International Relations Theory of War 27
HYPOTHESES OF THE THEORY CONCERNING THE TWO
INTERNATIONAL OUTCOMES
After discussing the general principles of the theory, the two dependent
variables that the international relations theory of war explains are now dis-
cussed—stability of international systems and the degree of territorial
expansion of polar powers at the end of wars that they have fought.
STABILITY OF INTERNATIONAL SYSTEMS
The first family of international outcomes that the international relations
theory of war assesses is the stability of the three international systems,
which is assessed in studies that deal with the causes of the outbreak of
wars. The stability of the system is measured according to the number,
frequency, duration, and lethality of wars in which the polar powers are
involved in the three polarity models.
The theory defines systemic international outcome using three values. A
system will be considered destabilized when the value of the four parame-
ters—the number, frequency, duration, and lethality of wars, with empha-
sis on the frequency of wars parameter—are very high relative to the other
two systems. A system will be considered stable when the values of the
four parameters—the number, frequency, duration, and lethality of wars,
particularly the frequency of wars parameter—are very low relative to the
two other systems. A system will be considered partly destabilized when
the values of the four parameters—the number, frequency, duration, and
lethality of wars—are very low relative to a destabilized system and very
high relative to a stable one.
The theory is based, as set forth, on the existence of two transhistoric
order principles. One is the principle of anarchy, the absence of a com-
mon regime that spurs the players, particularly the polar powers, to tend
always to expansion or to form hegemonies headed by them. The other is
the principle of homeostasis, a property of the system that resists change,
causing the system to dictate to players, particularly the polar powers, to
tend always to stagnation or retention of the system in its existing state.
Despite the constant presence of these two order principles, the current
study does not predict uniformity in the number or lethality of wars over
the years.
Each of the three different polarity models will apply certain forces, or
constraints, restraints, and restrictions, to the players in the system that dis-
tinguish it relative to the other two polar models. These forces will be a
result of the influence of each of the three polarity models on the values
of the two order principles of anarchy and homeostasis. These forces will
lead to each of the three international system models dictating identical