Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Bipolarity and multipolarity are theoretical concepts that refer to the distribution of relative power capabilities among the major powers in the global and/or regional international system. Bipolarity exists when there are two dominant powers—commonly referred to as “superpowers”—in the system whose power capabilities are considerably greater than those of other major powers. The prime example of bipolarity is the U.S.–Soviet competition during the Cold War. Multipolarity exists when there are three or more great powers in the system. Historically, multipolarity has been the dominant power configuration in the modern European states' system.

Polarity: Theoretical Approaches

The significance of the distribution of relative power capabilities in the international system is widely contested. For realists, it is the single most important determinant of international politics. Liberals also accept that the distribution of power is an important factor shaping international politics, although they attach greater significance to domestic-level factors (such as regime type) or the existence of international regimes and institutions as determinants of international outcomes. Similarly, the English School has traditionally recognized the importance of the balance of power and the management role of great powers, even though this approach stresses the importance of “international society” as a factor that ameliorates the operation of power politics.

Critical theorists and postpositivists, on the other hand, question the significance of polarity as a theoretical tool for understanding international politics. These, more radical approaches challenge the very concept of “power” as used by realists and other rationalist theories; power, they argue, cannot be reduced to resources, geography, and other material factors. Like constructivists, they tend to emphasize the significance of normative and ideational factors and stress the role of nonstate actors. Consequently, they argue that concepts of bipolarity and multipolarity are irredeemably freighted with realist assumptions and that focusing on polarity obscures the “real” operation of power in the international system that serves the interests of privileged elites.

For realists, however, the distribution of power in the international system is the key factor shaping any regional or global conjuncture. International political systems are inherently unequal, diverse, and pluralistic: They consist of a variety of different actors with wildly differing power capabilities, with a relatively small number of more powerful states. Realists argue that this handful of powerful states—generally known as great powers—exert a disproportionate influence on international affairs and that relations between them provide the key determinants of the structure and dynamics of the international system.

Classical Realism

The classical realist tradition of Hans Morgenthau, E. H. Carr, and Reinhold Niebuhr, as well as English School theorists such as Hedley Bull and Martin Wight, were centrally concerned with the balance of power. They explored the relations between the great powers from a perspective informed by the study of history and philosophy, and their analyses of multipolarity and bipolarity drew heavily on the experience of the modern European states' system. Much of their work explored the implications of multipolarity and bipolarity for diplomacy and statecraft. Classical realists tended to regard multipolar systems as more stable than bipolar systems, because their greater uncertainty and unpredictability encouraged foreign policy decision makers toward caution and circumspection.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading