Chapter 2: Realism
1) Elements of Realism (US is realist)
Basic realist assumptions: (1) pessimistic view on human nature (2) International conflicts are
resolved by force and that IR is conflictual (3) high regard for power, national security, survival
(4) history repeats itself
This pessimistic view of human nature is strongly evident in the IR theory of Hans Morgenthau
(1965, 1985), who was the leading classical realist thinker of the twentieth century. He sees men
and women as having a ‘will to power’. That is particularly evident in politics and especially
international politics
International politics are ‘power politics’: an arena of power, conflict, and war between states
Realists share the thought that the international state system is anarchical -there is no higher
power. NGOs and IGOs are useless
There is a power hierarchy between states and this is why war arises
The normative core of realism is national security and state survival: these are the values that
drive realist doctrine and realist foreign policy
States were born to protect its citizens and ensure their security (Thomas Hobbes, life without
state is poor, short…)
States pursue their own national interest, which is why other states cannot be completely
trusted. Every state is looking to improve its own situation and keep its position (if powerful)
and climb up the ladder (if not as powerful)
For realists, we can limit war when we have two great powers: powers balancing each other
(like the US and USSR post-cold war)
2) Classical Realism
Thucydides and Augustine, early modern political theorists such as Machiavelli, Spinoza, and
Hobbes, and modern social scientists such as Max Weber
2.1) Thucydides
two main claims: (1) the structure of the international system affects the relations between
states (war) (2) moral reasoning does not exist in relations between states
Thucydides saw IR like the inevitable competition between ancient Greek city states, and the
inequality in power that existed between them.
All states must adapt to the unequal distribution of power or risk be destroyed
Rulers of foreign policy have a limited sphere
He also emphasizes that decisions have consequences; before any final decision is made, a
decision maker should have carefully thought through the likely consequences, bad as well as
good. Thucydides thus emphasizes the ethics of caution and prudence in the conduct of foreign
policy in an international world of great inequality
Justice for him is not about equal treatment for all, because states are in fact unequal. Rather, it
is about recognizing your relative strength or weakness, about knowing your proper place, and
about adapting to the natural reality of unequal power
Theory of hegemonic war: when a new superpower is on the rise war also rises
2.2) Machiavelli
Power (the Lion) and deception (the Fox) are the two essential means for the conduct of
foreign policy, according to the political teachings of Machiavelli
, The supreme political value is liberty; for that to happen, nations must be strong (lion) or else
other states may prey on it and disturb the security. Nations must also be cunning (foxes) to
pursue self-interest. Leaders must be smart so they notice threats
Classical realism is basically the primary theory for survival
The Machiavellian world is a dangerous but opportune place. Leaders, to survive the dangers,
must be aware of them and take the necessary precautions. To prosper, they need to be smart
and exploit the opportunities given to them and be smarter than their opponents
‘…and therefore, it is necessary that he have a mind ready to turn itself according to the way the
winds of fortune and the changeability of [political] affairs require . . . as long as it is possible, he
should not stray from the good, but he should know how to enter into evil when necessity
commands’
He states that nations should not act in accordance to Christian ethics: love thy neighbor…
because it is foolish and might make them lose everything and risk the security of their citizens
People’s faith is entangled by the ruler’s faith
2.3) Hobbes and the Security Dilemma
for Hobbes, the ‘state of nature’ where there are no laws or states, is a constant state of war.
This is resolved through the establishment of sovereign states
The means of escape is by men and women turning their fear of each other into rational joint
collaboration with each other to form a security pact that can guarantee each other’s safety.
Men and women paradoxically cooperate politically because of their fear of being hurt or killed
by their neighbors: they are ‘civilized by fear of death’
The problem: peaceful life can only be enjoyed within a state and cannot exist between states
Political dilemma: the achievement of personal security and domestic security through the
creation of a state is necessarily accompanied by the condition of national and international
insecurity that is rooted in the anarchy of the state system. Because we cannot form a world
government, international insecurity will exist, so we are living in an international state of
nature, where war might occur anytime
Conclusion of the three:
The three mentioned realists have things in common. First, they agree that the human condition
is one 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 security, and each
of them tries to find the keys to unlock it. Finally, they agree that there is no final escape from
this human condition, which is a permanent feature of human life.
2.4) Morgenthau and Classical Realism
Morgenthau (German Jew/wanted to explain why Germany went to war) speaks of the
animus dominandi: the human ‘lust’ for power. People are naturally political animals. This
means that they also search for free and secure political space
If people desire to enjoy a political space free from the intervention or control of foreigners,
they will have to mobilize and deploy their power for that purpose. That is, they will have to
organize themselves into a capable and effective state by means of which they can defend their
interests (Machiavelli). The anarchical system of states invites international conflict which
ultimately takes the form of war (Hobbes). To stop or at least constrain this struggle for power
among nations, Morgenthau stresses the need for a tempering balance of power among
nations, a message echoed by most later realists
1) Elements of Realism (US is realist)
Basic realist assumptions: (1) pessimistic view on human nature (2) International conflicts are
resolved by force and that IR is conflictual (3) high regard for power, national security, survival
(4) history repeats itself
This pessimistic view of human nature is strongly evident in the IR theory of Hans Morgenthau
(1965, 1985), who was the leading classical realist thinker of the twentieth century. He sees men
and women as having a ‘will to power’. That is particularly evident in politics and especially
international politics
International politics are ‘power politics’: an arena of power, conflict, and war between states
Realists share the thought that the international state system is anarchical -there is no higher
power. NGOs and IGOs are useless
There is a power hierarchy between states and this is why war arises
The normative core of realism is national security and state survival: these are the values that
drive realist doctrine and realist foreign policy
States were born to protect its citizens and ensure their security (Thomas Hobbes, life without
state is poor, short…)
States pursue their own national interest, which is why other states cannot be completely
trusted. Every state is looking to improve its own situation and keep its position (if powerful)
and climb up the ladder (if not as powerful)
For realists, we can limit war when we have two great powers: powers balancing each other
(like the US and USSR post-cold war)
2) Classical Realism
Thucydides and Augustine, early modern political theorists such as Machiavelli, Spinoza, and
Hobbes, and modern social scientists such as Max Weber
2.1) Thucydides
two main claims: (1) the structure of the international system affects the relations between
states (war) (2) moral reasoning does not exist in relations between states
Thucydides saw IR like the inevitable competition between ancient Greek city states, and the
inequality in power that existed between them.
All states must adapt to the unequal distribution of power or risk be destroyed
Rulers of foreign policy have a limited sphere
He also emphasizes that decisions have consequences; before any final decision is made, a
decision maker should have carefully thought through the likely consequences, bad as well as
good. Thucydides thus emphasizes the ethics of caution and prudence in the conduct of foreign
policy in an international world of great inequality
Justice for him is not about equal treatment for all, because states are in fact unequal. Rather, it
is about recognizing your relative strength or weakness, about knowing your proper place, and
about adapting to the natural reality of unequal power
Theory of hegemonic war: when a new superpower is on the rise war also rises
2.2) Machiavelli
Power (the Lion) and deception (the Fox) are the two essential means for the conduct of
foreign policy, according to the political teachings of Machiavelli
, The supreme political value is liberty; for that to happen, nations must be strong (lion) or else
other states may prey on it and disturb the security. Nations must also be cunning (foxes) to
pursue self-interest. Leaders must be smart so they notice threats
Classical realism is basically the primary theory for survival
The Machiavellian world is a dangerous but opportune place. Leaders, to survive the dangers,
must be aware of them and take the necessary precautions. To prosper, they need to be smart
and exploit the opportunities given to them and be smarter than their opponents
‘…and therefore, it is necessary that he have a mind ready to turn itself according to the way the
winds of fortune and the changeability of [political] affairs require . . . as long as it is possible, he
should not stray from the good, but he should know how to enter into evil when necessity
commands’
He states that nations should not act in accordance to Christian ethics: love thy neighbor…
because it is foolish and might make them lose everything and risk the security of their citizens
People’s faith is entangled by the ruler’s faith
2.3) Hobbes and the Security Dilemma
for Hobbes, the ‘state of nature’ where there are no laws or states, is a constant state of war.
This is resolved through the establishment of sovereign states
The means of escape is by men and women turning their fear of each other into rational joint
collaboration with each other to form a security pact that can guarantee each other’s safety.
Men and women paradoxically cooperate politically because of their fear of being hurt or killed
by their neighbors: they are ‘civilized by fear of death’
The problem: peaceful life can only be enjoyed within a state and cannot exist between states
Political dilemma: the achievement of personal security and domestic security through the
creation of a state is necessarily accompanied by the condition of national and international
insecurity that is rooted in the anarchy of the state system. Because we cannot form a world
government, international insecurity will exist, so we are living in an international state of
nature, where war might occur anytime
Conclusion of the three:
The three mentioned realists have things in common. First, they agree that the human condition
is one 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 security, and each
of them tries to find the keys to unlock it. Finally, they agree that there is no final escape from
this human condition, which is a permanent feature of human life.
2.4) Morgenthau and Classical Realism
Morgenthau (German Jew/wanted to explain why Germany went to war) speaks of the
animus dominandi: the human ‘lust’ for power. People are naturally political animals. This
means that they also search for free and secure political space
If people desire to enjoy a political space free from the intervention or control of foreigners,
they will have to mobilize and deploy their power for that purpose. That is, they will have to
organize themselves into a capable and effective state by means of which they can defend their
interests (Machiavelli). The anarchical system of states invites international conflict which
ultimately takes the form of war (Hobbes). To stop or at least constrain this struggle for power
among nations, Morgenthau stresses the need for a tempering balance of power among
nations, a message echoed by most later realists
