hi guys today we're going to talk about regions and powers the structure of international security by bari bazan and oli veiva the argument in this book is that regional security complex theory enables one to evaluate the relative balance of power of regionalizing and globalizing trends this theory distinguishes between the system level interplay of the global powers those capabilities enable them to transcend distance and the subsystem level interplay of lesser powers those main security environment is their local region the central idea of regional security complex theory is that since most threats travel more easily over short distances then over long ones security interdependence is normally patterned into regionally based clusters security complexes the most states historically have been concerned primarily with the capabilities and intentions of the neighbors the regional level is the the extremes of national and global security interplay and there most of the action occurs theory uses a blend of materialist and constructivist approaches a brief modern history of regional security the modern world history of regional security complexes falls into three stages the modern era the cold war and decolonization and the post-cold war period before 1500 pre-modern security dynamics unfolded in multiple relatively separate systems but these were not regional because the global level was not strong enough to generate a global world system and therefore the separate systems were not regions but really worlds during the modern era from 1500 to 1945 the story is heavily titled in the favor of the global level the european international system expanded until it became global the new european national states reached out economically politically and military creating both formal and informal empires in all quarters of the globe european power eventually dominated and occupied the existing social and international systems largely stifling indigenous regional security dynamics there was regional security of a kind but it was defined much more by global rivalries among the european powers then by security interdependence among local units during the second stage 1945 to 1989 the cold war and decolonization created contradictory effects on the one hand the tidal wave of decolonization rolled back imperial power created dozens of new states and allowed regional security dynamics to start operating among these newly independent actors in most of africa the middle east and south and southeast asia on the other hand the bipolar rivalry of the united states and the soviet union subordinate most of europe and northeast asia and penetrated heavily into most of the newly liberated regions both superpowers quite quickly came to see that the third world was an important arena for a military and ideological rivalry the ending of the cold war had three major impacts on the story of regional security first and most obviously it lifted the superpower overlay from europe and radically changed the pattern of superpower penetration in northeast asia with the implosion of the soviet union in 1991 it also brought 15 new states and a new regional security complex into the game second by removing ideological confrontation and soviet power from the equation it greatly changed both the nature and the intensity of global power penetration into third world complexes third the ending of the cold war exposed and in many ways reinforced the shift in the nature of the security agenda to include a range of non-military issues and actors which have been visible since the 70s another influential interpretation of the post-cold war period has been the idea that the international system has divided into two worlds a zone of peace and a zone of conflict in the present era therefore the story of global security becomes more diversified a relatively uniform picture of military political security dynamics dominated by state actors gives way to multi-sexual conceptions of security a wider variety of factors and sets of conditions and dynamics that differ sharply from one region to another distinguishing the original from the global offers proposed the following definitional criteria for a free tiered scheme superpowers and great powers at the system level and regional powers at the regional level superpowers the criteria for superpower status are demanding that they require broad spectrum capabilities exercised across the whole of the international system superpowers must possess first class military political capabilities and the economies to support such capabilities they must be capable of and also exercise global military and political reach they need to see themselves and be accepted by others in rhetoric and behavior as having this rank superpowers must be active players in the processes of securitization and de-securitization in all or nearly all of the regions in the system whether as threats guarantees allies or intervenors except in extremely conflictual international systems superpowers will also be fought in hats of universal values of the tape necessary to underpin international society taking all of these factors into account during the 19th century britain france russia had this rank after the first world war it was held by britain the usa and the soviet union after the second world war it was held by the usa and the soviet union and after the cold war it was held only by the usa great powers achieving great power status is less demanding in terms of both capability and behavior great powers need not necessarily have big capabilities in all sectors and they need not be actively present in all securitization processes of all areas of the international system great power status rests mainly on the single key what distinguishes great powers from mainly regional ones is that they are responded to by others on the basis of system level calculations about the present and near future distribution of power usually this implies that a great power is treated in the calculations of other major powers as if it has the clear economic military and political potential to beat for superpower status in the short or medium term this angle key is observable in the foreign policy processes and discourses of other powers mostly great powers will be rising in the hierarchy of international power but a second route into this category is countries declining from acknowledged superpower status declining superpowers will normally have influence in the more than one region and be capable of limited global military operation regional powers regional powers define the polarity of any given regional security complex unipolar bipolar multipolar their capabilities loom large in their region but do not register much in a broad spectrum way at the global level regional security complex theory main variables regional security complexes are defined by durable patterns of enmity and energy taking the form of subglobal geographically coherent patterns of security interdependence the particular character of a local complex will often be affected by historical factors such as long-standing enmities or the common culture embrace of a civilizational area the formation of complexes derives from the interplay between on the one hand the anarchic structure and its balance of power consequences and on the other the pressures of local geographical proximity what links the overagent pattern of distribution of power among the global powers to the regional dynamics of regional security complexes is the mechanism of penetration penetration occurs when outside powers make security alignments with states within and regional security complex balance of power logic works naturally to encourage the local rivals to call in outside help and by this mechanism the local patents of rivalry become linked to the global ones such linkage between the local and global security partners is a natural feature of life in anarchic system historical hatreds and friendships as well as specific issues that trigger conflict or cooperation take part in the formation of an overall constellation of fears threats and friendships that define a regional security complex descriptive regional security complex theory a matrix for area studies the theory specifies what to look for at four levels of analysis and how to interrelate these the four levels are first domestically in the states of the region particularly their domestically generated vulnerabilities the specific vulnerability of the state defines the kind of security fears it has and sometimes makes another state or group of states a structural threat even if it or they have no hostile intentions it is important to remember that there are three significant dimensions of differentiation between states first a few states are great powers while most others are not second many states underwent colonial occupation while a smaller number of others either did not or the colonial occupiers themselves third some states have been established for a long time and have deep roots while others are recent constructions of decolonization sometimes with shallow roots second level is state-to-state relations third the region's interaction with neighboring regions fourth the row of global powers in the region taken together these four levels constitute the security constellation the essential structure of an regional security complex embodies four variables first boundary which differentiates the original security complex from its neighbor's second aeronautical structure which means that the regional security complex must be composed of two or more autonomous units third polarity which covers the distribution of power among the units and fourth social construction which covers the patterns of enmity and entity among the units from its configuration at any given snapshot in time there are three possible evolutions open to an regional security complex maintenance of the status quo which means that there are no significant changes in its essential structure second internal transformation which means that changes in essential structure occur within the context of its existing outer boundary this could mean changes to the anarchic structure because of regional integration to polarity because of disintegration merger conquest differential growth rates or such like or to the dominant patterns of energy enmity because of ideological shifts or awareness changes of leadership and etc and third external transformation which means that the outer boundary expands or contracts changing the membership of the regional security complex and most probably transforming its essential structure in other ways there are four types of regional security complex standard were polarity determined by regional powers centered on a superpower great power regional power or either institution great power which can be described by our multipolar with great powers as the original pulse and super complexes with strong inter-regional level of security dynamics arising from great powers below into adjacent regions regional security theory presupposed that the units concerned are normal members of an international system normal in the sense that they possess autonomy to make their own policy and the power capabilities to engage the other units in the system there are two general sets of condition in which regional security complexes do not or cannot form overlay and unstructured overlay is when great power interests transcend map penetration and come to dominate a region so heavy that the local patterns of security relations virtually ceases to operate it usually results in a long-term stationing of great powers armed forces in the region and in alignment of the local states according to the patterns of great power rivalry the strongest example of overlay are european colonization of africa asia and the americas and the situation in europe itself during the cold war when the classical european security dynamics was overlaid by superpower rivalry unstructured security regions occur for either or both of two reasons first the local states have such low capability that their power does not project much beyond their boundaries and second where geographical installation makes interaction difficult either condition can result in insufficient generation of security interdependence to form the structures of regional security complex no regional security complex exists because the units do not become each other's main security concern conclusions during the interwar period there was a three plus three global power structure with britain the usa and the soviet union as super powers and germany japan and france as great powers africa the middle east and most of asia remained overlaid by the control of colonial powers and regional security complexes the visible only in north and south america europe and northeast asia a total of four during the cold war the colonization period there was two plus free global power structure with the usa and the soviet union as superpowers and china japan and western europe becoming great powers albeit if western europe leaving room for questions about the standing of britain france and germany as independent players perhaps only of regional status when taken individually this period saw many new regional security complexes from giving the following totals three in africa three in asia one in south america one in north america none in europe and one in the middle east during the first decade of the post-cold war period the global power structure shifted to one plus four with only the usa remaining as a superpower and china the european union japan and russia has great powers there was some mobility in the pattern of regional security complexes north and south america stayed much as before but meltdown of the soviet union meant that two and for a while almost three regional security complexes emerged in europe in asia the merger of the northeast and southeast asian complexes reduced the total to two in africa the southern africa complex expanded into central africa and a central african regional security complex emerged raising the number to four and with one in the middle east the global total in 2001 was 11. office suggested two development scenarios for the global power structure first a shift to two plus x depend on either china or the european union being evaluated to superpower status and the second one is a shift to zero plus x with the usa giving up its superpower role and becoming a normal great power cast in the international history of the 20th and early 21st century draws attention to two striking points first is that the number of superpowers has been shrinking steadily second is that the number of regional security complexes rose sharply during the middle of the century and has remained stable thank you very much for watching happy holidays stay healthy see you soon you