Setyo Aji Pambudi

071112044

Realism

In the discipline of international relations there are contending general theories or theoretical perspectives. Political realism is a theory of political philosophy that attempts to explain, model, and prescribe political relations. Realism, also known as political realism, is a view of international politics that stresses its competitive and conflictual side. It is usually contrasted with liberalism, which tends to emphasize cooperation. It takes as its assumption that power is (or ought to be) the primary end of political action.  

Political realism in essence reduces to the political-ethical principle that might is right. The theory has a long history, being evident in Thucydides’ Pelopennesian War. It was expanded on by Machiavelli in The Prince, and others such as Thomas Hobbes, Spinoza, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Then, twentieth-century realism was born in response to the idealist perspective that dominated international relations scholarship in the aftermath of the First and the Second World War. Although the United Nations, founded in 1945, can still be regarded as a product of idealist political thinking, the discipline of international relations was profoundly influenced in the initial years of the post-war period by the works of “classical” realists such as John H. Herz, Hans Morgenthau, George Kennan, and Raymond Aron.

Realism encompasses a variety of approaches and claims a long theoretical tradition. Twentieth-century classical realism has today been largely replaced by neorealism, which is an attempt to construct a more scientific approach to the study of international relations. Both classical realism and neorealism have been subjected to criticism from IR theorists representing liberal, critical, and post-modern perspectives.

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. It can be conclude that realism emphasizes the role of the nation-state and makes a broad assumption that all nation-states are motivated by national interests, or, at best, national interests disguised as moral concerns.

At its most fundamental level, the national interest is generic and easy to define: all states seek to preserve their political autonomy and their territorial integrity. Once these two interests have been secured, however, national interests may take different forms. Some states may have an interest in securing more resources or land; other states may wish to expand their own political or economic systems into other areas; some states may merely wish to be left alone.

International relations realists emphasize the constraints imposed on politics by the nature of human beings, whom they consider egoistic, and by the absence of international government. Together these factors contribute to a conflict-based paradigm of international relations, in which the key actors are states, in which power and security become the main issues, and in which there is little place for morality. The set of premises concerning state actors, egoism, anarchy, power, security, and morality that define the realist tradition are all present in Thucydides.

The implications of this refusal to recognize greater authority than the state itself are important to recognize. The political realist fears centralized authority above the state actors, unless that authority is derived from the power of the state actors itself. However, the natural tendency of states is to increase their power, the preservation of a decentralized system must be purchased with force.

The Realist believe that the use of force to preserve the decentralized system is regulated by a system called the balance of power. The balance of power system works if only the major powers agree, at least tacitly, that they agree that the preservation of state autonomy is an important objective. If the major powers do agree, wars will still occur within the system, but those wars will be constrained by the limited objectives of each major state. If one major power does not agree with the limited objectives, then wars will be much larger and more open-ended.

Reffrences :

Beitz, Charles, 1997. Political Theory and International Relations, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Political Realism in International Relations 2012. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 14 March, 2012, from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/realism-intl-relations/

Political Realism 2012. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.. Retrieved 14 March, 2012, from http://www.iep.utm.edu/polreal/

Political Realism 2012. Vincent Ferraro, Resources for the Study of International Relations and Foreign Policy. Retrieved 14 March, 2012, from http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/pol116/realism.htm