International Relations Theory of War 49
social field and have not been perceived as having significant security
influence.^65 According to neorealism, the units are states and the theory
objects to nonstate players, such as individuals, transnational social move-
ments, and multinational corporations.
Neorealism attempts to explain the behavior of these units through the
international system and objects to relying on the personality of decision
makers or local political structures in foreign policy. Waltz was one of the
first to deal with the state system project systematically, and its influence
on the neorealism theory that he developed was extensive.^66 The hypoth-
eses of the international states system significantly shape and indeed
restrict the way in which we think about global politics.^67
The 9/11 attacks in 2001 caused “superempowerment” of weak non-
state players that were minor in every other respect, allowing them to
threaten great nation-states.^68 If nonstate players are also capable of caus-
ing damage to such a catastrophic degree, then many of the concepts on
which the security policy of the last 200 years has been based—such as
balance of power, deterrence, or buffering—lose their relevance, insofar as
the deterrence theory depends on the wielder of weapons of mass destruc-
tion having a “return address” with tangible assets on its side that may be
threatened with destruction in response.^69
GREAT POWER OR POLAR POWER
The terms great power, which is common in international relations
research, and polar power, which the current study uses, have received
various definitions. Schweller argues that to define a state as a polar state
it must have more than half the resources of the strongest power in the
system, whereas the rest of the powers will be defined as medium pow-
ers.^70 Mearsheimer argues that the polarity of the international system is
frequently defined in a broad manner that is out of the context of a spe-
cific region: to be defined as a pole in the global or regional system, the
state must have a reasonable chance of defending itself against the leading
country in the system.^71 Morgenthau, the traditional realist, and Waltz,
the neorealist, agree that great powers must excel in all aspects of physi-
cal power. The power status of a country depends, according to Waltz,
on the manner in which it succeeds in all the following components: size
of population and territory, natural resources, economic ability, military
force, political stability, and diplomatic skill.^72 Waltz adds that under bipo-
lar systems, no third power can challenge the first two powers.^73
POLAR POWER IN THE CURRENT STUDY
The international relations theory of war uses the term polar powers to
describe the strongest powers in the system. These powers are the ones