<P> Offensive realists accept that threatened states usually balance against dangerous foes, however, they maintain that balancing is often inefficient and that this inefficiency provides opportunities for a clever aggressor to take advantage of its adversaries . Buck passing, rather than joining a balancing coalition, is another tactic offensive realists point to when disputing the balance of power theory . </P> <P> Offensive realists believe that internal balancing measures such as increasing defense spending, implementing conscription, are only effective to a certain extent as there are usually significant limits on how many additional resources a threatened state can muster against an aggressor . However, since offensive realists theorize that states are always seeking to maximize their power, states are "effectively engaged in internal balancing all the time". </P> <P> The balance of threat theory is an offshoot of the balancing, coined in 1985 by Stephen M. Walt in an attempt to explain why balancing against rising hegemons has not always been consistent in history . In contrast to traditional balance of power theorists, Walt suggests that states balance against threats, rather than against power alone . The "balance - of - power theory is not wrong; it is merely incomplete . Power is one of the factors that affects the propensity to balance, although it is not the only one nor always the most important ." The theory acknowledges that power is an extremely important factor in the level of threat posed by a state, but also includes geographic proximity, offensive capabilities, and perceived intentions . </P> <P> Soft balancing was developed in the 2000s to cope with the current anomaly of the unipolar unbalanced world . </P>

Models of international peace based on the distribution of power among nations