Publication

This paper tests against empirical evidence the argument that states might adopt four responses to power preponderance, depending on their relative power compared to the leading state as well as their level of integration in the world system. These responses are buffering, binding, bonding and beleaguering. The paper examines five case studies: China, Taiwan, Singapore, North Korea and Australia. The author concludes by suggesting that the collective and cumulative effects of alternative responses to power preponderance may affect the persistence of unipolarity.