Essay: Classical realism

Classical realism is one of the most important theories on international politics. Realism is founded on the pessimistic view of human nature, and revolves around the quest for power. The international system is based around the Westphalian system. Thucydides, Niccolò Machiavelli, Thomas Hobbes, and Hans J. Morgenthau are all prominent thinkers that contributed to the formation of classical realism and the development of realist ideas throughout time. Although realism is esteemed for its pragmatic view of the world, it’s considered to overly prioritize the state.
The foundation of classical realism relies upon three main assumptions about how our world functions. These three suppositions are groupism, egoism, and power-centrism. Groupism is the idea that humans are members of groups, and that their survival is contingent upon group unity. However, this creates the possibility for conflict with other groups. In our current international system, the most important groups are known as nation-states, and the reliance between groups is known as nationalism. Egoism is the idea that the main force behind politics is self-interest, and that humans are inherently egotistic. Egoism will always beat altruism; the self-interest of one nation will come above the collective interest of other nations. In other words, the realists say that “inhumanity is just humanity under pressure.” (Wohlforth, 36). Power-centrism is the idea that politics revolves around power. Our society is characterized by inequalities of power and resources, and international relations are motivated by these inequalities.
Realism can also be seen as consisting of three core elements: statism, survival, and self-help. Statism is the principle the state is sovereign, meaning that it has supreme authority over itself. This includes implementing laws, representing the common will of the citizens, and dealing with foreign policies. Survival is the principle that states are more likely to survive if they acquire more power and focus on their national interest. This is connected with the ethic of responsibility, which is idea that sometimes immoral actions are necessary for the greater good. An example of this is how governments terminate certain legal rights of those who are seen as potentially harmful to national security. Self-help is the principle that states are compelled to depend on themselves to obtain national security as a consequence of belonging to an anarchical system.
Besides from the three main assumptions and elements, classical realism consists of different theories. The hegemonic stability theory asserts that powerful states will try to obtain supremacy over the international system, which naturally creates hierarchy within the anarchical system. This theory suggests that international order is stable only if the sources of authority within the system are sustained by the balance of power. A modern example of this is how the United States has the main power over global order, but this control might be threatened as China grows in power and influence. The power transition theory asserts that once subordinate states gain strength in relation to their dominant states, they will start challenging the current leadership. Relating back to the previous modern example, China’s accumulation of power may lead to it testing the United States’ captaincy of global order.
The realist international system is built upon the Westphalian system, where states are considered as the most important actors. A defining trait of this system is anarchy, which means that there is no higher authority above the states that manages disagreements. A consequence of anarchy is that conflict is constantly present, and that war naturally occurs since the states are competitive for power. This leads to the security dilemma, the idea that a state increasing its own security measures might cause heightened tensions between other states as they instinctively tighten their own security which causes less overall security. This anarchical system only remains stable through the balance of power, which means that states regulate each other’s acquisition of power by either constructing their own capacities, known as internal balancing, or by forming alliances, known as external balancing. States resort to cooperation through alliances out of their own selfish concerns for security.
Thucydides, an Athenian general and historian who lived from 471-400 BC, is known as the father of political realism. He chronicled the conflict between the Peloponnesian League led by Sparta and the Delian League led by Athens in the History of the Peloponnesian War. He explains that the cause of the war was Sparta’s fear of growing Athenian power and Athen’s obligation to maintain its empire. The Melian Dialogue was part of his text, and it contained a retelling of the consultations between the Athenian invaders and the rulers of Melos. Although the Melians decided to stay neutral in the war, the Athenians wanted to coerce them to join their side. While the Athenians negotiated by asserting the strength of their army and offering a peaceful submission, the Melians negotiated by appealing to the Athenians’ morals and values. Both sides were incapable of changing each other’s mindsets, so Athens seized the island. This failure on the Melians’ behalf showed that power and self-serving interests will ultimately overrun morality in times of conflict.
In The Prince, Niccolò Machiavelli examines how rulers acquire and retain authority and discusses how conflict shapes effective forms of government. He maintains a tone of ruthlessness throughout the book, often urging his readers to inflict harm whenever necessary to assure state security. He asserts that humans are inherently egotistic, describing them as “ungrateful, fickle, hypocrites and dissemblers, avoiders of dangers, greedy for gain.” (72). Machiavelli strongly believes that it is better to be feared than to be loved, as long as you are not hated. The other significant facet of this idea is knowing when to not be good. According to Machiavelli, it is extremely useful for a ruler to understand what circumstances require cruelty. Another important concept that he discusses is the notion that nations should never resort to neutrality. He states that “it always happens that the one who is not your friend will seek your neutrality, and the one who is your friend will ask you to declare yourself by taking up arms.” (95).
Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) was an English philosopher who wrote the Leviathan, where he examines human nature, societal structure, and different types of government. His primary argument is that the only way for people to escape the state of nature is to be ruled by an all powerful monarch. He describes the state of nature as a “condition which is called war; and such a war as is of every man against every man.” (3). Key characteristics of this chaotic situation are that men are equal and that they are driven by competition and diffidence. Another aspect of this anarchic condition is that nothing can be unjust since there is no law. Hobbes says that justice and injustice, the ideas of right and wrong, are “qualities that relate to men in society, not in solitude.” (4). Later on he claims that law itself cannot be unjust, only good or bad. His reasoning is that the law is created by the sovereign power, and all subjects have assented to the sovereign’s actions, so no subject can call the law unjust. He defines good law as that which is needful for the good of the people and of the sovereign, and bad law as that which is not needful.
Hans J. Morgenthau (1904-1980) was one of the most influential realists during the post-World War II period. He focused his work on international relations on power politics, which is the concept that states act in ways to heighten their power or influence. He claimed that humans are inherently selfish and that they are driven to control others. In the context of international relations, he viewed ethics and reason as nothing more than tools for obtaining and justifying power. He argued that there were no universally agreed morals, and that morals in general shouldn’t lead state behaviour. This ties in with the idea of the dual moral standard; there is a moral standard for individuals residing within the state and a different standard that is used for the state’s external relations with other states. There is a distinction between low politics, matters of social and human security, and high politics, matters of national security and survival. He also thought that leaving national security in the hands of international institutions (like the United Nations) was a foolish proposition.
A major strength of realism is that it explains international politics the way it actually is, not the way that we want it to be. Liberalism is far too idealistic since it depends on utopianism, which is the vision of a society with almost flawless citizens. It’s problematic to base modern day politics on ideology, especially because humans are inherently flawed. By putting the state first, the realist belief system prioritizes security and the safety of its citizens over pleasing other states. Not only that, realism offers an adequate guide for strong leaders on how to properly maintain control and make the best decisions for their states. Realism makes accurate predictions on the inevitability of conflict, rather than pretending that wars are avoidable.
A major weakness of realism is that state-centrism becomes increasingly inapplicable in the era of globalization. A realistic analysis of power doesn’t account for transnational corporations, international organisations, or terrorist organisations like the Islamic State and Al Qaeda. Non-state actors are gaining influence in modern world politics, so it’s problematic that realism doesn’t acknowledge this. Ignoring the importance of non-state actors and international institutions leads to the incapability of states to solve destructive global issues like poverty, environmental destruction, and the mistreatment of human rights. Humanitarian intervention is difficult when states refuse to work collectively instead of individually. Another major weakness of realism is that it naturally orients towards the most powerful nations, which includes countries like the United States and China. Although realism supports non-intervention, this doesn’t apply when it comes to the most powerful states. For example, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq led by the United States show that as a great power, the United States believed that it was able to ignore non-intervention principles on the basis of international order and national security.
Overall, classical realism will continue to be an essential component of international relations. It serves the best interests of citizens, leaders, and the states. Even as as globalisation continues to move forward, classical realism will continue to adapt and be shaped by modern theorists.