Abstract:

This study is about international system and stability. By comparing different theoretical approaches, it discusses the relation between polarity and stability. It is quite common to identify international systems as unipolar, bipolar, and multipolar structures. There is a wide ranging discussion over which one of these structures represents the most stable system. Although multipolar structures were admitted as more stable previously, later the claim of bipolar stability became more common. Recently, the idea that unipolar structures are more stable compared to bipolar structures has gained more ground. This study identifies two main theoretical logics behind the discussions over the relation between polarity and stability: a logic of motivations and a logic of obligations. Although the logic of obligations appears as doing better than the logic of motivations in predicting international stability, it has its own theoretical shortcomings. The study further offers the logic possibilities in order to theoretically explain and predict the relation between polarity and stability. According to this logic, international stability can be considered an outcome of states’ calculations of possibilities

Keywords: