenger state dominates

so here you can see the red power which

is growing

but the orange state is growing more

quickly

and so there's different opportunities

of war either at the red arrow the

status quo state can attack the

challenger or once the challenger has

surpassed the status quo state it can

violently reorder the international

system

here you can see a power transition and

it actually lists various different uh

inflection points where war could occur

between different states you have a

lower upper and you have the first and

second inflection points and there were

23 such power transition points

occurring between 1815 and 1975 and

these are grouped mostly

in the crises and the disputes leading

up to the first world war

now take note

the status quo challenger distinction is

not the same as the rational deterrence

theory approach

the deterrence theory is far more about

who attacks first not who wants to

change the system

now here you can see a chart of great

power and genera and and non-uh general

wars

these are wars involving the great

powers

this is an exhaustive list

of power transitions

it shows the name of the war it shows

the initiator the target

and

the outcome of the country that

initiated the conflict

here's some ongoing and historical power

transitions we can see the power of the

ottoman empire

in the 16th century

and how they went into a steep decline

and then effectively disintegrated

we can see the rise of china at the

extreme

right we can see france

which is a middle power then became a

great power in the 1720s under louis xiv

but then fell behind england

we can see the netherlands

and the rise of sweden

and the rise of

russia and the soviet union

and of prussia and germany and of japan

and all the opportunities there are for

these transitions leading to war

so what's the criticism it was found in

the correlates of war data set that 30

states accounted for 70 percent of all

mid initiation and were the targets in

sixty percent of mids

initiation and target correlations

indicate that revisionist and status quo

distinctions do not carry well in

multiple incidents

so

countries that initiate or are the

target of disputes are not necessarily

the

cha the uh status quo states being

attacked by the revision estates

rapid relative shifts increase the

likelihood of war

by 800

times

so

power transition is enormously powerful

predictor of war

so we get to our second uh

general or systemic war the war of dutch

independence from 1585 to 1609 it

involved three of the five great powers

so a majority of the great powers at the

time while most of europe was involved

in a catholic protestant civil war the

dutch revolted against spanish rule and

in 1585 the british intervened on their

behalf provoking the unsuccessful

spanish armada the spanish attempt to

invade england

the end of the war crippled the spanish

attempt to dominate europe and the

world's oceans and the dutch

emerged as challengers and ultimately

took over

international shipping

here you can see a queen elizabeth

and next to her is the spanish armada in

1588

you can see on the map on the right the

path the spanish armada took and they

were never able to achieve a landing on

the british coast and a great many ships

were wrecked

you can actually see here in the picture

in 1603 a british ship firing cannon

against a spanish ship

you can see again the pike and musket

squares used by the spanish in the top

left

you can see on the top right a map of

holland and what is today uh belgium

and the battleground uh in which the

dutch hid behind their dikes

and threatened to flood whenever the

spanish captured territory you can see

on the left of the the spanish aqui

and below you can see the prize the

portuguese conquered indonesia and the

spice islands of the malukas that you

can see in the

colors brown in the extreme

right of the map

and then the dutch took over

during this period they were able to

dominate the seas and then they

basically excluded the portuguese from

indonesia and the dutch were to control

indonesia for several more centuries

so you can see in the left the 1559 the

pre-revolt spanish holland

and then in the map on the top

right you can see in

1580 holland's become partially

independent with the support of the

english you got the huguenots in france

and the complex diplomacy of the period

and again you can see some spanish

alcabusia

going to battle

these are of course dutch merchants and

you can see the shift in overseas trade

the dutch

were predominant

in the 17th century but then went into

rapid decline in the 18th century and

the french and the english were able to

dominate

and replace the dutch

so the second theory is long cycle

theory and hegemonic wars

there are a set of theories grouped

under the title of long cycle theory

that seeks to explain the periodic

dominance of the international system by

the single most powerful state which is

termed a hegemon and the transition of

power from one hegemonic power to the

next

typically occurs through or during a

general or world war

the precise timing of these hegemonic

states

is in perpetual scholarly dispute

but there's a general consensus on the

broad outlines of the succession and its

nature the hegemonic cycle started with

the rise of europe in world affairs

around ad-1500

the statistical evidence is that

hegemonic wars follow the pattern of

probing

adjusting and then you have a hegemonic

war and you have 100 year cycles between

1494 and 1973.

for hegemonic states

they invariably had preeminent naval

power that was grounded in commercial

and technological dominance for example

today the u.s navy is the largest in the

world and probably strong enough to

defeat every other navy

as long as these states are dominant

they shape the structure of the

international system particularly

commerce

typically pursuing free trade

but this free trade is predatorial when

the dutch

were free trading with england they

would dump goods on the english market

but then their navy would interfere with

british merchants that tried to export

british goods to other ports

but as these

hegemons become overextended in

defending their interests where they

divert money to build navies and not

engage in commerce they fall behind

technologically to other states that are

investing more in their economy

and ultimately they fall behind

commercially to a rising challenger

for example the uk

in the mid 1850s accounted for 58

percent of the world's economy

the british were an industrial

powerhouse they manufactured in england

more than the rest of the world combined

but by 2006 the british had declined to

only 2 percent

of the world's economy

the british spent too much money on a

large navy and not enough on research

and development and reinvestment in new

technologies

when germany rose

they focus not on the iron industry like

the english but on steel and chemistry

and surpassed the english economically

and industrially with these new

technologies

because the dominant state obtains

resource benefits by controlling the

international system

they rarely make room for challengers

so the us has a very little interest in

giving up its domination of the

international financial institutions

like the imf of the world bank

or institutions of dialogue

like the united nations if the us were

to release what influence it has in

those institutions particularly the

financial ones the american dollar would

become more vulnerable

to the policies

of other countries and this would

disadvantage the u.s

for a hegemon trade and financial power

in the form of banks matters more for

maintaining naval dominance than natural

resources such as say wood

you can always buy natural resources

the british navy got its wood from the

baltic what is today lithuania latvia

estonia and finland

and from new brunswick

and

from

parts of asia

there's no large trees in england

sufficient to build its large navy

so the british power was not based on

natural resources it was based on

commerce and the ability to buy the

resources they need

now if the challenger is a naval power

it defeats and takes over the empire of

the preceding status quo naval power and

becomes the new status quo naval power

we saw this with the dutch

who supplanted both the portuguese and

the spanish with their global naval

power

now what do i mean by naval power well

most states in those days had very poor

roads and unless you were china you

didn't have a very large canal system so

almost every country in the world had

coastal shipping

but if a state wanted to trade with its

neighbor that was not simply up or down

its coast it would have to go into the

open oceans and there

the portuguese controlled many of the

global choke points they could stop

countries from going through the choke

points like for example

cape town in south africa

so

the dutch were able to shape trade and

stop trade where they didn't want it to

happen and ultimately the dutch replaced

the spanish

and the portuguese as maritime hegemons

now modelski and thompson have done a

lot of research on naval power

particularly as it applies to hegemonic

stability for them the challenger if

it's a land power is defeated but it so

weakens the hegemonic state that another

maritime power then inherits the

position

so we think of the anglo-dutch defeat of

france

this weakened holland enough

that the british then became the hegemon

the british defeat of germany weakened

england enough that the u.s then

replaced the english by the middle of

the 20th century

now there's been significant

disagreement on the actual general wars

that were hegemonic wars

but the periods roughly coincide in the

following waves

so 1494 to 1585 you got the portuguese

and the spanish and we think of spain as

a naval power but it wasn't the spanish

actually didn't have a royal fleet they

had a few ships that carried

bullion gold and silver from south

america the mines of potosi

and you had ships that traded with china

and came from manila but the portuguese

actually had a state fleet in 1475 the

portuguese wiped out the spanish fleet

off the coast of west africa and it took

centuries for the spanish to rebuild

their fleet so spain was a terrestrial

power with some naval capacity where

portugal was a truly global naval power

they were these portuguese and spanish

were challenged by the dutch

in the war of dutch independence the

dutch replaced the spanish and the

portuguese

the dutch were then the hegemon for

about a century

and then the english challenged them

during the wars of louis xiv

and england replaced the dutch

the english then had a standoff against

the french

the french were ultimately defeated the

british

went from mercantilism to

industrialization and so were able to

survive for another century and then

they had to

confront germany and japan in the first

and second world wars and then england

was weakened economically and then the

us rose up and then because of nuclear

weapons we had a cold war and ultimately

the soviet union

collapsed

and so

what

are we looking at now for the next

challenger probably china

but why not india

so these are

the um

disputes of which are hegemonic and you

can see here

long cycle global powers

spain portugal which is in the left most

column it tells us which of these

countries are the great powers at what

time you've got jack levy's

definition which comes from his uh book

on his statistical calculations of when

are the great powers you see that jack

levy excludes portugal as a great power

and then you've got singer and small

singer is jay david singer who founded

the correlates of war project

and he has a different definition of

what are the great powers of course the

correlates of war is only from the

post-napoleonic period

this is

a graph from the book

called sea power in global politics by

george mandelski and william thompson

and they focus on naval power because

they believe that it's the main

instrument for hegemons to dominate the

entire planet so they focused on all

aspects of naval warfare

for them global power is one that has at

least fifty percent of oceanic naval

power

um

and you have concentration that goes to

fifty percent of total power of a

hegemon after a war so after you have a

major war it's amazing how much

concentration of power there is in one

country's naval power and then when that

country loses its advantage and you have

a deconcentration this then leads to a

systemic war because challengers rise up

build navies and are able to take on

that main country

napoleon built a navy he he joined it

together with the spanish and at the

battle of trafalgar the british

inflicted a severe defeat

uh during uh the industrialization of

china

they the chinese built the bayang fleet

but the japanese destroyed it and the

japanese then built up their own fleet

in the 1890s in the 1910s and 1920s 30s

and 40s

you have uh the rise of uh germany

building a very large fleet in the lead

up to world war one

in world war ii germany didn't have a

very powerful fleet

in and of course in the first world war

uh the jab the the german fleet was

destroyed uh not destroyed but damaged

severely at the battle of jutland and

then spent the rest of the war in port

and then ultimately in 1917 the sailors

declared themselves socialist and went

on strike and that was the end of the uh

german fleet in world war ii you had

several pocket battleships that were

destroyed in individual engagements like

the bismarck the sheer the tier pits the

ignite snow the scharnhorst

prince eugene

and i think that was a cruiser and then

during the cold war the soviet union

built a fleet consisting of several

carriers

and large fleets of submarines and now

china is building up their fleet so

fleets matter and you can see in this

chart

the rise and decline of concentration so

when the values are high it indicates

that a country has enormous naval power

and when it goes into decline it

indicates that there are challengers and

so uh the bottom part the bottom end of

some of those um lines go as low as 20

so a challenger like england

in say the beginning of world war ii

only had let's see according to this

chart

had about 30 percent of the world's

naval power

with the rest of it being controlled by

the u.s and japan and other countries

like italy and germany

so victory by a new hegemon brings a

restructuring of the international

system which typically includes a new

set of international institutions and

structure of trade so the un is a

product of u.s victory in world war ii

and if china surpasses the u.s we can

expect the u.n to be closed down and

replaced with a chinese institution

perhaps in shanghai

world commerce did not exist until the

european navies specifically the

portuguese cleared the trade routes of

hostile navies in the 16th century you

did have trade

but it was much more difficult to travel

across the world as a merchant sailor

when the portuguese

wiped out all the smaller fleets

it basically left uh commercial commerce

to the control of the hegemons now just

because uh the portuguese controlled the

oceans didn't free it for everyone

the portuguese basically allowed those

countries that were friendly to it to

trade on its roots

so the command of the world's oceans has

since passed to the dutch than the

british and now the u.s navy

in each period free trade is

preferentially established around the

hegemonic power because it enjoys a

temporary technological and commercial

advantage

during dutch hegemony british traders

condemned free trade as a dutch

conspiracy to dominate world trade but

after the english surpassed the dutch

and took over domination of the world's

oceans

and trade it was the british who

championed uh free trade and it was the

dutch who argued that free trade was a

british conspiracy to dominate the

world's economy and trade

periods of peace have been periods of

preponderance by a single hegemon and

periods of war have been periods of

decline of that hegemon

you think of the examples of pax

britannica when the british were

dominant in the in the late 19th century

the world was generally peaceful there

were very few wars very few large

systemic wars but when britain went into

decline the germans built a fleet and

the english could be challenged the

british pulled their fleet out of every

ocean and concentrated the fleet

in europe

just so they could deter the german

fleet and as a consequence they lost

control of the world's oceans

what would happen to the us

rather to the united nations the world

bank

and attempts at liberalizing world trade

to the world trade organization if if

the u.s were to go into sharp decline

some would argue that it would fail

since these are in essence institutions

set up for america's benefit at the

beginning of its period of hegemony at

the end of the second world war and

could not persist without it

now look at the reader that i've given

you there's an article by jack levy and

there are other theories of these long

cycle theories that lead to war there's

arnold toynbee a famous historian bill

thompson and george madelski robert

gilpin charles doran and verena and they

all have variations

on the long cycle theory

now here's our third

systemic or general war it's the 30

years war from 1618 to 1648 and included

six of the seven of the world's great

powers

the thirty years war started as a

protestant catholic civil war in germany

but spread to include a habsburg or

spanish austrian versus french attempt

to dominate europe

the catholic side included spain austria

and the holy roman empire of germany

against the protestant germans sweden

and france a third of germany's

population 8 million people were killed

mostly to starvation

the war was also

concluded by the 1648 treaty of

westphalia which in political science is

used to indicate the birth

of modern sovereign states as we

understand them as having a monopoly on

the legitimate use of force in other

words people no longer gave their

allegiance to the church and to a local

potentate they now gave it to the state

who are you willing to die for are you

willing to die for your king or are you

willing to die for the pope

here you can see cardinal richelieu on

the

right and count tilly who's the flemish

catholic leader on the left

so this is the map of europe at the time

in 1634

and you can see that you got england and

france

and the kingdom of poland and the

russian empire

here's the world population at the time

in 1648 huge increases in china india

and europe

this is the world situation map and you

can see the domination

of the americas and the coasts of africa

by european commercial powers

this is the battlefield occurring within

germany during the 30 years war

this is the battle of lutzen in 1632 and

you can see gustavus adolphus the

swedish leader on the bottom center in

the bottom left

and you can see wallinstein the austrian

leader on the bottom right

so here we have a third theory of

general wars

by belani

now

blaney argues that general wars are long

and costly for a variety of reasons

now we spoke earlier about belani but

here we're examining the

extent of conflict and the constant of

hegemonic conflicts

now blaney argued that balancing

phenomenon creates two evenly balanced

sides that lead to a military stalemate

that's why general wars end up being so

long and costly

neutral states that could restrain a

dispute from escalating to war all

disappear because all the major powers

take sides and there's no one left in

the middle to destroy conflict

one of the reasons the soviet union was

concerned about invading europe and

fighting nato was because of the

strength of china one-third of the

soviet military was deployed in siberia

and in the east

to deal with the threat of china so the

soviets military force was divided

between two adversaries so the soviet

union would have to be significantly

desperate or china would have to be very

weak or distracted for the soviet union

to have invaded western europe

number two general wars produce fighting

on multiple fronts that makes victory on

all fronts unlikely

because you have efforts that are

divided

number three settlement is difficult

within and between the coalitions

because of the multitude of interests

that need to be coordinated

normally

these allies settle on the lowest common

denominator which is the complete

destruction of the enemy

but this goal is very often unattainable

and it makes the war drag on for years

number four general wars eliminate the

restraining effect of the threat of

third-party intervention leading to a

lack of restraint in the scale of war

and the type of weapons used

chemical weapons used in world war one

because germany and the allies had

become desperate

the war was going on forever and

seemingly every major power in europe

was involved so there was no consequence

to using chemical weapons

in world war ii the u.s dropped nuclear

weapons on japan because there was no

country to criticize the us every

country in the world every major power

was either an ally of the us

or an enemy targeted by the us

now here we're going to look at the

fourth systemic conflict

these were the wars of louis xiv between

1689 and 1700 it included six of the

seven great powers

francis louis xiv sought to dominate

europe especially as france's population

was by then the largest in europe

france's economy did not require a

colonial empire because it had very

fertile soil and a lot of agricultural

production

louis xiv was opposed and eventually

contained by the dutch spanish austrians

and the germans and the english

the british during this period came to

dominate the oceans and supersede the

dutch the british and french began their

wars over the control of india and north

america

so at the top

you can see the british soldiers at

blenheim

you can see at the bottom french

soldiers of louis xiv training and you

can see the duke of marlboro the british

leader

of the austrian

and the

dutch forces and the english forces that

along with prince eugene ultimately

defeated louis the 14th army

here you can see a portrait of louis xiv

and you can see on the top right the

1692 battle of stenkirk between the

dutch and the spanish and on the left

you can see the map

and france had a very strong defensive

system but louis xiv imagined that he

could cross the rhine go into the holy

roman empire would have stayed germany

and eventually fight his way

uh to the ottoman empire and then get to

jerusalem

and it was seen by some english as sort

of a totalitarian catholic crusade even

though louis xiv was not particularly

catholic in the spanish reformation

sense

or counter-reformation sense

here you have

the duke of marlborough at the battle of

blenheim

which is in the sketch

and you can see on the top the

the siege of turnai which is also a

sketch and shows the duke of marlborough

this is one of the sieges that occurred

during one of marlborough's

campaigns against louis xiv

this is the chicken marlboro at the

battle of mount plaquette in 1709 you

can see a painting of

marlboro in the bottom right

this is the french warship la couhon

and you can see in the top right jean

colbert who established the french navy

at the end of the 1600s and on the

bottom right is the uk's royal sovereign

warship in the late 1600s

and this is the battle of la hogue in

1692 in which an anglo-dutch fleet

destroyed a french fleet

now the fifth systemic war is the war of

the spanish succession from 1701 to

1714. it included five of the six great

powers the french and austrians clashed

over succession in spain the english

dutch germans austrians prussians and

portuguese opposed and eventually

defeated france

the british expanded her empire during

this period in north america

they secured newfoundland and acadia

essentially they captured what is today

nova scotia and they ethnically cleansed

the french-speaking acadians many of

whom went to louisiana

the french leader here is depicted on

the top right claude louis hector who's

who executed the war for louis xiv

you've got a scottish soldier on the

bottom left

and you got north american aboriginal

negotiators in england in 1710

and the bottom central picture is the

british navy in the caribbean in 1710.

so this is the map of the period of the

spanish succession you can see spain

united with

the french and the various coalition

efforts to break those two states apart

and here on the left you can see an

english buccaneer in the caribbean 1710

these are basically state sponsored

pirates

and on the right you can see the british

occupation of menorca a strategic island

today spanish in the mediterranean in

1713.