Original citation

Activity
It has been argued that European imperialism led to two distinct international 
societies: one within Europe and the other covering the rest of the world. Complete 
the table below thinking about how international institutions differed when applied 
inside and outside of Europe during the era of European imperialism.
Social function
Institutions among 
European states
Institutions between 
European and 
non-European actors
Communication
Diplomacy
Enforcement
Treaty making, war
Property
Mutual non-intervention, 
sovereignty
From the Long Peace to the Great War
This extended period of competition to determine the dominant actor in 
world politics, stretching from around 1500 to 1814, continues to exercise 
a great deal of fascination for IR scholars. We might argue that some of 
the discipline’s key concepts such as the balance of power – not to mention 

---

Chapter 2: Europe and the emergence of international society
35
its preoccupation with war and its interest in diplomacy – derive from this 
extraordinarily turbulent period. Following 1814, however, something 
equally extraordinary occurred: a form of ‘great power’ peace broke out 
and lasted – with only a few interruptions – until the outbreak of the First 
World War in 1914. Different explanations have been advanced to explain 
this period, often referred to as the Long Peace. These have ranged from 
the diplomatic efforts put in by the major powers at the peace conference 
at the Congress of Vienna; through war weariness (a believable hypothesis 
given that at least five million died across Europe between 1789 and 
1814); to the notion that, whatever else might have divided them, the 
major powers after 1814 shared some common values and interests that 
drove them to resolve most of their differences through diplomacy rather 
than costly wars.
Others have tried to apply the very modern idea of hegemonic stability 
to explain the nineteenth-century’s Long Peace. In this analysis, the 
key factor is not so much the existence of a balance of power between 
European states – though that was highly significant in Europe itself – but 
the structural imbalance that grew up between Great Britain and the rest 
of the European powers. Unlike France, or so the hegemonic stability 
argument goes, Britain never sought to control mainland Europe, focusing 
instead on increasing its influence in the non-European world. It did so 
by doing what Britain seemed to do best: pushing ahead industrially; 
exporting increasing sums of capital to all corners of the globe; 
underwriting world trade through its overwhelming naval superiority; 
and teaching others the benefits of commerce and industry over more 
dangerous – and less profitable – pursuits such as war and conquest.