48 International Relations Theory of War
relinquished this core principle, resulting in their becoming liberal, epis-
temic, or institutional theories^60 —the three values of the independent vari-
able, manifesting in the three polarity models of the system, are the factors
that influence the two international outcomes: the degree of stability of
international systems and the degree of territorial expansion of polar pow-
ers at the end of the wars in which they participate.
The rest of the chapter has five main parts. In the first part, the state is
presented as the most important player in the international system because
the polarity of the system is defined in research through the number of
strong countries that constitute it. In the second part, the manner in which
theory relates to the term polar power will be defined. In the third part, the
common definitions in research of the term great power will be examined,
and the term polar power as a replacement term will be suggested. In the
fourth part, the three possible polarity models—multipolarity, bipolarity,
and unipolarity—are discussed. In the fifth and last part, the way in which
the polarity of the system affects the international outcomes occurring in
it will be presented.
THE MOST IMPORTANT PLAYER IN THE INTERNATIONAL
SYSTEM: THE STATE
In the past, countries did not always control the regulating of violence
in the international scene as they do today. In premodern times, countries
in Europe competed with two other organizational models—city-states
and metropolises. Outside Europe, they competed with other models.
The alternatives to the state disappeared, but states continued to struggle
to strengthen their monopoly over violence, confronting the challenge of
mercenaries and pirates in the 19th century and with terrorists and gue-
rilla groups in the 20th century. Under certain pressures, countries have
also failed.^61
Today, the state is commonly held as the dominant model of political
order that is capable of executing independent foreign policy,^62 and it is
the political authority with monopoly over the legitimate use of organized
violence. Therefore, the focus must be the state when the regulation of vio-
lence in the international scene, which is one of the fundamental problems
of order in the social world, which extensively influences the aggregate
of other social relations, is discussed.^63 The relations between states differ
from other models of social interaction and involve primarily alternatives
of peace and war.^64
The realist theory assumes that nation-states are the only significant
players in global politics. In recent years, an attempt has been made to
expand the theory and extend it to nonstate players too, such as multi-
national corporations, nongovernment organizations, or crime syndicates.
However, to date, these organizations have operated in the economic or