Lecture 3 On The Theory Of Realism (2) PDF

Lecture on IR Theory of Realism Course: Theories of International Relations Fall 2024-2025 University of Sharjah M. Moniruzzaman  What is Realism in IR? Realism explains IR in terms of power. Realism’s foundation is principle of dominance. Reali...

Lecture on IR Theory of Realism Course: Theories of International Relations Fall 2024-2025 University of Sharjah M. Moniruzzaman  What is Realism in IR? Realism explains IR in terms of power. Realism’s foundation is principle of dominance. Realism was developed in reaction to a liberal tradition that realists called idealism/liberalism. International state system is anarchy i.e., a system with no higher, overarching authority, no world government. IR is struggle between the great powers for domination and security. Main Thinkers of Realism Sun Tzu (Chinese), The Art of War Thucydides (Greek), The History of the Pelop onnesian War Machiavelli (Italian), The Prince Hobbes (English), The Leviathan Morgenthau (German- American), Politics Among Nations  Basic Ideas and Assumptions of 1. Realists A pessimistic view of human nature. Human is Selfish 2. A belief that IR are necessarily conflictual & that international conflict are ultimately resolved by war. 3. Main concerns: national security and state survival. 4. A basic disbelief that there can be progress in international politics that is comparable to that in domestic political life. 5. The main actors are states, which are legally sovereign actors. 6. Other actors all have to work within the framework of inter-state relations (less important) 7. All international agreements are provisional and conditional on the willingness of states to observe them  Realist Mechanism Four Mechanisms to protect national security and interest: 1. Statism 2. Survival 3. Self-help 4. Rationality  Realist Mechanism For realists, states desire: to enjoy an advantage over others by dominance to avoid domination by others As a result, world politics represents a struggle for power between states each trying to maximise their national interests. States make alliance and create balance of power. to prevent any one state dominating. Thus world politics is all about bargaining and alliances.  Types of Realism 1. Classical realism 2. Neoclassical-realism 3. Structural realism 1. Defensive 2. Offensive  Classical Realism Thucydides’, who lived in the era of ancient Greek city states, believed that states were highly unequal in their powers & capabilities, hence, for states to survive it has to: Adapt to the unequal system Foreign policy must be based on: Foresight, prudence, caution, and judgement Thucydides is known for his statement, “the strong do what they have the power to do and the weak accept what they have to accept.” Machiavelli sees power & deception are the two essential means for the conduct of foreign policy. Main responsibility of rulers is to seek the advantages and defend the interests of their states and thus ensure its survival. Statesmen must be both lions (strong) and foxes (astute, cunning). He is known for stating that “Be aware of what is happening. Do not wait for things to happen. Anticipate the motives and actions of others. Do not wait for others to act.” George W Bush’s pre-emptive strike/war  Thomas Hobbes suggests that the state of nature is a permanent state of war of every man against every man. Men survive through the creation of the sovereign state – to protect them from internal disorders and foreign enemies. Men and women cooperate politically because of their fear of being harmed by neighboring states. The core value of Hobbessian realism is domestic peace and international security dilemma No possibility of forming a international peace.  Common features of classical realism First- they agree that the human condition is a condition of insecurity and conflict that must be addressed and dealt with. Second- they agree that there is a body of political knowledge, or wisdom, to deal with the problem of insecurity, and each of them tries to identify the keys to it. Third- they agree that there is no final escape from this human condition, which is a permanent  Neo-classical Realism Hans Morgenthau (1948), Politics Among Nations Men & women are by nature political animals – born to pursue power and enjoy the fruits of power. The ultimate political space within which security can be arranged and enjoyed is the sovereign state. The desire for power inevitably brings humanity into conflict (IR is all about power politics). Separation of the public sphere of politics from private sphere (no room for morality) – e.g. spying, lying, cheating, stealing, conspiring may be immoral but necessary.  To Morgenthau: The sovereign state was an independent actor whose collective behaviour reflected human nature, as its actions were primarily determined by an inherently selfish desire to survive within an anarchic international system. Power motivates state actions as it ensured survival in an international system in which there was an ongoing struggle for power. Anarchic nature of the international system facilitates the pursuit of power, however, state actions are primarily driven by man’s inborn desire “to live, to propagate, and to dominate” Six principles of Morgenthau’s political realism: 1.Politics is rooted in a permanent & unchanging human nature which is self- centred, self-regarding and self-interested. 2.Politics is ‘an autonomous sphere of action’ and cannot therefore be reduced to morals 3.International politics is an arena of conflicting state interests but interests are not fixed. 4. The ethics of politics is political or situational which is very different from private morality. leaders should strive not to do the best but, rather to do the best that circumstances permit. 5. States should not impose their ideologies on other nations as it as a dangerous activity that threatens international peace and security. 6. The pessimistic knowledge of human beings- as they are and not as we might wish them to be- is a difficult truth that lies at the heart of international politics.  Structural Realism: Lowes Dickinson Lowes Dickinson, coined the term anarchy, he meant anarchy is “mutual fear and mutual suspicion, aggression masquerading as defence and defence masquerading as aggression” Kenneth Waltz argues that state actions could be explained by the structure of the international system itself, as the absence of a higher central authority to regulate interstate behaviour ensured that “self-help is necessarily the principle of action in an anarchic order”  Structural Realism: Kenneth Waltz Waltz ignored the individual characteristics which were traditionally stressed as being responsible for a state’s bellicose behaviour, such as culture, ideology, and regime type. He argues that they only differed “vastly in their capabilities”, suggesting that the structure of the international system has remained fundamentally unchanged since the Peloponnesian War. State’s capability could be empirically measured by its ‘power’, which is defined in terms of population, territory, economy, military strength and political stability. Structural Realism: John Mearsheimer 1.States are the key actors in international politics, and no higher authority stands above them. There is no ultimate arbiter or leviathan in the system that states can turn to if they need help. This is called an anarchic system. This leads to security dilemma. Hence, the world politics is a self-help system. As a result, structure of the international political system is affecting the behavior of states 2.States have offensive military capabilities that are reasonably easy to measure because they are largely composed of material objects that can be seen, assessed, and counted. 3. States can never be certain about the intentions of other states, because intentions are inside the heads of leaders and thus virtually impossible to see and difficult to measure. 4. States rank survival as their most important goal. This is not to say it is their only goal, However, survival trumps all other goals, basically because if a state does not survive, it cannot pursue those other goals. 5. States are assumed to be rational actors, which is to say they are reasonably effective at designing strategies that maximize their chances of survival.  Implications of anarchy 1. Security dilemma, the absence of a higher central authority engenders a sense of mutual mistrust, hence, it is not impossible for one state to be absolutely certain of another’s intentions 2. Inability of states to cooperate as they are concerned with the relative gains of a potential partner 3. “War occur because there is nothing to prevent them”  Structural Realism: Defensive and Offensive Defensive Realism Kenneth Waltz, as defensive realist argues that states seek power in order to be secure and to survive, but excessive power is counterproductive, because it provokes hostile alliances by other states. “first concern of states is not to maximise power but to maintain their positions in the system.” Offensive Realism John Mearsheimer, as offensive realist, agrees with Waltz that anarchy compels states to seek and compete for power. However, he argues that states seek hegemony, that they are ultimately more aggressive than Waltz portrays them. “the stronger a state is relative to its potential rivals, the less likely it is that any of those rivals will attack it and threaten its survival” Offensive Realism John Mearsheimer, as offensive realist, agrees with Waltz that anarchy compels states to seek and compete for power. However, he argues that states seek hegemony, that they are ultimately more aggressive than Waltz portrays them. “the stronger a state is relative to its potential rivals, the less likely it is that any of those rivals will attack it and threaten its survival”  Criticisms of Realism 1. Statism, realists argue: the state is the main actor state sovereignty signifies the existence of an independent authority. Criticism: Statism is flawed on empirical grounds- there are challenges to state power from above & below (e.g. the emergence of other non-state actors such as MNCs, NGOs, terrorist groups, social groups) on normative grounds – the inability of sovereign states to respond to collective global problems such as famine, environmental degradation & human rights abuses. 2. Survival, realists argue:  the primary objective of all states is survival  national interest is the most important goal of states, all other goals (e.g. economic prosperity) are secondary.  actions of leaders must be judged according to the outcome rather than the means – positive outcomes may result from immoral actions (e.g. Nagasaki & Hiroshima bombing). Criticism There are no limits to what actions a state can take in the name of necessity, if it left alone. If we accept these assumptions, the world becomes a jangle. 3. Self-help, realists argue: the structure of the international system does not permit friendship & trust. a constant condition of uncertainty generated by the absence of a global government leads to security dilemma. Criticism: self-help is not an inevitable consequence of the absence of a world government. It is a logic that states have selected. There are historical & contemporary examples where states have preferred collective security systems in preference to self-help. 4. Rationality, realists argue: rationality implies that states and other international actors can identify their interests and put priorities on various interests. rationality implies that actors are able to calculate the costs incurred by a possible action and the benefits it is likely to bring. Criticism Not easy to calculate intangible political benefits against tangible costs of a war. Costs and benefits can be miscalculated. Human behavior and luck can be unpredictable.  Other Criticisms Realism overlooks the cooperative strain in human nature. States are not only in conflict, they also share common interests & observe common rules. conditions of anarchy can be negated through institutions, as they facilitate “transparency, access, representation, and communication” between states in the absence of a central authority Realism ignores other important actors e.g. individuals, NGOs, MNC, IO. Realism plays down the influence of international law. There are also other values besides national interest.