Hierarchy and Anarchy are two competing concepts in international relations theory. In this context, I think Hierarchy to be a more influential concept in explaining relations between states. In this context , it is necessary to highlight that hierarchy is a social construct that emerges out of relationship between states. Mutual aid, bandwagoning do not follow causally as a result of hierarchy as they are not specific features which emerge out of a system but they are part of a process of interaction of states with each other.
“Hierarchy is defined by extent of the authority exercised by the ruler over the ruled .” It is the relation created as an interaction between the states. As per David Lake, dominant and subordinate powers interact with each other there develops a mutual aid relationship between states which take contractual form in the process. This relationship is not embedded in any system but emerges as a result of bargain between the states where the dominant state provides order and security for small states whereas the other states respond with compliance. The dominance or authority of a big power is not resultant of an international system which pre-exists rather it comes into the picture as a voluntary agreement where small nations also benefit being in “mutualism”. Although in the process the dependent or small state has to recognize the power and legitimacy of the powerful state. The process of development of hierarchy as a construct the role of subordinate states is equally important as in the age of united nations and sovereign states, coercive power of powerful states does not remains a very potent tool. With multilateral trade and increased fungibility in relations a powerful state has to restrain its imperialistic ambitions and authority abuse tendency to establish itself at the top of hierarchy.
Praising hierarchy “as what states make out of their relations” doesn’t rule out the fact that anarchy is there. Anarchy may exist but hierarchy has been generated by the states mainly subordinate one as an antidote to survive and nurture in a system where there may not be a supra power but some hegemons to bandwagon with. It is a win-win situation for both small countries(gaining protection, aids) and big power( gaining legitimacy, compliance). So, hierarchy is all pervasive phenomenon. It is embedded within the anarchical system in a very actful manner as a part of interaction of states. With rise and fall of kingdoms constantly taking place in history there may be competing or overlapping hierarchies for example Soviet Union vs USA or BYZANTINE empire vs Magadha but its existence cannot be denied as a concept.
To be more precise hierarchal relations in international domain are need of the hour. It may not be explicitly stated by states but to thrive in anarchic international environment (Waltz), states have to manufacture certain strands of relationship based on not only mutual cooperation but coordination between powerful and small states. This mutual coordination does not imply loss of sovereignty by the smaller state as it exists at different levels. Despite transnational idea of sovereignty the states tend to subordinate for their ontological existence and prosperity on a sustainable basis . This reflects that states are crafting a relation among themselves for self and mutual benefit. INDIA-BHUTAN relationship is a good example in this context as India gives military support to Bhutan and in return has a big say in it’s foreign policy. So, with time small states are mature enough to subordinate in front of a bigger power and gain in the process.
We must understand in the process that hierarchical relations do exist in a very impactful way in global scenario which has no supra power. . For example MONROE DOCTRINE asserted on USA hegemony in western hemisphere. On similar lines China is developing as a hegemon in Eastern hemisphere so countries bandwagon accordingly . Hence there is no one denying that hierarchical relations exist and are manoeuvred by states.
Taking a holistic picture into consideration we must realize that world has become more interconnected and dependent with globalisation and open trade. So states have tried to orient in such a manner that they are able to extract maximum economic and political benefits out of this system. Mutual aid and bandwagoning have emerged in this process of interaction. Increased tendency of free riding in areas like defence is a very important proof for states moulding relations . For example Trump got angry on countries like Japan, South Korea and Germany free riding with USA . More promotion of global trade is possible owing to the fact that countries are helping each other and willing to acknowledge economic clout of a country in return of help. In case of increased number of regional trade blocks ( like SCO, MERCOSUR,SAARC) it can be seen that there is a powerful country within willing to act as friend, philosopher and guide of other countries within the block. So, hierarchical nature of international system is evident in the process.
In nutshell as world is evolving in terms of scale and scope considering domains like defence, resource mobilisation and development indicators , balance of power is not the main concern for the small states till a point they are also enriching and growing within the hierarchical system . They are happy being part of a vertical linkage where onus is on mutual growth.
It can be safely concluded a world is slowly emerging as a place where countries are willing to accept authority of a powerful state to the extent that it doesn’t harm its own sovereignty . We have seen past hegemony of China during Ming and qing dynasty brought stability and US hegemony doing so in modern times . Hence, states have been successful in countering the notion that in an anarchic system only self- help is the way out and balance of power is an imminent necessity. Rather, they have developed a system of hierarchy for mutual growth and development.
(The writer is a candidate at the Philosophy department of LSE. He is an alumnus of Lee kuan Yew School of Public Policy and Indian Institute of Management Ranchi)