Introduction to International Relations: Realism Theory

Realism is a school of thought in international relations that emphasizes the importance of power, national interest, and security in shaping international relations. Realists view the world as a system of states competing for power, and they believe that states are driven by a fundamental desire to survive.

The Melian Dialogue is a historical account of a conversation between Athenian and Melian leaders during the Peloponnesian War. The Athenians demanded the Melians surrender to avoid destruction, while the Melians refused, arguing for their right to independence. Ultimately, the Athenians conquered Melos.

Thucydides was a Greek historian who is best known for his work, 'The History of the Peloponnesian War.' His detailed and nuanced account of the conflict is considered a classic work of historical analysis and is still studied today for its insights into the dynamics of war and power politics.

The concept of raison d'état refers to the actions a state takes in its own self-interest, even if those actions are morally questionable or violate international norms.

Offensive Realism is a sub-branch of realism that argues that states are inherently aggressive and seek to maximize their power relative to other states. Offensive realists believe that states are driven by a desire to achieve security through dominance.

Defensive Realism is a sub-branch of realism that argues that states are primarily interested in security and that they only seek to acquire enough power to ensure their survival. Defensive realists believe that states are driven by a desire to avoid conflict and promote stability.

The Hegemonic Stability Theory proposed by Robert Gilpin and Stephen Krasner argues that an international system is stable when a single state, also known as a hegemon, is powerful enough to enforce international rules and provide public goods. This theory suggests that the decline of a hegemon can lead to instability and conflict.

The concept of deterrence refers to the act of dissuading another party from taking a certain action by threatening them with retaliatory action.

The concept of power in international relations is the ability of an actor (state, individual, group) to influence the behavior of other actors, even against their will.

Neoclassical Realism is a sub-branch of realism that combines elements of traditional realism with insights from other schools of thought, particularly domestic politics. Neoclassical realists argue that the international system shapes state behavior, but also that domestic factors like political institutions, leadership, and public opinion play a crucial role.

The concept of 'statism' in realism emphasizes the central role of states in international politics. It assumes that states are the primary, if not the only, actors in international affairs and that they act in a unified way to pursue their national interests.

The idea of 'balancing' in international relations is a key concept in realism, suggesting that states naturally seek to counter the power of any rising state that threatens their security. By balancing power, states aim to prevent any single actor from becoming too dominant and destabilizing the international system.

The concept of 'national interest' is a central theme in realist thought, referring to the set of goals and priorities that a state seeks to achieve in the international arena. These national interests often include security, economic prosperity, and territorial integrity.

The theory of 'preponderance' developed by A.F.K. Organski states that international stability is achieved when a single powerful state, known as a preponderant, dominates the system. According to this theory, the existence of a preponderant state prevents wars and maintains order.

In the theory of 'preponderance', a potential challenger is considered a threat if they possess more than 80% of the resources of the preponderant state while also harboring dissatisfaction. This combination of power and discontent could lead to conflict as the challenger attempts to overturn the existing order.

The concept of 'public goods' in international relations refers to goods that are non-excludable and non-rivalrous, meaning that everyone can benefit from them regardless of whether they contribute to their provision. Examples include global climate change agreements or international security institutions.

According to Morgenthau, international politics is driven by a desire for power, and ethical considerations are secondary. This view suggests that states are primarily motivated by their own self-interest and will often prioritize national interests over moral principles.

Clausewitz believed that war is an extension of politics by other means. He argued that war is not a separate phenomenon but rather a political act, often resulting from disagreements between states over policy, territory, or resources.

Carr's work emphasized that the state system naturally generates conflict due to competition for resources and power. He argued that international relations are characterized by an inevitable tension between idealism (moral aspirations) and realism (practical necessities).

Bismarck's foreign policy was focused on maintaining the balance of power in Europe. He believed that stability could be achieved by forming alliances and ensuring that no single state could dominate the continent. His skillful diplomacy helped to prevent major wars in Europe for decades.

Waltz's theory of international politics argues that the international system is anarchic, meaning that there is no central authority to enforce laws or settle disputes. This anarchy creates a situation where states are constantly seeking to survive and maximize their security.

Morgenthau believed that international politics is autonomous, not driven by economic or social factors. He argued that states are guided by their own national interests and power, not by their domestic structures.

Hobbes believed that human nature is inherently self-interested and driven by a desire for power. In the absence of a strong sovereign, individuals are constantly at risk of violence and chaos

Morgenthau argued that statesmanship requires a pragmatic approach, acknowledging that morality cannot always be applied in international politics. He believed that statesmen should pursue national interests even if it means acting in ways that might be considered immoral.

Carr's work is often characterized by its cynicism about international relations. He believed that power politics is a necessary consequence of the anarchic state system, and that idealism is a naive and unrealistic approach to international affairs.

Clausewitz defined war as a process of escalating violence between two parties, ultimately leading to a decisive conflict. He argued that war is only truly initiated when both sides are willing to escalate to the extreme, risking total destruction.

Morgenthau emphasized the importance of ethical considerations in international politics. He argued that states should act in accordance with moral principles and strive for a just and peaceful world order.

The realist school of thought, especially Morgenthau's version, emphasizes the importance of national interest in shaping international politics, while downplaying the role of ethical considerations.