Hard Power

Temel anlamıyla güç, bir olayın sonucunu ne gerekiyorsa yaparak elde etme olarak tanımlanabilir. Bir aktörün kendi tercihleri dışında yapmayacağı bir şeyi başka bir aktör sayesinde yapması veya bir aktörün bir şeyi yapmasını önlemek güç kullanımına örnek olarak gösterilebilir. Pek çok açıklamaya sahip olan güç kavramı etki, amaç veya yeterlilik olarak da tanımlanmaktadır. Güç, karmaşık ve ilişkisel bir kavramdır. Neredeyse insanlık tarihi kadar eski olan ‘‘güç’’ kavramı günümüzde de hala etkin olarak kullanılmakta özellikle uluslararası ilişkiler alanında çokça karşımıza çıkmakta ve birçok olayda açıklayıcı olan bir kavramdır. Sosyal bilimlerde karşımıza çıkan güç kavramı geçmişten günümüze kıyaslayıcı bir unsur olarak da karşımıza çıkmıştır. Güç kavramının eski olmasına karşın algılanamaması, dönemden döneme değişen güç kıstasları ve bu gücün uygulanma değişikliğinden kaynaklanmaktadır. Güçlü olan zayıf olanı yener veya büyük balık küçük balığı yer yaklaşımı güç kavramının önemine atıfta bulunmaktadır. Tarihsel olarak pek çok olayın açıklanmasında karşımıza çıkan güç kavramı günümüz siyasetinde ve uluslararası ilişkilerde etkin olarak kullanılmaya devam etmektedir. Bu çalışmada güç kavramı tanımı yapılmış realizm bakış açısı ile incelenmiş, uluslararası ilişkiler açısından güç kavramının önemi ile sert, yumuşak ve akıllı güç kavramı incelenmiştir.

(If you need this paper, send me a message).
This article questions the universality of smart power and substantiates the pertinence of a Costa Rican approach when facing the challenge to generate a Public Diplomacy strategy. The theoretical and empirical analysis of the investigation allows determining the suitability of soft power to provide Public Diplomacy with epistemic consistency in a Small State lacking armed forces such as Costa Rica, which currently is considering to create a Public Diplomacy strategy. To test Nye’s hypothesis, a non-probabilistic exploratory approach was conducted between 2013 and 2014 with 40 career diplomatic officials (representing 20 per cent of the total amount of career officials), as an innovative exercise, considering the extensive academic literature review carried out for this study.

Problematyka niniejszego tekstu została zawężona do problemu wykorzystania twardej i miękkiej siły przez Rosję i UE wobec poradzieckich państw czarnomorskich (Gruzji i Ukrainy oraz Mołdowy, Armenii i Azerbejdżanu). Trzy ostatnie państwa nie leżą bezpośrednio nad Morzem Czarnym jednak bliskie położenie oraz związki historyczne z tym regionem wskazują na zasadność włączenia ich do obszaru czarnomorskiego.

This article aims at introducing two new concepts: Hack Power and Cyberbullying Power, which complement and broaden the Hybrid Warfare approach and, at the same time, reveal a series of academic characteristics that enables their assessment as independent conceptual tools to identify a new kind of military maneuvers, whose objective is the use of digital and psychological techniques to promote color revolutions through the imposition of ideologies and the removal of politically incorrect information from internet and social media. The collected results indicate that the Hack Power and the Cyberbullying Power are two new categories of military power which could be implemented among digital security, defense and attack systems of some governments with regard to the threats of hostile organizations. However, it should be pointed out that the content of this article is directly linked to the conclusions arising from the article Clockwork Cyberactivism (esp. Ciberactivismo mecánico), which was issued under the supervision of the Saint Petersburg State University. Finally, a series of bibliographical, journalistic and digital sources have been consulted for this article, which have been useful to identify a set of recurring military and corporative activities deployed in the last few years through social media and which tend to evolve as they reach positive outcomes.

The strategic importance of Afghanistan has increased since 2001 for both India and Pakistan. Both India and Pakistan are in pursuit of gaining influence in Afghanistan through the use of soft power and hard power respectively as a foreign policy tool. Soft power is associated with intangible power resources such as culture, ideology and institutions. In contrast, hard power is usually associated with tangible resources like military and economic strength. India has been able to make an impact and generate goodwill by spending billions, mostly on infrastructure to help turn Afghanistan into a modern state. On the other hand, Pakistan has used hard power in Afghanistan in order to achieve its objectives. The focus of this paper is to have a comparative study of India’s soft power and Pakistan’s hard power in Afghanistan since 2001.

The political, social and security landscape in the region be- tween EU and Russia, which is also called the shared neighborhood, has been constantly changing after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Some of the rea- sons that stand behind this transformation consist of the will of states to change their domestic and foreign policy in order to become ”truly indepen- dent” and to be able to choose what is best for them, without being forced, as in a democracy. More or less, in this landscape, each of the three most important international actors - Russia, EU and NATO - can influence the destiny of these countries through their own measures, be them soft, hard or smart. In this game of power, each actor tries to gain more but in the mean- time seeks to keep a balance. From this angle, the present article analyzes the way in which NATO operates through its hard power and how EU through its soft power can attract the members of the Eastern Partnership on the West side. At the same time, it presents the challenges that may emerge in this kind of game, where Russia cannot permanently be denied. The proposed case study refers to Georgia.

Se analiza el protagonismo de EEUU; la incorporación de China como una potencia económica en el orden mundial; así como, la relación de EEUU y China, con el llamado G2, cuyo protagonismo y asociación, ha generado grandes debates, y que incluso, se llega a considerar un grupo que carece de legitimidad, representatividad y la eficacia, cuyo planteamiento inicial incluía proyectos ambiciosos de medio ambiente, cuestiones nucleares, económicas y regulación financiera.

Güç, tarih boyunca kabilelerden ulus devletlere kadar her organizasyonda önemli bir kavram olarak ön plana çıkmıştır. Uluslararası ilişkiler disiplininde, temel olarak iki ayrı güç türü vardır: birincisi, askeri ve ekonomik gücün oluşturduğu “sert güç” ve diğeri, daha soyut olarak nitelendirebileceğimiz, ülkenin kültürü ve değerleri ile özdeşleşen “yumuşak güç”. Geçmiş dönemlerde devletler genellikle sert güç imkânlarını geliştirmeye çabalarken, yumuşak güç kapasitelerini göz ardı etmişlerdir. Ancak; zamanla, devletler açısından salt sert güç kapasitesi yeterli olmamış ve yumuşak güç unsurları da kullanılmaya başlanmıştır.  Bu anlamda yumuşak ve sert güç kapasitelerinin harmanlanması şeklinde tanımlanabilecek olan “akıllı güç” kavramı devletler için önemli hale gelmiştir. Bu çalışmada, Türkiye’nin son yıllarda gerçekleştirdiği politikalar “akıllı güç” kavramı temel alınarak incelenmiştir.

Power has come into prominence in all organizations ranging from clans to nation-states throughout history. In international relations discipline, two types of “power” exist: one is “hard power” which is constituted by military and financial powers and the other is “soft power”, regarded as rather abstract, which is more related to the culture and values of a state. States used to focus on enhancing their means of hard power in the past, thereby ignoring their soft power capacities. In the course of time, however, hard power capacities of states per se did not suffice and means of soft power were utilized as well. In this sense, “smart power” as the combination of both “hard power” and “soft power” has been pivotal for all states. In this study, Turkey’s latest policies have been analysed through the concept of “smart power”.

EU-Russia relations have been defined by a number of defining parameters that affect the conflict-cooperation framework of the two actors. Nicholas Ross focuses on this complex relation by scrutinising the effects and side-effects of the Ukraine Crisis, as well as the role of western security architecture in qualitatively defining the cooperation-conflict ratio.
The author’s descriptive approach covers both overt and covert elements that have constituted points of friction in an analysis that implicitly refers to a forceful interdependence framework. The Ukraine crisis has emerged as a critical test that still divides the two sides and sets challenges on multiple, inter-connected levels. Ross Smith’s supports that the crisis gave vent to divergent, if not contending, theoretical approaches to regional security settings and the way interests of the sides involved can be accommodated.

On 2/11/2023 ALL MY TWITTER ACOUNTS WERE SUSPENDED.
THIS CAME AFTER I STARTED PUBLICIZINFG INFO ON THE BIGGEST EVER RECRUITING/INTELLIGENCE CRIMINAL NETWORK IN GREEK ACADEMIA SET UP BY USEmbassy Athens and  f. U.S. Ambassador to Greece Geoffrey R. Pyatt! Following this I have been denied access to my LINKEDIN account, MY SOCIAL MEDIA & EMAIL ACCOUNTS WERE COMPROMISED!

Tulisan ini bertujuan untuk menjelaskan dan mengetahui efektivitas diplomasi pada konflik Indonesia-Malaysia atas perebutan Ambalat. Dengan pendekatan persuasif, Pemerintah Indonesia melakukan diplomasi untuk mencari solusi atas permasalahan dengan Malaysia. Isu ambalat ini menarik perhatian masyarakat Indonesia dan memicu gelombang anti Malaysia di semua lapisan masyarakat mulai dari warga Negara hingga elit politik rakyat. Dalam isu ini, publik menyuarakan penentangannya terhadap Compact di Indonesia atas klaim Malaysia, yang mengingatkan pada slogan propaganda di era Sukarno, ‘Ganyang Malaysia’. Jurnal ini menjelaskan langkah-langkah yang diambil Presiden Yudhoyono atas penyelesaian konflik blok Amblat. Langkah yang diambil Presiden Yudhoyono adalah diplomasi dengan menitikberatkan pada perdamaian atas pengelompokan Negara dengan penyelesaian melalui arbitrase, penyelesaian yudisial, dan negosiasi. Bisa menjadi tolak ukur untuk mengetahui kemampuan efisiensi diplomasi Indonesia dalam menerapkan smart power di Indonesia. Teori yang digunakan dalam makalah ini adalah teori soft power, hard power di Indonesia. Teori yang digunakan dalam jurnal ini adalah teori soft power, hard power, dan smart power yang dikandung oleh Joseph Nye dan Daryl Copeland. Sumber pengembangan basis data penjelasan dalam artikel ini berupa buku, jurnal, berita serta berbagai website yang kemudian dianalisis dalam pembahasan. Hasil diskusi mengemukakan gagasan penulisa untuk penyelesaian konflik Negara Negara atau konflik perebutan wilayah. Serta menunjukkan kemampuan efisiensi diplomasi yang digunakan dalam konflik ini adalah diplomasi.

Kata kunci: Konflik Ambalat, Soft power, Hard power, smart power, politik luar negeri Yudhoyono

This paper is aimed to understand and find out more about how effective the application of Smart Power in Indonesia to solve the case of redemption for the crews of MV Sinar Kudus from Somali pirates. In solving this case, Indonesia is also aided by the PT. Samudera Indonesia. Both parties cooperated using Smart power, which consists of a combination of hard power and soft power as efforts in redemption the crews of MV Sinar Kudus. This paper will point out how the implementation by combining the two concepts which are hard power and soft power could become the most effective power commonly known as smart power in solving this case.
The theories that are used in this paper are the theory of soft power, hard power, and smart power by Joseph Nye and we use several source of datas for deeper explanation and enhancing its paper are books, journals, news, and various websites which will be analyzed in the discussion session.
Discussion result showed that Indonesia in a role to redemption the Crews of MV Sinar Kudus had to take the composition of two powers at the perfect time. Where in the approachment of hard power should be implemented through military force. As for soft power is the capability of the delegates in diplomacy and negotiation. If the use of those concepts of power implemented in the right timing and in line with one another would may solve a case more effectively.

Armed conflicts are generally associated with the use of hard power for coercing and forcing an opponent to do something against its will in a situation where war is an extension of politics. However, there are many scholarly observations about the important role of soft power in armed conflicts, the interaction between hard and soft power, and the effects on one another within the framework of an armed conflict. This paper explores two specific armed conflicts, the 2003 U.S.-led military intervention in Iraq and the 2015 Russian intervention in Syria. Various aspects of hard and soft power approaches are discussed, and the outcome of military operations for the national soft power potential is analyzed. The results of the study show that whereas the Iraq War came as a disaster for the U.S., the military operation in Syria—despite dire predictions—created strengths and opportunities for Russia in international relations.

The IUP Journal of International Relations, Vol. V, No. 3, July 2011, pp. 35-52

Historically, transatlantic relations have been formulated under specific systemic circumstances with the aim of dealing with a distinctive military threat. Through a Realist perspective, this paper looks into the structural limits of equal partnership of a strategic partnership between a hard and a soft power. By conceptualizing actual, material and cognitive, elements of power through a differentiated descriptive and prescriptive spectrum and their relative effectiveness in a state-centric, anarchic and antagonistic international system, the paper, overtly or covertly, makes the distinction between instrumental and elemental power, as well as their importance in forming and successfully advancing images of world order within a strategic partnership and their respective persuasive credibility.

Armed conflicts are generally associated with the use of hard power for
coercing and forcing an opponent to do something against its will in a
situation where war is an extension of politics. However, there are many
scholarly observations about the important role of soft power in armed
conflicts, the interaction between hard and soft power, and the effects on one another within the framework of an armed conflict. This paper explores two specific armed conflicts, the 2003 U.S.-led military intervention in Iraq and the 2015 Russian intervention in Syria. Various aspects of hard and soft power approaches are discussed, and the outcome of military operations for the national soft power potential is analyzed. The results of the study show that whereas the Iraq War came as a disaster for the U.S., the military operation in Syria—despite dire predictions—created strengths and opportunities for Russia in international relations.

Ilgar Gurbanov, "Energy in Russian Foreign Policy: Soft Power, Hard Power, or Smart Power?", Strategic Outlook, 2013, http://www.strategicoutlook.org/asia---pasific/news-energy-in-russian-foreign-policy--soft-power-hard-power-or-smart-power.html#.UTueJ-uzP64.facebook

In the period of the 21 st century leading up to the Corona Virus pandemic, there was increasing consensus that the global order that had existed since the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union where the unipolar hegemony of the United States was in relative decline, weakening and transforming. It was transforming from a un-ipolar to multipolar order, of course, the US was not going to leave the transformation un-contested in order to retain its privileged global position. The Corona Virus outbreak was a black swan event, it is also being used by various international actors to leverage opportunities caused by the weaknesses exposed in this extraordinary time. The US has been acting in an aggressive manner during the pandemic in an effort to try and weaken opponents and coerce friends in order to 'cancel' the pre-Corona Virus global transformations and retain its global hegemony.

摘要：新世纪以来，中国以及中国的崛起问题一直是学术界广为讨论的议题，网络上更是刊载了大量关于“和平崛起”、“和平发展”、“和谐世界”以及“中国软实力”的著作与文章。本文选取不同的研究方法，力求检验西方学术界的“实力”概念是否适用于中国。文章追述了中国人对软实力、硬实力及巧实力三个概念的理解，从而辨析哪一个概念适用解释中国崛起的特点。本文首先概述了西方学术界对国际关系中“实力”这一概念的解析；第二部分分析中国官方对此所给出的阐述；第三部分探讨中国拥有的软实力和硬实力；根据上述研究作者得出结论，中国实际上对三种实力皆有所设想，特别是优先考虑利用巧实力来实现其崛起目的。
关键词：中国；硬实力，软实力，巧实力；自我阐释；话语分析；国际关系理论

ACCORDING TO REALIST PERSPECTIVE IN THE STUDY
OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, DISTRIBUTION OF
POWER AMONG NATIONS IS ONE OF THE KEY FEATURES
DEFINING THE CHARACTER AND CONFIGURATION
OF THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM. REGARDLESS OF
THE THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE ONE EMPLOYS,
IT IS UNDISPUTABLE THAT MATERIAL RESOURCES
(TERRITORIAL, DEMOGRAPHIC, ECONOMIC OR
MILITARY) AVAILABLE TO MAJOR POWERS ARE
AN IMPORTANT ELEMENT IN EVERY ANALYSIS OF
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS. AS THE INTERNATIONAL
SYSTEM UNDERGOES A SIGNIFICANT SHIFT OF POWER
(GENERALLY TO THE ADVANTAGE OF THE SO-CALLED
BRICS COUNTRIES) THE AUTHORS FOUND IT USEFUL
TO PROPOSE A FORECAST OF A GLOBAL POWER
RANKING IN A TEN YEARS PERSPECTIVE. IT EMPLOYS
A MODIFIED CLINE’S FORMULA OF NATIONAL POWER
IN ORDER TO ASSESS THE MATERIAL POTENTIAL OF
PROSPECTIVE GLOBAL POWERS IN 2025. THE AIM IS
BY NO MEANS TO AUTHORITATIVELY PREDICT THE
FUTURE DISTRIBUTION OF POWER IN THE INTERNATIONAL
SYSTEM. THE AUTHORS PREFER TO EMPLOY THE
“R/EVOLUTIONS’” FORECASTING METHOD TO IDENTIFY
AND EXPLAIN KEY TRENDS, WHICH WILL SHAPE THE
GLOBAL PECKING ORDER OF THE NEXT DECADE.

Este trabalho trata da inserção de políticas norteadoras do controle que os Estados Unidos exercem sobre o plano político e ideológico mundial, principalmente por meio da sua produção cinematográfica. Verificou-se, nesse estudo, o papel que a indústria cinematográfica hollywoodiana desempenha em auxiliar o Estado norte-americano na disseminação de ideias de seu interesse. Analisou-se com especificidade o filme ‘Voo 93’ (2006), identificando seus elementos principais e observando a forma como ele atende ou não às demandas estadunidenses no campo político e ideológico. Esse trabalho se inicia fazendo um breve resgate histórico da Geopolítica a partir da relação entre cinema e guerra. Posteriormente, trata das ferramentas de poder empregadas pelos Estados Unidos para domínio do pensamento populacional, entre elas o soft power e as imagens de terror. Nessa perspectiva, o estudo mostrou como tais políticas são aplicadas e a influência que exercem sobre o povo. Concluiu-se com uma breve análise das mensagens contidas no filme ‘Voo 93’. A metodologia utilizada foi de um estudo exploratório, bibliográfico e de análise da política externa estadunidense e sua indústria cinematográfica pós 11 de setembro por meio de livros que tratam do tema.

The article develops two simultaneous arguments; one is theoretical, and the other is analytic. The theoretical argument is based on an assessment of the utility of the concept of “soft power” in comparison to the Gramscian concept of hegemony in understanding the developments in the recent regional power games in the geographical area consisting of Eastern Europe and the near and Middle East. The analytic argument examines the popularity of Turkish soap operas, both among a cross-cultural audience and within the wider context of cultural, economic, and political influences, and in so doing, it points out challenges and limits for Turkey’s regional power.

The article develops two simultaneous arguments; one is theoretical, and the other is analytic. The theoretical argument is based on an assessment of the utility of the concept of “soft power” in comparison to the Gramscian concept of hegemony in understanding the developments in the recent regional power games in the geographical area consisting of Eastern Europe and the near and Middle East. The analytic argument examines the popularity of Turkish soap operas, both among a cross-cultural audience and within the wider context of cultural, economic, and political influences, and in so doing, it points out challenges and limits for Turkey’s regional power.

Le Soft Power est un concept qui n’est formalisé et développé que depuis une trentaine d’années par Joseph Nye, professeur Américain. Cependant, les pratiques qu’il recouvre existent depuis longtemps. Une revue de littérature explique dans un premier temps ce concept de Soft Power et permet de comprendre comment il peut être utilisé par le sport. Le Soft Power consiste à parvenir à ses objectifs par un effet d’attraction, d’influence, de persuasion envers les autres États. Quatre études de cas sont alors effectuées, au travers des différentes époques et à travers le monde. Ces études se rapportent aux grandes compétitions sportives, car ce sont celles qui ont un plus grand impact sur le monde. Cela nous permet de confronter des initiatives de terrain réputées de diplomatie avec les principes retirés de la revue de littérature.Master [120] en sciences de la motricité, orientation éducation physique, Université catholique de Louvain, 201

was leader of the then Country Party and Deputy Prime Minister in December 1967 when the Prime Minister, Harold Holt, unwisely went for a dip at Cheviot Beach outside Melbourne and didn't come back. Within hours of Holt's disappearance, various senior ministers, in an unseemly but not at all surprising display of the ultimate in bad taste, began "scrambling"-to use a very Covid-era word-to determine who would be the new PM.

Would countries with stronger institutions and governance lead to less or more hard power? This article empirically analyzes this issue and corroborates the idea that countries with stronger institutions and good governance have a lower level of hard power, with it being understood here that hard power is basically symbolized by military spending. For this purpose, we used the World Bank's database of World Governance Indicators and the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute's (SIPRI) database for military spending, for a group of 153 countries. Estimates point to this relationship with some robustness through instrumental variable techniques, identifying, for example, that increased voice and accountability in countries would lead to lower military spending. Robustness tests using the cointegration technique corroborate the idea that more democracy leads to less hard power. Resumo Os países com instituições e governança mais fortes levariam a menos ou mais hard power? Este artigo analisa empiricamente essa questão e corrobora a ideia de que países com instituições mais fortes e boa governança levam a um menor hard power, entendendo-se aqui que hard power é basicamente simbolizado pelo gasto militar. Para isso, utilizamos a base de dados do World Governance Indicators, do Banco Mundial, e do Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), para gastos militares, para um conjunto de 153 países. As estimativas apontam para essa relação com alguma robustez por meio de técnicas de variáveis instrumentais, identificando, por exemplo, que mais voice and accountability nos países levariam a menos gasto militar. Nos testes de robustez usando a técnica de cointegração, é corroborada a ideia de que mais democracia leva a menos hard power. Palavras-Chave: hard power; instituições; voice and accountability; mínimos quadrados ordinários; cointegração

Burada gerçekten zor bir konuyu tartışmak üzere bulunuyoruz. Kabaca bakıldığında aralarında ortak yönlerden ziyade farklılıkların bulunduğu bu altı ülke arasında işbirliğinin geliştirilmesinin imkânsız olduğu düşüncesine kapılmak çok da anlamsız görünmüyor. Çünkü Rusya ile Gürcistan arasındaki sorunlara, Rusya ile Ukrayna arasındaki sorunlara ve Türkiye ile Rusya arasındaki sorunlara bakıldığında böyle bir karamsarlığa kapılmak gayet doğal görünüyor. Ancak sadece sorunlara ve çatışma unsurlarına odaklanmak yerine hangi noktalarda işbirliği yapabiliriz diye baktığımızda durum değişiyor. Bu aslında siyaset biliminde özellikle de uluslararası ilişkilerde iki temel bakış açısına karşılık geliyor. Bildiğiniz gibi uluslararası ilişkilerde iki ana damar var. Bunlardan biri çatışmayı esas alan ve insan ilişkilerine, toplumsal ilişkilere ve uluslararası ilişkilere bir çatışma ve mücadele süreci olarak bakan yaklaşım, diğeri ise hem insanlar ve toplumlar arasındaki ilişkilere hem de uluslararası ilişkilere bir işbirliği süreci olarak bakan anlayıştır. Bunlara tekabül eden yaklaşımlar veya teorik bakış açıları realizm ve idealizm/liberalizmdir. Çatışmayı esas alan ve siyaseti bir çatışma ve güç mücadelesi olarak gören realist yaklaşıma göre, devletler arasında esas olan güvenden ziyade kuşku ve güvensizliktir. Her devlet bir diğeri için ya düşmandır ya da potansiyel düşmandır. Uluslararası ilişkilere sıfır toplamlı bir ilişkiler süreci olarak bakılır. Yani bu ilişkiden hep birileri kazanırken birileri kaybeder. Devletler diğerleri ile ilişkilerine, mahkûmun ikileminde olduğu gibi kuşku ile yaklaştıklarından işbirliğinden kaçınmaktadır. Bu anlayışa göre, kuşku ve güvensizliğin hâkim olduğu bir ortamda güvenliğe erişmenin tek yolu daha fazla güç sahibi olmaktan geçtiğinden ister amaç olsun isterse araç olsun her durumda güce erişmek devletler açısından ilişkileri ve politikayı yönlendiren başlıca unsur haline gelmektedir. Böyle bir ortamda sorunların barışçıl yollardan çözülmesi ve bu amaçla ortak işbirliği alanları oluşturmaya çalışmak boşunadır. Çünkü bu tür araçlarla güvenli bir ortam oluşturulacağına olan inanç ütopyadır, hayalciliktir, hayal peşinde koşmaktır. Liberal-idealist görüş ise bunun tam tersi bir bakış açısına sahiptir. Öncelikle kuşku ve güvensizliğin yerine güven esastır ve sorunlara işbirliği yolu ile çözüm bulunabilir. Devletler diğerlerinin ne kazandığından ziyade bir