[5] Neorealist theory makes a few assumptions about the system, the interests and motives of the actors within it and the constraints that all states face, which ultimately lead to behaviours such as balancing.
[16] External balancing involves strengthening and enlarging one's alliances and interstate cooperation in order to prevent a hegemon or counter a rising power.
[28] The fourth factor concerns offensive intentions, where perceived aggressive or expansionist goals or motives of a state lead others to balance against it.
However, it is tough to dispute the growing trend towards bandwagoning rather than balancing exhibited over the recent decades of United States (U.S.) prevalence.
This trend has shown that, whether for purposes of seeking protection or out of fear, states are choosing to ally with the superpower and accept the conditions its inflicts onto the international system.
[31] A state that adopts a strategy of military buildup to increase its security and balance a rising power may inadvertently do the very opposite and create unfavourable conditions for all in the international system.
[34] The international system is subjected to the enduring conditions of insecurity and uncertainty about the intentions and actions of actors within it which makes cooperation difficult to achieve and maintain.
[35] Furthermore, external balancing is caught in the problematique of the 'game of coordination' and a collective action problem in which it is difficult to sustain long term cooperation, dedications and equal contributions to the cause.
However, even though there is an expectation to share the costs and efforts of achieving a common goal, alliances and groups demonstrate a tendency towards exploitation and inconsistent dedication and input among participants.
Historical instances of great unbalanced power, such as Louis XIV and Napoleon I's rule of France or Adolf Hitler's rule of Germany, saw aggressive and expansionist motives with aims to conquer and dominate, hence provoking the crucial need for balancing in an instance of a single dominant state in order to bring the international distribution of power into balance.
[45][46] The U.S. pre-eminence has not been balanced against over the last decades mainly because the superpower exhibited non-aggressive approaches without seeking to dominate or challenge the sovereign existence of others but rather promote security and autonomy of all.
[47][48] However, it is argued that increasing U.S. unilateralism, especially under the Bush administration, has changed its image of a benign superpower and made foreign governments uneasy regarding its ambitions.
A number of aggressive and unilateral foreign policies, most significant ones being the abandonment of Kyoto Protocol, withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and most importantly the decision to go to war in Iraq in 2003 despite great opposition from other states have led secondary powers to pursue indirect, soft-balancing strategies towards constraining the U.S. power and preventing it from becoming an "unrestricted global hegemon".
[49] The Iraq invasion is often used as one of the key incidents that provoked major states to rethink their own security and resort to soft balancing against the unipole since it proved not simply a strategy aimed at stopping proliferation of nuclear weapons by rogue states but rather a challenge to the norm of territorial integrity[50] – an aggressive U.S. intervention into a region outside of its own that demonstrated the U.S. commitment to taking any necessary actions to ensure that their superiority and primacy is not challenged by anyone.
China has come through as a "formidable political, strategic and economic competitor"[53] to the United States, increasingly challenging its regional and global leadership.
Even if China and other growing states refrain from balancing the U.S., the sheer size of their economy, capability and military strength will undoubtedly pose certain constraints on the U.S. freedom of strategic action, ability to influence, dominate and project power in the future.