1. Conceptualization and Approaches to Hegemony

2. Approaches to Hegemony
Realist vs. liberal logic of explaining unipolar distribution of power
Three approaches to hegemony:
-- Optimists (Wohlforth, Fortman, TV Paul, Wirtz)
-- Agnostics (Nye, Ikenberry)
-- Pessimists (Layne, Mearsheimer)

3. Realist Interpretations of Hegemony
Unipolar optimism – US hegemony will last for long time; it is beneficial for US and the whole int’l system Arguments:
-- soft balancing
-- reject polarity as discrete concept
-- hegemony has been able to sustain in the past (the Roman Empire)
Unipolar pessimism -- the structural imbalance has not completely eliminated the balancing dynamic; there is only limited evidence for response to preponderance. Arguments:
-- terrorism as a form of balancing
-- “soft” balancing
-- opaque balancing
-- “semi-hard” balancing

4. Liberalism and Hegemony
Unipolar agnostics approach – the US hegemony might last for quite some time (Ikenberry, Nye).
Arguments:
-- it rests not only on the US “hard” power but also by exercising “soft power”
-- Pax Americana rests on the open and pluralistic US foreign policy
-- The US provided security protection and access to its markets in Europe and Asia in exchange for accepting the US leadership within an agreed-upon political and economic system (also the logic of CI)