Asia & the Pacific

8 Items

Panel discussion at Halifax International Security Forum 2018

Halifax International Security Forum

Analysis & Opinions

Future Tense - Our World in Ten

| Nov. 19, 2018

This year’s Halifax International Security Forum paid respect to the 100th anniversary of the end of World War One, but in its final plenary session, Future Tense: Our World in Ten, the attention shifted to the future. How will the issues discussed throughout this year’s Forum play out over the next decade? Will democratic states be able to defend their values and institutions from growing threats like great power politics and cyber-warfare? This diverse set of panelists spoke confidently and optimistically about the resilience of democracies to withstand this challenge.

The International Criminal Court building in The Hague, Netherlands.

The Guardian

Analysis & Opinions - METRO U.N.

The International Criminal Court: A Court of Justice or a Political Tool?

| Oct. 10, 2018

Karl Kaiser, Senior Associate of the Belfer Center's Project on Europe and the Transatlantic Relationship, gives his view on the recent U.S. administration's criticism of the International Criminal Court in the latest issue of Metro U.N. magazine.

teaser image

Analysis & Opinions - METRO U.N.

BRICS—Is the Concept still Relevant?

| Aug. 29, 2018

Ever since this group of states became more than a handy acronym about a decade ago, the question whether the partial common interests or the striking differences among them will ultimately prevail has been posed and though it remains open, contemporary trends in international politics have, in fact, given the group new impetus, at least for the time being.

teaser image

- Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School Belfer Center Newsletter

Newsmakers

| Summer 2012

"Belfer Center Newsmakers" highlights members of the Belfer Center community who have been featured recently in the news.

Journal Article - Quarterly Journal: International Security

The Security Curve and the Structure of International Politics: A Neorealist Synthesis

    Author:
  • Davide Fiammenghi
| Spring 2011

Realist scholars have long debated the question of how much power states need to feel secure. Offensive realists claim that states should constantly seek to increase their power. Defensive realists argue that accumulating too much power can be self-defeating. Proponents of hegemonic stability theory contend that the accumulation of capabilities in one state can exert a stabilizing effect on the system. The three schools describe different points along the power con­tinuum. When a state is weak, accumulating power increases its security. This is approximately the situation described by offensive realists. A state that con­tinues to accumulate capabilities will eventually triggers a balancing reaction that puts its security at risk. This scenario accords with defensive realist as­sumptions. Finally, when the state becomes too powerful to balance, its oppo­nents bandwagon with it, and the state’s security begins to increase again. This is the situation described by hegemonic stability theory. These three stages delineate a modified parabolic relationship between power and secu­rity. As a state moves along the power continuum, its security increases up to a point, then decreases, and finally increases again. This modified parabolic re­lationship allows scholars to synthesize previous realist theories into a single framework.