Realism in International Politics: A Theory of State Behavior and Security, Slides of Political Science

Download Realism in International Politics: A Theory of State Behavior and Security and more Slides Political Science in PDF only on Docsity! REALISM Group Members: Alejo, Athena S. Alfane, Pierre Anthony Balonzo, Aurey Fae R. Banton, Jerico M. Banzuela, Danica Kim L. Caño, Flynn Nicole M. Codilla, Ma. Dorothy V. Lejano, Veronica A. Miranda, Hannah Pamela M. Monsalve, Schella Mae M. Morado, Chelsea Dannah D. Navarro, John Erasmus Marie Novio, Henry Jose D. INTRODUCTION Realism, also known as political realism, is a view of international politics that stresses its competitive and conflictual side. Realists consider the principal actors in the international arena to be states, which are concerned with their own security, act in pursuit of their own national interests, and struggle for power. Their emphasis on power and self-interest is often their skepticism regarding the relevance of ethical norms to relations among states. National politics is the realm of authority and law, whereas international politics is a sphere without justice, characterized by active or potential conflict among states. Not all realists deny the presence of ethics in international relations. The distinction is drawn between classical realism and radical or extreme realism. Classical realism emphasizes the concept of national interest, classical realists do not reject the possibility of moral judgment in international politics. Rather, they are critical of moralism. They assign supreme value to successful political action based on prudence: the ability to judge the rightness of a given action from among possible alternatives on the basis of its likely political consequences. REALIST VIEW OF WORLD POLITICS AND SECURITY: POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS AND PREMISES POLICY PRESCRIPTION FOR STATES PREMISES AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR STATES Prepare for War: To achieve peace, war is inevitable. Remain Vigilant: No state is to be trusted further than its national interests. Remain involved and actively intervene: Isolationism is not an alternative. Protect with arms: Increase military capabilities and fight rather than submission. Preserve the balance of power: Don’t let coalition of states become dominant. Arms reduction: Negotiate agreement to maintain military balance. ~ REALIST’S VIEW OF WORLD POLITICS Source: Kegley’s (2009), World Politics Trend and Transformation, Chapter 14 The Military Pursuit of Power through Arms and Military Strategies, p. 422-432. Thucydides and the Importance of Power Thucydides (c. 460–c. 400 B.C.E.), a classical political theorist, saw politics as involving moral questions. He asks whether relations among states to which power is crucial can also be guided by the norms of justice. His History of the Peloponnesian War is in fact neither a work of political philosophy nor a sustained theory of international relations. His work, which presents a partial account of the armed conflict between Athens and Sparta that took place from 431 to 404 B.C.E., consists of paired speeches by personages who argue opposing sides of an issue. Realism is expressed in the very first speech of the Athenians recorded in the History—a speech given at the debate that took place in Sparta just before the war. Moreover, a realist perspective is implied in the way Thucydides explains the cause of the Peloponnesian War, and also in the famous “Melian Dialogue,” in the statements made by the Athenian envoys. General Features of Realism in International Relations The set of premises concerning state actors, egoism, anarchy, power, security, and morality that define the realist tradition present in Thucydides: ◈ Realists view human beings as inherently egoistic and self-interested to the extent that self-interest overcomes moral principles. The Athenians affirm the priority of self-interest over morality. The considerations of right and wrong have “never turned people aside from the opportunities of aggrandizement offered by superior strength”. (The debate in Sparta, described in Book I of Thucydides’ History. chap. 1 par. 76) ◈ Realists consider the absence of government (anarchy) to be the primary determinant of international political outcomes. The lack of a common rule-making and enforcing authority means, they argue, that the international arena is essentially a self-help system. Each state is responsible for its own survival and is free to define its own interests and to pursue power. Anarchy leads to a situation in which power has the overriding role in shaping interstate relations. Machiavellianism ◈ Is a radical type of political realism that is applied to both domestic and international affairs. ◈ A doctrine which denies the relevance of morality in politics. ◈ Claims that all means either moral and immoral, are justified to achieve certain political ends. ◈ Machiavelli justified immoral actions in politics, but never refused to admit that they are evil. ◈ Additionally, referring to Machiavelli, Heinrich von Treitschke declared that the state was power, precisely in order to assert itself as against other equally independent powers, and that the supreme moral duty of the state was to foster this power. He considered international agreements to be binding only insofar as it was expedient for the state. The idea of an autonomous ethics of state behavior and the concept of realpolitik were thus introduced. Traditional ethics was denied and power politics was associated with a “higher” type of morality. Hobbes’s Anarchic State of Nature ◈ Human beings are extremely individualistic rather than moral or social, are subject to “a perpetual and restless desire of power after power, that ceases only in death” (Leviathan XI 2) and inevitably struggle for power. ◈ “Such a war as is of every man against every man” (XII 8) In a state of nature, there is no government = Everyone enjoys equal status, every individual has a right to everything, there are no constraints on an individual’s behavior. Anyone may at any time use force = All must constantly be ready to counter such force with force. Having no moral restraints, and motivated to compete for scarce goods = Individuals are apt to “invade” one another for gain. Being suspicious of one another and driven by fear = they are also likely to engage in preemptive actions and invade one another to ensure their own safety. Individuals are also driven by pride and a desire for glory whether for gain, safety, or reputation, power-seeking individuals = will “endeavor to destroy or subdue one another” (XIII 3). In such uncertain conditions, where everyone is a potential aggressor, making war on others, is a more advantageous strategy than peaceable behavior, and one needs to learn that domination over others is necessary for one’s own continued survival. What Hobbes says about the lives of individuals in the state of nature can also be interpreted as a description of how states exist in relation to one another. Once states are established, the individual drive for power becomes the basis for the states’ behavior, which often manifests itself in their efforts to dominate other states and peoples. States, “for their own security, enlarge their dominions upon all pretences of danger and fear of invasion or assistance that may be given to invaders, [and] endeavour as much as they can, to subdue and weaken their neighbors”. Accordingly, the quest and struggle for power lies at the core of the Hobbesian vision of relations among states. Hans Morgenthau’s Realist Principles ◈ Politics is governed by objective laws which have roots in human nature ◈ National Interest is defined in terms of National Power ◈ Interest is always dynamic ◈ Abstract Moral Principles cannot be applied to Politics ◈ Political realism refuses to identify the moral aspirations of a particular nation with the moral principles that govern the universe ◈ Political Realism accepts the autonomy of International Politics as a discipline