Hegemony,
Counter-hegemony, and Stability
Five Dimensions of the
Concept of Hegemony
There are at least five basic dimensions to
the concept of hegemony, ranging from gross and obvious to more subtle.
Hegemony is much more than simple domination because of its more subtle
dimensions found later on this list.
|
Five Dimensions of the Concept of
Hegemony 1. Military: The hegemon has the strongest military in the world,
significantly stronger than any of its rivals. Its military alliance system
is significantly stronger than any rival military bloc. 2. Economic: The hegemon has the largest and most technologically advanced
economy in the world. It is a major trading partner of most of the nations of
the world, including most of the major powers. 3. Political: The hegemon has a wide range of political allies and friendly
relations with most nations and major powers. 4. Institutional: The hegemon, along with its allies, usually controls most of
the international institutions and thus significantly shapes the rules that
govern global political and economic relations. 5. Ideological:
The hegemon largely determines the terms of
discourse in global relations. The predominant ideas about globalization are
the ideas of hegemon. |
Hegemony Contains Both
Coercion and Consent
In
international relations, the theory of hegemony is crucial because it captures
both the tendency of the world’s leading power to forcefully assert its
dominance yet at the same time to create alliances, ideas, and institutions
that attract the relatively free participation of other states and peoples in a
more or less open international system.
Hegemony thus embodies both the coercion of informal empire and the
consent of democratic participation.
It combines both the “hard” power of military and economic empire with
the “soft” power of democratic ideas and global institutions. Because the
current international system built around U.S. hegemony thus contains both
elements of coercion and consent, over time it could evolve in either the
direction of an expanded informal empire or a more democratic, peaceful world
order.
Counter-hegemony and
Counter-hegemonic
All states have the choice of either siding
with or opposing the hegemon, as a general strategy
and on particular issues. In the language of international relations,
these choices are called bandwagoning (siding with
the hegemon) or balancing (allying against the hegemon). Even hegemons
face resistance from popular movements and national elites who contest the hegemon's plan for globalization on each of the five levels
listed above. States who oppose the hegemon
often form a counter-hegemonic alliance system, as did the
Theories of Hegemonic
Stability and Hegemonic Instability
Most American specialists in international
relations (and many of their European counterparts) believe in the theory of
hegemonic stability. Simply stated, this theory argues that the hegemonic
power plays a crucial role in maintaining stability and order in the world system.
In other words, the hegemon is the most benign power
in the global system. Because the hegemon is
the power that benefits most from the existing world system, the hegemon has the greatest stake in keeping that system
functioning. The military power of the hegemon
keeps the peace, discouraging challengers to the global order. The
economy of the hegemon is the engine that drives
international economic growth and development. In order to preserve its
network of alliances, the hegemon is the political
broker who moderates disputes between other powers, thus keeping them from
escalating into serious conflict. The hegemon
seeks to bind other states into the global order and thus plays a leading role
in developing global institutions that manage international security and
economic relations. The hegemon is often the
source and usually a propagator of ideas about world order and security.
For example, current concepts of “globalization” are shaped largely by American
intellectuals. In the words of former Secretary of State Madeline
Albright, the hegemon is “the indispensable nation…(the one) that walks tall and looks forward.”
On the other hand, the theory of hegemonic
instability argues that hegemony is a destructive force in the global
system. The hegemon uses its military power to
impose its will around the world, raising the level of violence associated with
regional political conflicts. The economy of the hegemon
sucks resources from less developed economies and twists development around the
globe to fit its insatiable appetites rather than benefit the peoples of the
world. The alliance system of the hegemon
virtually guarantees that peoples and states excluded from the hegemon’s councils will be forced into a series of
counter-hegemonic alliances. Conflict between the hegemonic alliance
system and the counter-hegemonic alliance system was the source of the two
world wars and the Cold War. The military competition between the
hegemonic and counter-hegemonic alliances turns many otherwise manageable political
disputes into violent conflict. The rules and values of the international
institutions constructed by the hegemon are blatantly
unfair. The hegemon represents its own narrow
national interests as the interests of global society, while in fact global
institutions serve to expand the power and wealth of the hegemon.
Just as a dictator within a nation proclaims himself the protector and voice of
the people while actually suppressing and exploiting the people, the hegemon claims to be the protector of international order
and the driving force of global prosperity, but in truth the hegemon spreads disorder, repression, and exploitation.
The
Potential for World Order or Neoimperialism in the
Hegemonic System
The 21st
century hegemonic system has a dual nature, combining elements of both neoimperialism and world order. Over time the hegemonic system can
evolve more in the direction of either neoimperialism
or more toward world order.
Hegemony, World Order, and Neoimperialism
|
|
World Order |
Hegemony |
Neoimperialism
|
|
Foundation of International System |
Shared Values |
Military/Economic Power + Shared Values |
Military + Economic Power |
|
Key Way States Interact |
Cooperation |
Conflict but also Cooperation |
Conflict |
|
Why States Participate in
International System |
Consent |
Consent + Coercion |
Coercion |
|
Nature of International System |
Based on Rules + Institutions |
Sometimes based on Rules + Institutions but often
Anarchical |
Anarchical |
|
Key form of Power |
Soft Power |
Hard Power + Soft Power |
Hard Power |