print

«Why are we not all dead?»:
on the issue of the circulation of power in international relations

Loshkariov I.D.,

MGIMO University, Moscow, Russia, ivan1loshkariov@gmail.com

elibrary_id: 639886 | ORCID: 0000-0002-7507-1669 |

Article received: 2025.04.01 21:25. Accepted: 2025.06.25 21:25


DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2025.06.04
EDN: RGEZDI

Rubric: Theme of the issue: research conceptualization and political designing of the future’s image

For citation:

Loshkariov I.D. «Why are we not all dead?»: on the issue of the circulation of power in international relations. – Polis. Political Studies. 2025. No. 6. https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2025.06.04. EDN: RGEZDI (In Russ.)

The study was funded by a grant from the Russian Science Foundation (project No. 23-18-01045 “Transfer Potential of Political Science in the System of Social and Humanitarian Knowledge”).

Abstract

Traditional ideas about power in international relations are associated with a few stable characteristics such as verticality, asymmetry, control, and static state. Within the framework of this view of power, the problem of the integrity and reproduction of international relations as sustainable practices of interaction remains unsettled. The source of the problems was and remains the unresolved nature of a set of contradictions at the level of social ontology: they can hardly be eliminated, but they can be mitigated. To this end, the article attempts to consider power in international relations as a horizontal and “fluid” phenomenon that circulates between actors, rather than being accumulated by them to achieve certain goals. Three concepts of circulating power – derivative, pivotal and Protean power – are thoroughly considered and compared. The findings of this study show that these concepts describe several poorly understood phenomena, some of which are limited to the field of interaction or the framework of social space. Collectively, these types of power reveal mechanisms of multiplicity and coherence in international relations, due to mutual disposition and partly the consequences of the social construction of norms and rules of behavior. Based on the thesis of the circulation of certain types of power, it is possible to build a relational ontology in which some significant contradictions are blurred and fit into the broader context of actors’ interactions. This type of ontology offers new directions for international political research while recognising that circulating types of power in international relations complement vertical/traditional types of power and mitigate the most complex contradictions at the ontological level of interactions.

Keywords

power, derivative power, pivotal power, Protean power, circulation, relational ontology.

Adler, E. (2020). Control power as a special case of protean power: thoughts on Peter Katzenstein and Lucia Seybert’s Protean Power: exploring the uncertain and unexpected in world politics. International Theory, 12(3), 422-434. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1752971920000226

Albert, M., & Buzan, B. (2013). International relations theory and the “social whole”: encounters and gaps between IR and sociology. International Political Sociology. 7(2), 117-135. https://doi.org/10.1111/ips.12013

Barnett, M., & Zarakol, A. (2023). Global international relations and the essentialism trap. International Theory, 15(3), 428-444. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1752971923000131

Bieler, A., & Morton, A.D. (2001). The Gordian Knot of agency–structure in international relations: a neo-Gramscian perspective. European Journal of International Relations, 7(1), 5-35. https://doi.org/10.1177/135406610100700100

Bloomfield, S.F. (2016). In future we are going to have to view our microbial world very differently. Perspectives in Public Health, 136(4), 183-185.

Boon, H.T., & Ardy, C. (2017). China and Lilliputians: small states in a big power’s evolving foreign policy. Asian Security, 13(2), 116-131. https://doi.org/10.1080/14799855.2017.1286159

Boon, H.T., & Teo, S. (2022). Caught in the middle? Middle powers amid US-China competition. Asia Policy, 17(4), 59-76. https://doi.org/10.1353/asp.2022.0058

Börzel, T.A., & Zürn, M. (2021). Contestations of the liberal international order: from liberal multilateralism to postnational liberalism. International Organization, 75(2), 282-305. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818320000570

Bueger, C., & Wivel, A. (2018). How do small island states maximize influence? Creole diplomacy and the smart state foreign policy of the Seychelles. Journal of the Indian Ocean Region, 14(2), 170-188. https://doi.org/10.1080/19480881.2018.1471122

Camber Warren, T. (2010). The geometry of security: modeling interstate alliances as evolving networks. Journal of Peace Research, 47(6), 697-709. https://doi.org/10.1177/00223433103862

Compaoré, W.N. (2018). Rise of the (other) rest? Exploring small state agency and collective power in international relations. International Studies Review, 20(2), 264-271. https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viy036

Conway, P.R. (2020). On the way to planet politics: from disciplinary demise to cosmopolitical coordination. International Relations, 34(2), 157-179. https://doi.org/10.1177/00471178198794

Cooper, A.F., & Schulz, C.A. (2023). How secondary states can take advantage of networks in world politics: the case of bridges and hubs. Globalizations, 20(7), 1083-1101. https://doi.org/10.1080/14747731.2023.2190701

Deutsch, K.W. (1968). The Analysis of International Relations. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

Ding, J., & Dafoe, A. (2023). Engines of power: Electricity, AI, and general-purpose, military transformations. European Journal of International Security, 8(3), 377-394. https://doi.org/10.1017/eis.2023.1

Downs, G.W., Rocke, D.M., & Barsoom, P.N. (1996). Is the good news about compliance good news about cooperation? International Organization, 50(3), 379-406. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300033427

Duncombe, C., & Dunne, T. (2018). After liberal world order. International Affairs, 94(1), 25-42.

Esposito, R. (2021). Instituting thought: three paradigms of political ontology. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Galiè, A., & Farnworth, C. R. (2019). Power through: A new concept in the empowerment discourse. Global Food Security, 21, 13-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2019.07.001

Giddens, A. (1968). Power in the recent writings of Talcott Parsons. Sociology, 2(3), 257-272. https://doi.org/10.1177/003803856800200301

Goddard, S.E. (2018). Embedded revisionism: networks, institutions, and challenges to world order. International Organization, 72(4), 763-797. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818318000206

Goldgeier, J.M., & Tetlock, P.E. (2001). Psychology and international relations theory. Annual Review of Political Science, 4(1), 67-92. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.4.1.67

Guzzini, S. (2020). Protean power as a plea for an open social ontology, non-efficient causal explanations, and cautious political practice. International Theory, 12(3), 449-458. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1752971920000287

Handel, M.I. (1990). Weak states in the international system. London; New York: Routledge.

Haugaard, M. (2012). Rethinking the four dimensions of power: domination and empowerment. Journal of Political Power, 5(1), 33-54. https://doi.org/10.1080/2158379X.2012.660810

Hoff, P.D., & Ward, M.D. (2004). Modeling dependencies in international relations networks. Political Analysis, 12(2), 160-175. https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mph012

Ignatow, G. (2022). The microbiome‐gut‐brain and social behavior. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 52(1), 164-182. https://doi.org/10.1111/jtsb.12315

Ikenberry, G.J. (2018). The end of liberal international order? International Affairs, 94(1), 7-23. https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iix241

Jackson, P.T., & Nexon, D.H. (1999). Relations before states: substance, process and the study of world politics. European journal of International Relations, 5(3), 291-332. https://doi.org/10.1177/135406619900500300

Jervis, R. (1978). Cooperation under the security dilemma. World Politics, 30(2), 167-214. https://doi.org/10.2307/2009958

Jessop, B. (2005). Critical realism and the strategic-relational approach. New Formations, 56, 40-53.

Kadıoğlu, İ.A., & Bezci, E.B. (2020). Small state intelligence: New Zealand in SEATO security affairs. Pacific Focus, 35(1), 5-28. https://doi.org/10.1111/pafo.12152

Karlberg, M. (2005). The power of discourse and the discourse of power: pursuing peace through discourse intervention. International Journal of Peace Studies, 10(1), 1-25.

Katzenstein, P.J. (2020). Protean power: a second look. International Theory, 12(3), 481-499. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1752971920000238

Katzenstein, P.J., & Seybert, L.A. (Eds.). (2018). Protean power: exploring the uncertain and unexpected in world politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108597456

Keohane, R.O. (1969). Lilliputians’ dilemmas: small states in international politics. International Organization, 23(2), 291-310. https://doi.org/10.1017/S002081830003160X

Kessler, O., & Lenglet, M. (2020). Between concepts and thought: digital technologies and temporal relationality. International Relations, 34(3), 413-431. https://doi.org/10.1177/004711782094819

Kim, R. E. (2020). Is global governance fragmented, polycentric, or complex? The state of the art of the network approach. International Studies Review, 22(4), 903-931. https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viz052

Kinne, B.J. (2013). Network dynamics and the evolution of international cooperation. American Political Science Review, 107(4), 766-785. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055413000440

Kruck, A., & Zangl, B. (2020). The adjustment of international institutions to global power shifts: a framework for analysis. Global Policy, 11, 5-16. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12865

Kurki, M. (2022). Relational revolution and relationality in IR: new conversations. Review of International Studies, 48(5), 821-836. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210521000127

Linell, P. (2007). Dialogicality in languages, minds and brains: is there a convergence between dialogism and neuro-biology? Language Sciences, 29(5), 605-620. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2007.01.001

Long, T. (2017a). It’s not the size, it’s the relationship: from ‘small states’ to asymmetry. International Politics, 54(2), 144-160. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-017-0028-x

Long, T. (2017b). Small states, great power? Gaining influence through intrinsic, derivative, and collective power. International Studies Review, 19(2), 185-205. https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viw040

Miller, R. (2024). Qatar–Türkiye relations during the embargo of Qatar: a case study in derivative power. International Politics, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-024-00609-1

Morgenthau H.J. (1993) Politics among nations: the struggle for power and peace. Boston: McGraw Hill. Nye, J.S. (1990). The changing nature of world power. Political Science Quarterly, 105(2), 177-192. https://doi.org/10.2307/2151022

O’Neill, K., Balsiger, J., & VanDeveer, S. D. (2004). Actors, norms, and impact: Recent international cooperation theory and the influence of the agent-structure debate. Annual Review of Political Science, 7(1), 149-175. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.7.090803.161821

Pansardi, P. (2021). Why we do need a concept of power. Journal of Political Power, 14(2), 301-312. https://doi.org/10.1080/2158379X.2021.1901195

Parsons, T. (1963). On the concept of political power. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 107(3), 232-262.

Pelopidas, B., & Verschuren, S.C.J. (2023). Writing IR after COVID-19: Reassessing political possibilities, good faith, and policy-relevant scholarship on climate change mitigation and nuclear disarmament. Global Studies Quarterly, 3(1).

Robertson, R. (1968). Strategic relations between national societies: a sociological analysis. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 12(1), 16-33. https://doi.org/10.1177/002200276801200102

Snidal, D., Hale, Th., Jones, E., Mertens, C., & Milewicz, K. (2024). The power of the “weak” and international organizations. The Review of International Organizations, 19(3), 385-409. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11558-024-09531-w

Solomon, T., & Steele, B.J. (2017). Micro-moves in international relations theory. European Journal of International Relations, 23(2), 267-291. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066116634442

Szalai, M. (2025). Smaller Gulf states and competing geopolitical scripts in the Indo-Pacific. International Politics, 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-024-00660-y

Thorhallsson, B. (2018). Studying small states: a review. Small States & Territories, 1(1), 17-34.

Tickner, A.B., & Querejazu, A. (2021). Weaving worlds: Cosmopraxis as relational sensibility. International Studies Review, 23(2), 391-408. https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viaa100

Trownsell, T., Behera, N.C., & Shani, G. (2022). Introduction to the special issue: pluriversal relationality. Review of International Studies, 48(5), 787-800. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210522000389

Wendt, A., & Friedheim, D. (1995). Hierarchy under anarchy: informal empire and the East German state. International Organization, 49(4), 689-721. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300028484

Wijaya, T., Liao, J.C., Baik, E., & Katada, S.N. (2024). Pivotal power of small states to save the international liberal economic order: the case from East Asia. The Pacific Review, 1-32. https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2024.2369700

Zürn, M. (2020). Unknown effects of social innovations. International Theory, 12(3), 471-480. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1752971920000251

Alekseyeva, T.A. (2022). Agent-structure relations: methodology of constructivism. Polis. Political studies, 4, 77-99. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2022.04.07

Istomin, I.A. (2021). Management of security commitments in asymmetric alliances the case of Russia. International Trends, 19(1), 26-55. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17994/IT.2021.19.1.64.1

Kharkevich, M.V. (2025). Plural ontology of international: in search of overcoming the crisis in political science. Polis. Political studies, 1, 24-38. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2025.01.03

Loshkariov, I.D. (2021). Protean power concept in international relations: origins and prospects. Politeia, 3, 6-21. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.30570/2078-5089-2021-102-3-6-21

Machiavelli, N. (2017). Il Principe. De arte bellica. (Russ. ed.: Machiavelli, N. Il Principe. De arte bellica). Moscow: AST).

Nikitin, A.I. (2018). Modern world order, its crisis and prospects. Polis. Political Studies, 6, 32-46. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2018.06.03

Safranchuk, I.A., & lukyanov, F.A. (2021). The contemporary world order: the adaptation of actors to structural realities. Polis. Political studies, 4, 14-25. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2021.04.03

Semenenko, I.S., Lapkin, V.V., & Pantin, V.I. (2010). Identity in the system of coordinates of the world development. Polis. Political Studies, 3, 40-59. (In Russ.) https://www.politstudies.ru/article/4278

Torkunov, A.V. (2013). International relations in the post-crisis world: a view from Russia. MGIMO Review of International Relations, 3, 7-11. (In Russ.)

Yudin, N.V. (2018). Faces of power debate in international relations theory? International Trends, 16(3), 84-99. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17994/IT.2018.16.3.54.4

See also: