More handpicked essays just for you.
Relevance of realism in international relations
Relevance of realism in international relations
Relevance of realism in international relations
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
People’s ideas and assumptions about world politics shape and construct the theories that help explain world conflicts and events. These assumptions can be classified into various known theoretical perspectives; the most dominant is political realism. Political realism is the most common theoretical approach when it is in means of foreign policy and international issues. It is known as “realpolitik” and emphasis that the most important actor in global politics is the state, which pursues self-interests, security, and growing power (Ray and Kaarbo 3). Realists generally suggest that interstate cooperation is severely limited by each state’s need to guarantee its own security in a global condition of anarchy. Political realist view international politics as a struggle for power dominated by organized violence, “All history shows that nations active in international politics are continuously preparing for, actively involved in, or recovering from organized violence in the form of war” (Kegley 94). The downside of the political realist perspective is that their emphasis on power and self-interest is their skepticism regarding the relevance of ethical norms to relations among states. However, the structure and process of international relations, since the end of World War II, has been fundamentally impacted through an immense growth of a variety of factors at multiple levels, which leads to the liberalist theoretical perspective of global complex interdependency. The complex interdependency is constructed from the liberalist theoretical perspective emphasizing interdependence between states and substate actors as the key characteristics of the international system (Ray and Kaarbo 7), which means that cooperation can be made more te... ... middle of paper ... ...ous situations, possibly because these studies have attributed motive and action to the states rather than to the decision-makers within them. Thus, foreign relations and policies can truly be strengthened when people can view and truly appreciate international issue in many different perspectives, such as realist, idealist, liberalist, constructivism, feminist, world economic system analysis, etc. When people are able to see issues and solutions to problems in many different ways world peace might be reachable. Works Cited Crane, George T., and Abla Amawi. The Theoretical Evolution of International Political Economy: a Reader. New York: Oxford UP, 1997. Print. Kegley, Charles W., and Eugene R. Wittkopf. World Politics Trend and Transformation. New York: St. Martin's, 1981. Print. Ray, James L. Global Politics. Ninth ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2007. Print.
Edkins, Jenny, and Maja Zehfuss. Global Politics: A New Introduction. 2nd ed. London: Routledge, 2009. Print.
...heories outlined in this paper. One of the defining principles of realism is that the state is paramount to anything else, including morality. Realists argue that deviation from the state interests in an anarchic system creates vulnerability. Morality of state theorists uphold state sovereignty and argue that intervention is not permissible unless the circumstances are crass and warrant action. They talk about aggression as the only crime that one state can commit to another and suggest that aggression should only be allowed as a retaliatory measure. Finally, cosmopolitans believe that morality can be achieved at the individual level and that morality can be somewhat universally applied. Non-realists do not support preemptive actions or intervention under almost any condition, and the criteria by which intervention is warranted aligns with the principles of justice.
Frieden, Jeffry A., David A. Lake, and Kenneth A. Schultz. World Politics. New York: W.W. Norton &, 2013. Print.
New York: Oxford University Press, 2005. Shiraev, Eric B., and Vladislav M. Zubok. International Relations. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014. Silver, Larry.
... between the theory of liberalism and realism to find which one of the theory gives better explanation and prediction of the international relations. For instance, each theories would approach the explanation for the peaceful relations between Republic of Korea and Japan different. If the reason for the friendly relation between the two countries are due to the balance of power to counter the Chinese interest, this would be the perspective of the realist. But if the economic interdependence between the Japan and Korea caused the peaceful relations, this is the view of the liberalism. Contemporary society analyze certain issues of international relations with different perspective, but it is utterly important for individuals to approach issues of international relations from one perspective and approach from contrasting critic view to study international politic.
Dennis Pirages and Christine Sylvester (eds.), Transformations in the Global Political Economy (London: Macmillan, 1989).
Kegley, Charles W., and Eugene R. Wittkopf. World Politics Trend and Transformation. Belmont: Wadsworth, 2006.
According to realist view ordering principle of the international system is based on anarchy. There is no higher authority other than the states themselves to check and balance their actions. Consequently, nation-states are the main players in this system. In other words, sovereignty inheres in states, because there is not a higher ruling body in the international system. This is known as state centrism. Survival is an obligation continuing to be sovereign. On the other hand, sovereignty is the characteristic feature of states and its meaning is strongly tied to use of force. According to the most of the realist variants, states are “black boxes”; the determinative factor is states’ observable behavior, not their leaders’ characteristics, their decision making processes or their government systems.
Balaam, David. Introduction to International Political Economy, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, Pearson Education, 2005.
When analyzing causes of wars, realists focus on the systems level of analysis. To realists, the state and individual level are not contributing factors to wars, and they are not significant when analyzing causes. Defensive realists focus more on the use of aggression for security purposes, whereas offensive realism argues that states deal with anarchy and their own insecurities by being the strongest state. I argue that defensive realism relates more to World War I and II because it appears as though the states created alliances and utilized balance-of-power politics in order to stop certain states from growing too large and too powerful rather than to become more powerful than other states. The realism research paradigm also believes in the type of power known as relative power. Although realism focuses primarily on power, it does not mean that liberals do not. They simply look at power differently than realists do. Relative power is a type of power where states wants to have more power than those states that surround them. Liberals do not think that relative power is the way that states compete for
Dimitter, Lowell. World Politics. 1st ed. Vol. 55. New York: Johns Hopkins UP, 2002. 38-65.
To conclude, there are four main components of the realist approach to international relations, they are: state which includes egoism as the states are composed by the selfish people, self-help which includes balance of power as power is used to enhance the survival rate, survival which includes hegemony in order to maintain its position and anarchical system which related to lust for power and led to security dilemma.
Baylis, Smith and Patricia Owens. 2014. The globalization of World Politics: An introduction to international relations. London. Oxford University Press.
After the Cold War, the system of international relations entered a new era. With the bipolar world order broken, countries started a complex conflict and cooperation process to establish a new multipolar world order. Stemming from basic strategic interests, these countries have to make adjustments and supplements foreign strategic position to win favorable positions to their interest in the international system. The similarity and/or differences in interests, ideological perspective, history, culture ... between countries are always a major factor and dominant impact issues of cooperation and conflict. Besides the efforts to maintain peace and expand cooperation for development, the world witness many international conflicts in both large scale and small scale. Therefore, when talking about the trend of peace and cooperation it is impossible to ignore the impact and influence of current international conflicts as well as the possibility of new conflicts future.
Krain, Matthew (2005), “AP Comparative Government and Politics Briefing Paper: Globalization,” [http://apcentral.collegeboard.com/apc/public/repository/ap05_comp_govpol_glob_42253.pdf], accessed 15 May 2012.