Hegemony provokes rising powers and creates unnecessary conflict – offshore balancing solves in an inevitably multipolar world

Neorealists believe that grand strategies, among other things, result from systemic factors like distribution of power in the international system.39 They say in the current multipolar world where new powers are rising, a hegemonic strategy will unnecessarily provoke rising powers. Christopher Layne and other influential realists like J. J Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt propose ‘offshore balancing’ as an alternative grand strategy to hegemony, suitable for a multipolar world that will effectively counter China’s rise. Under offshore balancing, America would offer support to alliances and allies–through diplomatic, military, and intelligence channels–to counterbalance China. In this way, it can shift burdens of security to other countries (buck passing).40 Buck passing would reduce headlong confrontation between Washington and Beijing, as the former assumes the role of a buck passer and remains on the side-line, only to use local powers to contain its rival. Rather than maintaining an overwhelming power everywhere to check rival powers by itself, offshore balancing aims to preserve ruling power’s strength and dominance by containing rising power with regional security architecture, created out of favorable regional allies or powers.41 Hence, rather than fear multipolarity, offshore balancing strategy embraces it. Offshore balancing accepts that the United States cannot stop the rise of new powers, either among American allies and Strategic partners (the EU, India, Japan, Indonesia) or outside it (China, Russia, Iran). At the same time, offshore balancing allows United States the right to protect and promote its interest by balancing Beijing with regional allies. These arguments make a strong case for the adoption of an offshore balancing strategy by the United States to reduce risks with China that has the potential to insulate her from future great wars with Beijing and maximize her relative power position in the international system. Offshore balancing, in other words, has the potential to offset the Thucydides’s Trap.