MIDDLE POWERS IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS: COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF CONCEPTUAL APPROACHES

Throughout the past decades the international relations studies were mostly dedicated to the analysis of the superpower’s and great power’s role in the world order. Less powerful states, namely small and middle powers, were widely considered as objects that are not able to have an impact on the international political processes. Nevertheless, with the collapse of the bipolar system, new approaches have emerged and were applied to the analysis of the existing balance of power in the international relations. One of them is widely known as the concept of middle powers. The conceptual understanding of middle power’s foreign policy behavior has become signifi cantly more complicated in comparison with the bipolar period. On the other hand, there is still no clear defi nition of the term ‘middle power’. In light of this lack of a clear defi nition, various authors use different methods to identify middle powers. Researchers usually defi ne middle powers based on such criteria as large population, natural recourses, economic strength, military force, political stability, its formal recognition by other actors in international relations as a signifi cant international actor, and its active involvement in solving regional and international issues.

The aim of this article is to review the concept of middle powers, its historical perspective and key theoretical approaches namely positional, behavioral and constructivist. Based on the analysis of these three approaches the article argues that a holistic understanding of the middle power concept is possible only based on a comprehensive approach. The article also addresses historic periods of concept’s development and provides a distinction between emerging and traditional middle powers. The concept of middle powers and its popularity indicates the gradual formation of a new world order where the international momentum is determined not only by great powers but also by not less powerful small and middle powers.

1. Asia’s Middle Powers? The Identity and Regional Policy of South Korea and Vietnam. Ed. By Joon-Woo Park, Don Keyser, Gi-Wook Shin. Stanford, CA: Shorenstein Asia-Pacifi c Research Center, 2013. 275 p.

2. Beeson, M. Can Australia Save the World? The Limits and Possibilities of Middle Power Diplomacy // Australian Journal of International Affairs, 2011,Vol. 65, No. 5, pp. 563-577.

3. Bélanger, L.; Mace, G. Middle Powers and Regionalism in the Americas: The Cases of Argentina and Mexico // Niche Diplomacy. Middle Powers after the Cold War. Ed. by Andrew F. Cooper. London: Macmillan Press, 1997. Pp 164-184.

4. Bogaturov, A.D. Sovremennyj mezhdunarodnyj porjadok (Modern World Order) // Sovremennye mezhdunarodnye otnoshenija i mirovaja politika (Contemporary International Relations and World Politics), A.V. Torkunova (Ed.). Moscow: Prosveshhenie, 2004.

5. Burges, S. Mistaking Brazil for a Middle Power // Journal for Iberian and Latin American Research, 2013, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 286-302.

6. Carr, A. Is Australia a Middle Power? A Systemic Impact Approach // Australian Journal of International Affairs, 2014, Vol. 68, No. 1.

7. Chapnick, A. The Middle Power // Canadian Foreign Policy Journal, Winter 1999, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 73-82.

8. Cooper, A.; Higgott, R. Middle Power Leadership and Coalition Building: Australia, the Cairns Group, and the Uruguay Round of trade negotiations // International Organization, 1990, Vol. 44, No. 4, pp. 589-632.

9. Cooper, A.; Higgott, R.; Nossal, K.R. Relocating Middle Powers: Australia and Canada in a Changing World Order. Vancouver: UBC Press, 2004. 232 p.

10. Cox, R.W. Middlepowermanship, Japan, and Future World Order // International Journal, 1989, Vol. 44, No. 4, pp. 823-862.

11. Efstathopoulos, C. Reinterpreting India’s Rise through the Middle Power Prism // Asian Journal of Political Science, May 2011, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 74-95.

12. Ehteshami, A. Middle East Middle Powers: Regional Role, International Impact // Uluslararasi Iliskiler, August 2014, Vol. 11, No. 42, pp. 29-49.

13. Freedman, A. Malaysia, Thailand, and the ASEAN Middle Power Way // Middle Powers and the Rise of China. Ed. By Gilley B., O’Neil A. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2014. Pp 104-125.

14. Glazerbrook, G.D. The Middle Powers in the United Nations System // International Organization, June 1947, Vol. 1, No. 2.

15. Holbraad, C. Middle Powers in International Politics. London: Macmillan Press, 1984.

16. Holbraad, C. The Role of Middle Powers // Cooperation and Confl ict, 1971, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 77-90.

17. Holmes, J.W. Most Safely in the Middle // International Journal, Spring 1984,Vol. 39, No. 2, pp. 366-388.

18. Istomin, I.A. Logika povedenija gosudarstv v mezhdunarodnoj politike (The Logic of the Behavior of States in International Politics). Moscow: Aspekt press, 2018.

19. Jordaan, E.C. The Concept of a Middle Power in International Relations: Distinguishing Between Emerging and Traditional Middle Powers // Politikon, November 2003, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 165-181.

20. Karim, M.F. Middle Power, Status-seeking and Role Conceptions: the Cases of Indonesia and South Korea // Australian Journal of International Affairs, 2018, Vol. 72, No. 4, pp. 343-363.

21. Keohane, R. Lilliputians’ Dilemmas: Small States in International Politics // International Organization, Spring 1969, Vol. 23, No. 2.

22. Kissinger, H. World Order. New York: Penguin Books, 2015. 432 p.

23. Kudrjashova, I.V. Legko li byt’ srednevelikim (Is it Easy to be a Middle-Sized?) // Mezhdunarodnye processy, 2008, Vol. 6, No. 3.

24. Kuvaldin, V.B. Globalizacija i novyj mirovoj porjadok (Globalization and New World Order) // Sovremennye mezhdunarodnye otnoshenija i mirovaja politika (Contemporary International Relations and World Politics), A.V. Torkunov (Ed.). Moscow: Prosveshhenie, 2004.

25. Kuvaldin, V.B. Global’nyy mir. Politika. Ekonomika. Sotsial’nyye otnosheniya (The Global World: Politics, Economy, Social Relations). Moscow: Ves’ Mir, 2017. 400 p.

26. Mares, D.R. Mexico’s Foreign Policy as a Middle Power: The Nicaragua Connection, 1884-1986 // Latin American Research Review, 1988, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 81-107.

27. Middle Powers and the Rise of China. Ed. By Gilley B., O’Neil A. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2014. 240 p.

28. Middle Powers in Global Governance. The Rise of Turkey. Ed. By Emel Parlar Dal. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2018. 275 p.

29. Mo, J. South Korea’s Middle Power Diplomacy: A Case of Growing Compatibility between Regional and Global Roles // International Journal: Canada’s Journal of Global Policy Analysis, December 2016, Vol. 71, No. 4, pp. 587-607.

30. Nossal, K.R.; Stubbs, R. Mahathir’s Malaysia: An Emerging Middle Power? // Niche Diplomacy. Middle Powers after the Cold War. Ed. By Andrew F. Cooper. London: Macmillan Press, 1997. Pp 147-163.

31. Öniş, Z.; Kutlay, M. The Dynamics of Emerging Middlepower Infl uence in Regional and Global Governance: the Paradoxical Case of Turkey // Australian Journal of International Affairs, 2017, Vol. 71, No. 2, pp. 164-183.

32. Otte, M.A. Rising Middle Power? German Foreign Policy in Transformation, 1989-1999. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2000. 324 p.

33. Patience, A. Imagining Middle Powers // Australian Journal of International Affairs, 2014, Vol. 68, No. 2, pp. 210-224.

34. Ravenhill, J. Cycles of Middle Power Activism: Constraint and Choice in Australian and Canadian Foreign Policies // Australian Journal of International Affairs, 1998, Vol. 52, No. 3, pp. 309-327.

35. Robertson, J. Middle-power Defi nitions: Confusion Reigns Supreme // Australian Journal of International Affairs, 2017, Vol. 71, No. 4.

36. Schoeman, M. South Africa as an Emerging Middle Power // African Security Review, 2000, Vol. 9, No. 3, pp. 47-58.

37. Sethi, J.D. India as a Middle Power // India Quarterly: A Journal of International Affairs, April 1969, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 107-121.

38. Shakleina, T.A. Rossija i SHA v novom mirovom porjadke. Diskussii v politiko-akademicheskih soobshhestvah Rossii i SSHA (1991-2002) (Russia and the USA in the New World Order. Discussion in the Political and Academic Circles of Russia and the USA (1991-2002)). Moscow: Institut SHA i Kanady RAN, 2002.

39. Sirota, N.M. Ponjatie «mirovoj porjadok» v sovremennom teoreticheskom diskurse (“World Order” Notion in Modern Theoretical Discourse) // Istoricheskie, fi losofskie, politicheskie i juridicheskie nauki, kul’turologija i iskusstvovedenie. Voprosy teorii i praktiki, 2013, No. 3 (29).

40. Skriba, A.S. Balansirovanie malyh i srednih gosudarstv (The Balancing of Small and Medium-Sized Nations) // Mezhdunarodnye protsessy, 2014. Vol. 12, No. 4.

41. Soward, F.H. On Becoming and Being a Middle Power: The Canadian Experience // Pacifi c Historical Review, May 1963, Vol. 32, No. 2, pp. 111-136.

42. The Regional World Order. Transregionalism, Regional Integration, and Regional Projects across Europe and Asia. Ed. by Alexei D. Voskressenski, Boglarka Koller. Lanham, Boulder, New York, London: Rowman & Littlefi eld / Lexington Books, 2019. 242 p.

43. Ungerer, C. The “Middle Power” Concept in Australian Foreign Policy // Australian Journal of Politics & History, December 2007, Vol. 53, No. 4, pp. 538-551.

44. Vellut, J.L. Congolese Foreign Policy and African ‘Middle Powers’, 1960-64. // Australian Outlook, 1965, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 287-305.

45. Westhuizen, J.V.D. South Africa’s Emergence as a Middle Power // Third World Quarterly, September 1998, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 435-456.