- Intro-
- Realism is concerned with the world as it actually is rather than how it is ought to be. In other words, it is an empirical rather than a normative paradigm
- It is the hegemonic school of IR. Based on Westphalia world order and is state centric.
- It views power as the only way to protect national interest.
- Context:
- The great debate during 1930s and 1940s between idealists and realists on dealing with Nazi Germany , forms the origins of this school
- the world is torn apart by the particular interests of different individuals and groups. In such a conflictual environment, order is based on power, not on morality. - EH carr in his book - Twenty years crisis,1939
- Swami Vivekananda- described the world as a gymnasium where nations come to make themselves strong.
- Hobbes- Described countries as always “in the state and posture of Gladiators; having their weapons pointing, and their eyes fixed on one another.”
- Classical realism:
- Classical Realist theory explains international relations through assumptions about human nature.
- The theory is based on Hobbesian view of human nature and emphasizes that individuals are primarily motivated by self-interest and not higher moral or ethical aspirations.
- Hans Morgenthau-
- the first person to give systematic theory of realism
- Father of realism
- principles of Morganthau
- Uses behavioural approach to explain the nature of man which he calls as animus dominandi (power seeking animal).
- National interest is the prime motivation of foreign policy
- Power is the means and power is the end (dual nature of power)
- State’s national interest is a dynamic concept. Country needs to go for making adjustments with reality on a continuous basis
- There is no significance of ideology in international politics. Ideologies are masks to hide real intentions
- On ethics- says Morals are for humans, not for nation states. Pragmatism is the ethics of international politics
- Suggest that in international politics the only way to maintain peace is either through BOP, deterrence or diplomacy
- He had no faith in international organisations like UN or concepts like collective security
- Morganthau criticised by Neo realist scholar Kenneth Waltz.
- Morgenthau’s essentialist conception of human nature is problematic because if human nature was the cause of war in 1914, it was by the same token the cause of peace in 1910.
- Waltz accuses Morgenthau of reductionism , as he has reduced the complex phenomenon of international politics to just one factor- human nature
- criticism by J Ann Tickner particularly on the concept of state security:
- Rather than state security human security is more important
- National interfest is a multi dimensional concept
- Power is not just a coercion but also constructive dimension ie empowerment
- If we ignore ethics humanity cannot survive
- Separation from ethics and politics gives excuse to politicians from takingmoral responsibilities of their action
- Saying international politics is autonomous of ethics is taking very narrow view of international politics
- conclusion: it is said that the theory of intl politics is nothing but the debate between supporters and critics of Morganthau
- Neo realism:
- Term coined by Robert Cox
- starts with The publication of “the theory of international politics “written by Kenneth waltz 1979
- principles
- states are unitary, functionally similar actors. They are the only important actors in international politics
- the international system is characterised by anarchy
- the distribution of power capabilities is the main variable to explain state behaviour.
- Defensive realism
- Kenneth waltz-wrote the theory of intl politics in 1979
- detente realist
- structural realist
- defensive realist.
- During 1969 to 79 there was cooperation among nations known as the period of detente Hence waltz wrote in the “defence of realism” and said the nature of international politics is such that it does not give any scope to the states ignore the “timeless wisdom”
- Rather than going for actor level analysis, waltz goes for structural level analysis.
- Because Waltz found a recurring pattern of behaviour for states to pursue the same policies in order to guarantee their security. Hence he concluded that the structure of the international system is the driving force and not the internal characteristics of the states.
- In his words- “international structure emerges from the interaction of states and then constraints them from taking certain actions while propelling them towards others”.
- Says power is a means but security is the end. Rather than going for power maximisation, states should go for security maximisation.
- Policy of unlimitd power is counterproductive as it causes arms race, counter coalition, security dilemma
- Waltz contends that the anarchical international system inevitably leads to the logic of self-help and power politics. According to Waltz , states who struggle for power are simply following the dictates of the international system in order to survive in an international order where there is no global leviathan to offer them protection.
- His realism is Neo because unlike Waltz he does not uses actor level analysis to come to the conclusion that balance of power is the common sense of international relations.
- For Waltz, regardless of the choice of the states, in an anarchic system, the quest for survival would lead to a particular outcome- balance of power.
- criticism of Waltz:
- Social constructivist scholars like Alexander Wendt Say anarchy is what we make of it. Waltz presupposes state preferences. Anarchy cannot compel states to struggle for power if they do not share any ambitions.
- Randall Schweller accuses Waltz of reductionism for reducing the complexity of international politics to just one factor- the structure.According to neoclassical realists like him and Zakaria foreign policy is the result of international structure, domestic influences, and a complex relations between the two
- offensive realism:
- Defensive and offensive basically differ on one point- that is the amount of power a country requires to safeguard its national interest.
- John J mearsheimer -book- the tragedy of great power politics(offensive realist). Post cold war realist.
- argues that the best way for great powers to ensure their survival is to maximize power and pursue hegemony.
- This is the so-called “Tragedy of Great Power Politics”: security-seeking states forced to engage in conflict to ensure their security.
- Mearsheimer rejects Waltz’s conclusion(that states must maximise security) and argues instead that states can never truly be secure and that only through power maximization can states ensure their survival .
- Mearsheimer’s theory is based on 5 bedrocks
- anarchy in the international system, which means that there is no hierarchically superior, coercive power that can guarantee limits on the behavior of states
- all great powers possess offensive military capabilities, which they are capable of using against other states
- states can never be certain that other states will refrain from using those offensive military capabilities
- states seek to maintain their survival (their territorial integrity and domestic autonomy) above all other goals as it is the means to all other ends
- states are rational actors, which means that they consider the immediate and long-term consequences of their actions, and think strategically about how to survive
- Criticism of realism:
- Post modern critique of realism
- Richard Ashley- anarchy problematic. Says anarchy only means absence of world actor. It does not mean there is a security dilemma. Says scholars like waltz purposefully ignore presence of intl organisations
- Power: Realists say states are power maximisers and focus on hard power, whereas post modernists say realists ignore the role and importance of norms , ideas as source of power in IR
- Actors: for realists state are the only actors but Neo classical realists also focus on role of domestic actors shaping foreign policy.
- Henry kissinger in world order- idealists do not have a monopoly on moral values; realists must recognise that ideals are also part of reality."
- Criticism by critical school- people – not states – must be put at the centre of politics, global or otherwise.
- Criticism by Feminists—>views of J Ann Tickner
- Criticism by social constructivitists
- Criticism by Headly bull—> there is not just anarchy but anarchical society.
- Conclusion: It can be rightly said that Realism is timeless wisdom and other schools of intl politics nothing but are footnotes to realism.
- Further reading-
- Read- https://www.e-ir.info/2018/02/27/introducing-realism-in-international-relations-theory/
- https://www.e-ir.info/resources/international-relations-theory/
- https://www.e-ir.info/2018/01/15/the-past-present-and-future-of-realism/
- https://www.e-ir.info/2019/02/01/have-waltzs-critics-misunderstood-his-theory-of-international-politics/
- https://www.e-ir.info/2009/07/23/comparing-and-contrasting-classical-realism-and-neo-realism/
- https://www.e-ir.info/2011/08/17/the-realist-school-of-thought-an-analysis/
- https://www.e-ir.info/2014/03/06/john-mearsheimers-theory-of-offensive-realism-and-the-rise-of-china/
- https://www.e-ir.info/2018/04/22/huntington-vs-mearsheimer-vs-fukuyama-which-post-cold-war-thesis-is-most-accurate/
- https://www.e-ir.info/2009/12/28/the-political-realism-of-thucydides-and-john-mearsheimer/
- https://www.e-ir.info/2017/01/24/bringing-power-to-justice-rawls-contra-marx-and-foucault/
- https://www.e-ir.info/2014/06/18/climate-change-politics-through-a-constructivist-prism/
- https://www.e-ir.info/2011/09/07/the-case-for-constructivism-in-analysing-the-india-pakistan-conflict/
- https://www.e-ir.info/2013/02/01/towards-a-critical-securitization-theory-the-copenhagen-and-aberystwyth-schools-of-security-studies/
- https://www.preservearticles.com/international-trade/evaluate-the-systems-approach-to-the-study-of-international-politics/6680
- https://www.e-ir.info/2013/03/12/gender-security-as-a-category-of-international-politics/
- https://www.e-ir.info/2011/07/30/human-rights-in-the-context-of-international-relations-a-critical-appraisal/
- https://www.e-ir.info/2011/02/01/conflict-and-cooperation-in-international-relations/
- https://www.e-ir.info/2021/08/06/opinion-a-feminist-foreign-policy-for-india-where-to-turn