Realist international relations
theory
Paul Bacon
SILS
IR201
Realism
• Realism has been easily the most influential theory
of international relations.
• Most diplomats, politicians and professors have,
implicitly or explicitly, believed that realism provides
the best account of how international relations work.
• It is a quite simple commonsense theory.
• It can be explained in a few straightforward
propositions.
Hans Morgenthau and Realism
• Professor Hans Morgenthau is regarded as the
father of modern realism.
• He published several books, including Politics
Amongst Nations.
• This book is acknowledged as the ‘bible’ of
modern realist thought.
• It should be noted that the book is about politics
between states.
• Realists often define themselves as students of
international politics, not international relations.
(They are actually students of interstate politics).
Hans Morgenthau and Realism
• Morgenthau discusses many issues in Politics
Amongst Nations, but the core arguments can
be stated as follows:
• 1. States are the most important actors in
international politics.
• 2. International politics and domestic politics
are different.
• 3. International politics is a competitive
struggle for power.
1. The importance of states
• If we want to understand how international politics
work, we should study the relations between states.
• In particular, we should study the international
relations between the most powerful and wealthy
states in the world.
• At present, these states would perhaps include: the
United States, Russia, China, Japan, Germany, the
United Kingdom, France, India and Iran.
The roles of the state
• According to realists, states possess three elements – a
government, a population and a territory.
• Realists assume that states have effective governments.
• It is the role of the government of a state to provide security
for the people living in that state.
• This security has two elements.
• 1. Internally, the state should provide public goods such as
order, an education system, medical services, a transport
network and a social welfare system.
• 2. The government should also attempt to protect the state
from external attack.
External security provision
• It is important that the state develops as
strong an army as possible, for the purpose of
self-defence.
• The government should also try to build solid
alliances with other powerful states in the
international system.
• Good diplomacy is essential to this task.
Anarchy
• Realists assume that states have efficient
governments.
• They also assume that states have effective police
forces and legal systems.
• Because of this they argue that domestic politics are
different from international politics.
• For realists, the world is an anarchy.
• Anarchy is a Greek word which means ‘absence of
government’, or ‘absence of authority’. (It does not
mean chaos).
Features of international anarchy
• Several features which are present in a domestic political
order are absent from international politics, according to
realists. For example:
• 1. realists argue that there is no world government;
• 2. realists argue that there is no international police force;
• 3. realists believe that international organizations such as the
United Nations are not effective;
• 4. realists believe that international law is weak. This is
because existing international law reflects the interests of the
most powerful states in the system. Also, if a state is powerful,
it can simply ignore international law if it chooses to.
Inside and outside
• Realism is often referred to as an ‘inside-out’
theory.
• This is because realists argue that domestic
and international politics are different.
• The ‘inside’, domestic politics, is a domain of
peace, order, and safety.
• Threats to security come from the world
‘outside’, international politics, which is a
domain of competition, threat, conflict and
war.
Power
• Realists claim that in order to understand
international politics, it is necessary to
understand which states are the most powerful,
and what their interests are.
• Power is the study of who gets what, and how.
• Put simply, the most powerful states control
international politics.
• It is often claimed that the ancient Greek scholar
Thucydides is the first systemic realist thinker.
• In The History of the Pelepponesian War he
argued that ‘The strong do what they will (want),
and the weak suffer what they must’.
Resources
• In order to be powerful, it is necessary
to own, control, or have access to,
important resources.
• The easiest way to define a resource is
as ‘something which can be used to
achieve an objective’.
• In international politics, resources can
take a variety of forms.
Types of resource
• Natural resources, such as
oil, pig iron, water, uranium,
gas.
• Size of national population.
• Size and quality of armed
forces.
• Possession of nuclear
weapons.
•
•
•
•
Strategic location.
Quality of government.
Size of territory.
Flexibility and creativity of
national population.
• Prestige and status.
• Size and level of
development of economy.
Scarcity
• International politics is a competitive struggle for
power and resources.
• But there is a problem. The most important
resources are SCARCE.
• If something is scarce, this means that there is not
enough supply to satisfy demand.
• This scarcity means that there will be winners and
losers in the struggle for resources.
Human nature
• According to Morgenthau, the most important fact about
human nature is that human beings are selfish, and they have
a desire to dominate.
• In Latin this is referred to as an animus dominandii.
• States are groups of human beings, operating in a world of
anarchy and scarcity.
• It is therefore reasonable to expect that states will compete in
a selfish manner for prestige and resources, according to
realists.
• According to realists, then, we live in a world of anarchy and
scarcity, and humans are motivated by an animus dominandii.
Gilpin’s law
• Robert Gilpin is a well-known American realist
professor of international relations at Princeton
University.
• He takes the argument a stage further, and argues
that states will try to expand their power and control
as much as they can.
• Put simply, if a state is powerful enough to do
something, and it wants to do it, then it will.
• We might refer to this as Gilpin’s law.
The ‘security dilemma’
• States are aware of anarchy, scarcity, and the animus
dominandii.
• As a result of this, they are always worried that they
will be attacked.
• The rational response to this is to arm and to form
alliances.
• However, such behavior causes other states to worry.
• Realists believe that in this way states find
themselves in a ‘security dilemma’.
A ‘self-fulfilling prophecy’?
• The only way in which a state can provide
for external security is to build up its own
military forces, or to form alliances with
other countries.
• But this behavior reduces security, because
other states respond by arming against you.
• This is how arms races begin and develop.
• The security dilemma creates a ‘selffulfilling prophecy’.
Outcomes in the international system
• The fact of competition can lead to three
different types of outcome in the international
system, according to the French realist
Raymond Aron.
• 1. Empire
• 2. Hegemony
• 3. A Balance of Power
Empire
•
•
•
•
An empire exists when one country has
official political control of other countries.
These countries become colonies of the
imperial power.
Use of the term ‘empire’ also implies that
the imperial power exercises a high level of
real control over the activities of its colonies.
In the past, for example, India has been a
colony of Britain.
Hegemony
•
•
•
•
•
•
This term comes from the Greek word for leader.
The word actually has two elements – leadership and
control.
A hegemon does not officially possess colonies. But a
hegemonic state is clearly more powerful than all of the
other states in a given international system.
A hegemon also exercises a high level of control over
the behavior of other states in the system.
Many commentators argue that the current
international system is hegemonic, and that the US is
the hegemonic state.
The US can strongly influence the behavior of other
states in the system, such as Japan and the UK.
Balance of power
•
•
•
•
A balance of power is the most ‘normal’ situation
in the international system.
This occurs when there is no state which is
significantly more powerful than all of the other
states in the international system.
To use the definition of Hedley Bull, ‘a balance of
power exists where no one state or group of states
has more power than any other state or group of
states’.
To explain how the balance of power works, I will
discuss the historical example of Europe between
1870 and 1914.
Changes in relative power
• Each of the three outcomes is possible, according to
Aron.
• But it is important to note that states develop at
different rates in the international system.
• As a result, states are always adjusting to
accommodate the rise and fall of great powers.
• For example, at the moment the long-term relative
power of China and India is increasing, and that of
Japan is falling.
• This will make it necessary for there to be
adjustments in the system.
Progress?
• Realists take a longer view of international relations. They count in
tens and hundreds of years, rather than months and years.
• Realists argue that in the long run, history always repeats itself.
• Progress in the international system is not possible.
• The English realist Martin Wight offers an interesting thought
experiment. He suggests that if Thucydides were to travel in time to
the 21st century, he would be in awe of some of the technological
progress that humans have made. In this sense, there have been
profound changes in human life.
• But Wight suggests that Thucydides would recognize similar realist
patterns of competition in international relations. Just as in Ancient
Greece, it is still relevant to talk of arms races, balances of power,
deterrence and war.
The realist cycle
• Despite all of our progress in other areas of human
existence, then, our patterns of international politics
are just the same as they were in ancient Greece.
• The anarchical structure of the international system is
the same as then, and, according to realists, it will
always remain the same.
• This is because the facts of anarchy and scarcity
create a security dilemma that states always respond
to in the same way, by arming, and forming alliances.
• In this way, they continue to create empires,
hegemonic systems or balances of power.
• These always collapse in the long run, and the
mistakes are repeated.
The realist cycle of conflict
Emergence of
new system
Breakdown of system/war
Different rates
of growth
States
Anarchy/scarcity
Competition/security dilemma
Empire
Hegemony
Balance of Power
Realism and democracy
• Realists also argue that the domestic regimes
of states are not relevant to their international
relations.
• For example, realists believe that it does not
matter whether a country is democratic or
authoritarian.
• The behavior of states can simply be explained
by the amount of power they possess, and by
the relative distribution of power in the
international system.