The Differentiation And Conceptual Reshaping Of Medium - Sized Countries

With the diversification of international politics and deepening interdependence,the influence of bloc politics and polarized politics with the characteristics of greatpower orientation is increasingly weakening. A group of countries with certainstrength gradually expand their influence and establish their own political status in theinternational arena, which is operated in the alternative to the way that great poweruse. The definition of middle power is an appropriate generalization of these states.Middle power is an old concept which can date back to the system of Europeannations in the fifteen century. Its rapid development was after the World War II withthe formation of certain theoretical concepts and frameworks and many states seen asmiddle powers by international society emerged in international system, creating thefirst climax of studies of middle powers. When the Cold War was coming to the end,many countries, taking advantage of new international situation, highlighted theirstatus and characteristics in the participation of global governance and in theimprovement of existing international structure. The range of middle powers isexpanding by the effort of many scholars in the construction of theories, forming thesecond climax and also creating tensions and conflicts between current situation andoriginal theories.Given the significant role that middle powers play in global governance,international power transfer and reshaping of international system, and also to solvethe insufficiency of present theories of middle power, it is necessary to remodel thetheoretical frameworks which take the definition of middle power as their core.The concept of middle power has realized the process from policy level toacademic level, but failed to get rid of the shackles of structural realism for a longtime. In the previous studies, scholars always claimed that the fundamental purpose offoreign policies and behaviors went to the maintenance of a stable internationalsystem, but without clear definition of a stable international system. In a dramaticallychanging international environment and relations between nations, reassessing thepurpose above is of basic and decisive significance and value. With the changinginternational context and the expansion of quantities and diversities of middle powers,original theoretical frameworks can’t afford to interpret the existing problems and failto predict the future direction of middle powers.The core of the problem lies in the reality that the original concept of middlepower ignored the fundamental characteristics that system is treated as a process insome aspects, and also neglected the marked impact on architecture made by factormobility within the system. International relations under the condition of globalgovernance not only need to pay attention to the issues of critical mass, military andsecurity, but also focus on capital, knowledge, values and ideas that rely on processstructure and create process structure in turn. This helps us to understand the internallogic and development directions of structural changes in the international system andsolve problems we face now. Development of middle power as well as their inherent national characteristics is bound up with the elements, so the paper attempts tore-observe middle powers from the respects of development and resource flow inorder to partially compensate for deficiencies of current concept and researchframeworks.Therefore, the analysis of this paper on the definition of middle power will bedetached into several parts with logical connections. Redefinition of array of middlepowers, re-analysis of the system stability, vertical comparison of times that holdmiddle powers in place and analysis of the similarities and diversities betweendifferent middle powers will be the focus that needs to be discussed. Finally, theseparts will be integrated into a new understanding of middle powers and related issues,which is a development-oriented understanding.