A Balance of Interests

    Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

    Abstract

    This article argues that ‘a balance of interests’ is a more satisfactory descriptor, analytical concept, and policy precept than ‘the national interest’. The first two sections describe the dissatisfaction with the national interest. The third part expounds the advantages of ‘interests’ in the plural, ‘balance’ instead of ‘national’, and ‘a’ rather than ‘the’. The final section illustrates the conceptual arguments with selected case studies. ‘The national interest’ is erroneous as a description of the empirical reality, substitutes tautology for explanation, and is unhelpful as a guide to policy. ‘A balance of interests’ is superior on all three counts of description, explanation, and prescription. It also captures human agency and allows for human error and multiple balances as weighed by different people, reflecting their personal predilections, professional backgrounds, life and career experiences, and institutional interests and perspectives.
    Original languageEnglish
    Title of host publicationThe Oxford Handbook of Modern Diplomacy
    Editors Andrew F. Cooper, Jorge Heine and Ramesh Thakur
    Place of PublicationOxford
    PublisherOxford University Press
    Pages70-87
    Edition1st
    ISBN (Print)9780199588862
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2013

    Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'A Balance of Interests'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this