Print

10 International Relations Theory of War understand that international systems would dictate to the players acting in the system to counter a country that was aiming for hegemony. The other is the collapse of the existing system and the formation of another system in its place. Two prominent examples of this are (1) the collapse of the multipolar system of 1910–1945 due to the absolute defeat of Germany and Japan at the end of the Second World War, which was caused by the reaction of the allied powers to their aggressive behavior, and (2) the col- lapse of the 1946–1991 bipolar system due to the Soviet Union’s economic exhaustion that was caused by overutilization of its economic resources that were intended to preserve its standing as one of the two superpowers in the system. The theory also provides innovation in the way in which it defines the polarity of the system. Most of the other theories in the realistic paradigm define great powers, which are referred to in the current study as polar powers, only according to their material power, which consists of military power and economic power. The international relations theory of war, in con- trast, adds the territorial power of countries to this definition. The theory presents a novel argument that holds that the stability of unipolar systems is somewhere between that of the other two systems— greater than that of multipolar systems but less than that of bipolar ones. THE STRUCTURE OF THE BOOK The first chapter is devoted to explaining the manner of action of the two dependent variables: systemic international outcome—the stability of the three possible international system models and intrasystemic international outcome—the degree of territorial expansion of polar powers at the end of the wars in which they will participate. In this chapter, a distinction will be made between stability and durability, which in other theories are both known as stability. In this chapter, the six possible manners of territorial expansion or contraction are also defined: conquest, annexation, cession, secession, unification, or mandated territory. The second chapter presents the international relations theory of war and its key assumptions. In this chapter, a clear differentiation will also be made between the theory that the book presents and contemporary systemic realistic theories, primarily from neorealism and offensive realism.28 The third chapter precisely defines the distribution of power in the sys- tem, which is represented using the existing polarity model at any point in time. Within the examination, material power, military power, and eco- nomic power are examined using a combined index of these two power components of all strong countries in the system in the period that is being assessed in the study, 1816–2016.