نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسنده
دانشیار، علوم سیاسی، دانشکدة حقوق و علوم سیاسی و تاریخ، دانشگاه یزد، یزد، ایران.
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسنده [English]
Introduction
The term "emerging powers" refers to a distinct category of states that have gained prominence in the contemporary international system due to their growing economic capabilities, diplomatic influence, and recognition by established powers (Mahrenbach, 2019: 217). These actors actively engage in international regimes and institutions, employing strategic tools to expand their role and reshape global governance. However, emerging powers are not a monolithic group; they exhibit varied behavioral patterns, institutional engagements, and strategic objectives. This diversity necessitates a typological approach to better understand how different categories of emerging powers formulate distinct foreign policy strategies. The research question is: how can emerging powers be categorized into distinct typologies, and what kinds of foreign policy strategies does each typology produce? This study aims to analyze the role models of emerging powers and assess their impact on political-security strategies. Given the relative scarcity of theoretical frameworks in this area, this research seeks to contribute to the literature by developing a structured typology that links power attributes to strategic behavior.
Methodology
The method of this research is the matching of case with theory. For this purpose, the desired patterns are identified firstly and then they are applied to different countries. In addition, in order to achieve the goals of the research, these cases should be compared, qualitatively.
Results and discussion
The research findings demonstrate that emerging powers operate according to three distinct models: security powers, trading powers, and civilian powers. Each model represents a different strategic orientation in international relations, with significant implications for foreign policy formulation and implementation.
Security powers concentrate their capabilities on defending their fundamental existence against perceived threats from both domestic and international sources beyond their immediate sphere of influence. This concept bears resemblance to Mackinder's continental power ideal from the 18th and 19th centuries, which posited that such powers could resist threats from sea powers (Blagden & Levy, 2011: 190). These states pursue territorial security objectives regardless of material costs or benefits, employing strict military balancing strategies to achieve their international goals. Political leaders following this model emphasize military capabilities, territorial control, and hard power dynamics in global affairs, believing that maximizing hard power forms is essential for achieving foreign policy objectives (Goksel, 2023: 83).
In contrast, trading powers prioritize economic cooperation and peaceful relations with other states through strong economic ties, cultural exchanges, and diplomatic influence. These powers prefer soft power instruments over hard power to achieve their goals, utilizing business incentives, investments, and economic support as key tools for both internal development and external policy objectives. Their strategic approach revolves around competition for markets and economic advantage with other states and international actors. Trading powers typically evolve through four key transitions: from inflationary interventions to sustainable growth; from macroeconomic to microeconomic governance; from broad interventionism to targeted strategies; and from welfare-state models to efficiency-focused policies. Given the substantial costs associated with military balancing, these states shift toward hedging strategies (Darakhshandeh Lazarjani and Shafi'i, 2012), which involve improving economic and diplomatic relations even with potentially threatening states. Turkey's approach toward Greece since 2003 exemplifies this model, as Ankara has sought to advance its interests through expanded economic and political-diplomatic relations with various regional and global actors while maintaining balanced relations between different power centers.
The civilian power model emerged following the collapse of the Soviet Union, representing states that aim to demilitarize international relations and avoid militaristic approaches toward other countries. This model emphasizes values, democratic principles, and social issues arising from the international system as key influences on state behavior (Hersich and Seydi, 2007: 21). Civilian powers reject arbitrary and unilateral actions, preferring conflict resolution through participation, mediation, and arbitration. A defining characteristic of civilian powers is their acceptance of the international status quo, leading them to avoid strategies that might fundamentally alter existing power structures - what Morgenthau would describe as avoiding imperialistic tendencies (Morghenta, 1401). This explains why post-Cold War Germany and Japan have secured their positions through strategic alliances with the United States rather than independent power projection. Unable to pursue formal power projection strategies, these states have adopted informal approaches through civilian power mechanisms (Maull, 1991: 69). Such powers typically employ peaceful means, particularly multilateralism, to achieve foreign policy objectives (Pehlivanturk & Demirtas, 2018: 2), combining strategies of accommodation and hedging. India's post-Cold War foreign policy illustrates this approach, as New Delhi faced economic pressures and growing Chinese threats while aspiring to great power status. This led India to abandon non-alignment policies in favor of closer ties with the United States (Ollapally, 2018: 61), demonstrating how civilian powers navigate complex international environments through balanced strategic positioning.
Conclusion
Emerging powers do not rely on a single strategy to achieve their foreign policy objectives. Instead, their chosen approach often depends on the role they perceive for themselves within the international arena. Based on these roles, three primary strategies can be identified: the security state, the commercial state, and the civil power. Security states, such as Iran and Russia, typically adopt a hard balancing strategy to advance their interests internationally. In contrast, some powers classified as commercial states tend to employ a hedging strategy, balancing engagement with caution. An interesting category is that of powers using an adaptation strategy, which we can term “civil powers.” These states aim to avoid militarism, favoring peaceful means and diplomacy to achieve their goals. In summary, these strategies—geopolitically oriented security power, commercial power, geoeconomic-oriented power, and civil power—are largely rooted in different geocultural ideals. However, it is important to recognize that not all countries neatly fit into these categories. Some may deviate from the typical pattern and pursue strategies that diverge from the classifications discussed here.
کلیدواژهها [English]
References
Urbanovska, J., & Kříž ,Z. (2019). The Middle Power Concept: Presenting a Complex Approach, Politické vedy, 22(4),33-56, DOI:10.24040/politickevedy.2019.22.4.33-56.
Belozerov, V. K.(2023). Strategy as a Political Phenomenon and Concept, 25(2), 368–376. DOI: 10.22363/2313-1438-2023-25-2-368-376
Aster, S. (2008). Appeasement: Before and After Revisionism, Diplomacy and Statecraft, 19(3):443-480, DOI:10.1080/09592290802344962
Ollapally, D. M. (2018). India and the International Order: Accommodation and Adjustment, Ethics & International Affairs , 32(1), 61-74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0892679418000102
Kutty, S.N. (2019). the Iran Factor in India-U.S. Relations. Asia Policy, 4, (1). 95-118.
Chandra, V. (2018). India’s accommodation in the emerging international order: challenge and process, India Quarterly, 74(4), 420-437.
Ken, B. (1998). Statecraft and Security: The Cold War and Beyond, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pardesi, M. S. (2021). India’s China strategy under Modi continuity in the management of an asymmetric rivalry, International Politics, 59(3), 44-66. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-021-00287-3
Hettne, Bjorn & Fredriik Soderbaum (2005), Civilian Power or Soft Imperialism? The EU as a Global Actor and The Role of Interregionalism, European Foreign Affairs Review, 10(4), 535-552. DOI:10.54648/EERR2005036.
Manners, I. (2002). Normative Power Europe: A Contradiction in Terms?, Journal of Commom Market Studies, 40(2), 232-258.
Manners, I. (2006). Normative Power Europe Reconsidered: Beyond the Crossroads, Journal of European Public Policy, 13(2), 182-199.
Pehlivanturk, B., & Demirtas, B. (2018). Civilian Powers and Contemporary Global Challenges, PERCEPTIONS. XXIII (1), 1-7.
Hellmann, G. (1997). The Sirens of Power and German Foreign Policy: Who is Listening?, German Politics, 6(2).
Oribe, J. (2006). Civilian Power EuropeReview of the Original and Current Debates, Cooperation and Conflict 41(1):123-128, DOI:10.1177/0010836706063503.
Mabee, B. (2003). Security studies and the “security state”: Security provision in a historical context, International Relations, 17(2), 135–151.
John G. R. (1982). International Regimes, Transactions, and Change: Embedded Liberalism in the Postwar Economic Order, International Organization, 36(2), 195–231.
Maull, H. W. (1991). Germany and Japan: the new civilian powers, Foreign Affairs, 69(5), 69-91.
Michael, M. (1988). Ruling Class Strategies and Citizenship, in States, War and Capitalism, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Hobsbawm, E. (1995). Age of Extremes: The Short Twentieth Century 1914-1991, London: Michael Joseph.
Aydin, U. (2021). merging middle powers and the liberal international order, International Affairs, 97(5), 1377-1394, DOI:10.1093/ia/iiab090
Mahrenbach, L. C. (2019). Conceptualizing Emerging Powers, In book: The Palgrave Handbook of Contemporary International Political Economy, Publisher: Palgrave Macmillan, retrieved from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340706743_Conceptualising_Emerging_Powers
Blagden, D. W & Jack S. Levy. (2011). Sea Powers, Continental Powers and Balancing Theroy, International Security, 36(2), 190-202, retrieved from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254925339_Sea_Powers _Continental_Powers_and_Balancing_Theory
Flemes, D. (2007). Emerging Middle Powers' Soft Balancing Strategy: State and Perspectives of the IBSA Dialogue Forum, GIGA Working Papers 57, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies
Paul, T.V. (2016). The accommodation of rising powers in world politics. In book: Accommodating Rising Powers (pp.3-32), Publisher: Cambridge University Press, retrieved from: https://assets.cambridge.org/97811071/ 34041/excerpt/9781107134041_excerpt.pdf. DOI:10.1017/CBO9781316460191.001
Maull, Hanns. w. (2000), “Germany and the Use of Force: Still a ‘Civilian Power’?, Survival. 42(2), 56-80.
Maull, H. W (1990). Germany and Japan: The New Civilian Powers, Foreign Affairs, 69 (5), 92-93.
ozdimir, E., & Vildan Serin, Z. (2016). Trading State and Reflections of Foreign Policy: Evidence from Turkish Foreign Policy, Procedia Economics and Finance, 38, 468-475. retrieved from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/304000435 Trading State and Reflections of for eign Policy Evidence from Turkish Foreign Policy. DOI:10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30218-0
Hegre, H. (2000). Development and the liberal peace: what does it take to be a trading state?, Journal of Peace Research, 37(1), 5-30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343300037001001
Regilme S.S.F., Beller B. (2020) Security State. In: Romaniuk S., Thapa M., Marton
Cham
Regilme S.S.F., Beller B. (2020) Security State. In: Romaniuk S., Thapa M., Marton
Cham
Waltz, K. N. (1979). Theory of International Politics, Berkeley: Addisson Weslay Publishing Company
Bordachev, T. et al (2018). The rise of rimland: the new political geography and strategic culture, Retrieved From: https://valdaiclub.com/files/28181/
Mousavian, S. H., & Shah, M. R. (2020). Iran’s foreign policy in the Middle East: A grand strategy, retrieved from: https://www.researchgate. net/profile/Mohammadhitsazian/publication/347935912_Iran’s_Foreign_Policy_in_the_Middle_East_A_Grand_Strategy/links/5fe8a71692851c13fec5ff20/Irans-Foreign-Policy-in-the-Middle-East-A-Grand-Strategy.pdf
Gasparetto, A. (2021). Iranian attitude toward Eurasia: objective, Opportunities and Challenges, Journal for Iranian Studies, 5(13), 87-107.
Andreas, P., & Price, R. (2001). From war fighting to crime fighting: Transforming the American National Security State, International Studies Review, 3 (3), 1–23.
Tabarani, G. G (2006). How Iran plans to fight America and dominate the Middle East, Washington: Author House
KŘÍŽ, Z.. et al (2019). The Middle Power Concept: Presenting a Complex Approach, Politické vedy, Banská Bystrica: Matej Bel University Press, 2019, 22(4), 33-56. ISSN 1335-2741. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.24040/politickevedy.2019.22.4.33-56.
Millani, M. M. (2006). Iran’s policy toward Afghanistan. Middle East Journal, 60(2), 235-256.
Rosecrance, Richard (1987), Rise of the Trading State: Commerce and Conquest in the Modern World, Retrived from: http://www.olivialau.org/ir/archive/ros4.pdf
McNeill, W. H. (1984). Pursuit of Power: Technology, Armed Force, and Society since A.D. 1000, Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 2nd ed
Morozova, N. (2009). Geopolitics, Eurasianism and Russian Foreign Policy under Putin, Geopolitics, 14(4), 667-686. https://doi.org/10.1080/14650040903141349.
Fergusen, Chaka (2009), The Strategic Use of Soft Balancing: The Normative Dimensions of the Chinese–Russian ‘Strategic Partnership’, Journal of Strategic Studies, 35(2):1-26,DOI:10.1080/01402390.2011. 583153
Shlykov, P. V. (2023). the State of Strategic Hedging: Turkeys foreign policy and Relations with Russia, Russia in Global Affairs, 21(3), 134-158
Regilme, S, S, Jr & Beller, B, (2020). Security State, In: Romaniuk S., Thapa M., Marton P.(eds), The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Global Security Studies, Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
Kirişci, K. (2009). The transformation of Turkish foreign policy: The rise of the trading state, New Perspectives on Turkey, (40), 29-57.
Kovac, I. (2019). Peaceful Accomodation: A New Research Program?, International Studies Review, (21), 324–325, https://doi.org/10.1093/ isr/viz019
Lesage, Dries, Daskin, Emin & Hasan Yar (2022). The War in Ukraine and Turkey's Hedging Strategy Between the West and Russia, retrieved from: https://www.ugent.be/ps/politiekewetenschappen/gies/en/research/publications/gies_papers/202ukraine/the-war-in-ukraine-and-turkeys-hedging-strategy-between-the-west-and-russia
Mersheimer, J.. J. (2010). The Gathering Storm: China’s Challenge to US Power in Asia, The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 3(4), Winter 2010, Pages 381–396, https://doi.org/10.1093/cjip/poq016.
Pape, R. A. (2005). Soft Balancing Against U.S.A, International Security, 30(1), 7-45.
Azubuike, S. (2006). To Appease or to Concede? Contrasting Two Modes of Accommodation in International Conflict, International Relations, 20(1),49-68.DOI:10.1177/0047117806060928.
Hersich, H., & Seydi, M. (2007). The Role of Civil Power in Foreign Policy, Law and Politics Research, 9(22), 30-2. [In Persian]
Lake, D. A. (1998). Anarchy, Hierarchy, and the Variety of International Relations, International Organization, 50(1) , 1-33.
He, Kai & Huiyun Feng(2008), If Not Soft Balancing, Then What? Reconsidering Soft Balancing and U.S. Policy toward China, Security Studies, 17(2), 363 - 395.
Brljavac, B., & Conrad, M. (2011). A Global Civilian Power? The Future Role of the European Union in International Politics, celandic Review of Politics & Administration, 7(1):97
Brawely, M. R (2005). The Rise of the Trading State Revisited, in Globalization, Security and the Nation- State, edited by Ersel Aydinli and James Rosenau, SUNY Press, 67-80
Whitman, Richard G (1998). From Civilian Power to Superpower? The International Identity of the European Union, Palgarve Macmilan
Morgenthau, Hans J. (1401). Politics among nations, the struggle for power and peace, translated by Homeira Moshirzadeh, Tehran: Political and International Studies Office. [In Persian]
Darakhshandeh Lazrjani, M., & Shafi'I, N. (1401). United States Policy Towards China in the Form of Immunization Strategy (1990-2021), Quarterly Journal of World Politics,12(2), 7-38. [In Persian]
)