Search

Balance of power is a ubiquitous concept in theory and practice, but it is rarely tested. This study tests balance of power and balance of threat theories in the case of U.S. intervention in the Persian Gulf. Propositions are derived from the theories and from a conceptualization that treats external states as facing potentially competing and contradictory pressures to balance at the global and regional levels as well as against power and threat. Evidence strongly disconfirms balance of power theory, while balance of threat theory is partly confirmed. Conditions are identified that make balance of threat theory more robust against the historical period explored and possibly in other cases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]