There are three most widely accepted international relations paradigms, realism, liberalism, and constructivism. These three theories all have their benefits and drawbacks and all try to explain how a nation will operate in the context of our global political system. Of these three schools of thought, realism is the one that most scholars align with. There are many different variations of realism: classical realism, neorealism, defensive realism, and offensive realism. The unifying message that all realist thinkers believe is that nations are the main political actors and they will pursue their national interests above all else. This means that nations will make decisions based on what is most rational depending on its position in the system. The international system is anarchical, meaning there is no overall governing body, and there is a finite amount of power; therefore, nations will make decisions that are individually beneficial because they are constantly in competition with each other. Additionally, realists believe that the only type of power is hard power (military and economic strength).
Classical realism states that nations will behave according to human nature because they are run by humans. Thus, primitive emotions, such as fear, aggression, or desire will dictate a nation’s foreign policy decisions. Classical realists therefore believe that conflicts are inevitable because the individual motivations of some given nations will ultimately overlap, and there is no governing body of the international system, so nothing is preventing them from fighting. The theory’s core ideas date back to Ancient Green, as Greek Historian Thucydides observed that the Pellippinesian War between Athens and Sparta was a power struggle, and international relations operate following human nature, which usually is self-motivated, but is impossible to predict scientifically. The main ideas that classical realists put forth are that the state seeks to increase its relative power and the notion of the balance of power. The first idea is that each nation desires to be the most powerful that it can be. To achieve the maximum power possible because that’s human nature, any given nation arms itself because it can then pose a threat to other nations and force them to comply with its interests. This scenario then leads to the balance of power, as one nation accumulates arms and power it becomes threatening to other nations, so it is in the other nations’ best interests to partner with each other and protect themselves against the most powerful country. This means that classical realists believe all military alliances are conditional and are bound to disintegrate when no longer beneficial.
Neorealists believe that power politics between nations is inevitable, not necessarily because it is inherent human nature, but because the anarchic system that all nations operate in forces them into competing for power. Many realists believe that a nation’s most important objective is security; however, the way the international system works makes nations mistrustful of other nations. This can result in something called the security dilemma, where one nation does not trust another nation, so they invest in more security, which alarms other nations. Other nations then fear their security, so they invest in increasing military power. This security dilemma can spiral and result in conflict due to mistrust and fear, even though the two nations never wanted to fight in the beginning. The belief that nations are security maximizers is the core tenant of defensive realism. Defensive realists believe that the way to prevent conflict is by having all nations adopt militaries with purely defensive weapons, increase communication between nations to promote transparency and increase trust, and balance the power of other nations or military alliances, so no one nation or group of nations has complete power.
Another school of thought in neorealism is offensive realism. Offensive realists agree that nations compete for power because of the anarchic international system, but believe that nations seek to maximize their relative power, not security. Nations end up in conflict because they want to expand their power and influence because it is in their best interests. This can be used to explain why some nations practice interventionist foreign policy even when their security is not directly threatened.
Overall, realism is best able to predict short-term outcomes and can be used to explain many conflicts in the past. For example, the Cold War was a struggle for power between the United States and the Soviet Union, where other nations joined a given side to protect their national security interests. It can also be said that the Cold War was a result of a lack of certainty, which resulted in mistrust and kept spiraling; this aligns well with defensive realist ideology. However, realism does have some drawbacks. Realism fails to explain why the power of the United States was not balanced after the collapse of the Soviet Union and it does not take into account non-nation actors. Social movements, intergovernmental organizations, and individual people and departments inside of a nation can have a large impact on how nations make decisions and what foreign policy they pursue. However, realism as a whole states that nations always act in their self-interests and nothing but the nation has any bearing. While realism has its pros and cons, it is helpful when examining how conflicts begin, and many of its ideas, such as increasing communication between nations and encouraging the transition to a more defensive military, can be useful in preventing conflict in the future.
Bibliography:
Camisão, Isabel, and Sandrina Antunes. “Introducing Realism in International Relations Theory.” E-International Relations, 27 Feb. 2018, www.e-ir.info/2018/02/27/introducing-realism-in-international-relations-theory/.
Notre Dame International Security Center. “An Introduction to Realism in International Relations.” ND International Security Center, 21 July 2022, ndisc.nd.edu/news-media/news/an-introduction-to-realism-in-international-relations/.
“Neorealism (International Relations).” Wikipedia, 3 Mar. 2024, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neorealism_(international_relations)#Offensive_realism. Accessed 30 Mar. 2024.
留言