REALISM IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

In the discipline of International Relation realism is a school of thought that emphasized the competitive and conflictual side of International Relations. This theory have a pragmatic approach to International Relation describing the world ‘as it is, not as it ought to be’.

 

HISTORY OF REALISM

In history there was some thinkers which we can called realist thinkers like:

Thucydides in his writing “History of the Peloponnesian War” explain that strong should rule over weak.

Niccolò Machiavelli in his writing “ The Prince” emphasized on the effectual truth. He was first political scientist to behold the human condition without illusion.

Thomas Hobbes in his writing “ Leviathan” describe state of nature as realist describe IR as state of nature.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau in his writing “ Social Contract” accepts human imperfection and avoid any ultimate solution to the human problem.

  Realism as a self conscious movement in the study of International Relations emerged during the mid 20^th century and was inspired by the British political scientist and historian E HCarr. He attacked on “Idealism” of liberal internationalists who believe to construct international institution like League of Nations. He focused instead on the perennial role of power and self interest in determining state behavior. The outbreak of World War II converted many scholars to that pessimistic vision.

Thereafter realism established in American Political science departments. A number of European scholars most notably the German born political scientist and historian Hans Morgenthau gave attention to this concept. It is the realism of Carr, Morgenthau and their follower that is labeled classical.

 

ASSUMPTION

 

•          State-centrism

                                States are the central actors in International Politics, rather than leaders or International organizations. No actor exists above states.

•           Anarchy

                          The International Political System is anarchic as there is no supranational authority to enforce rules.

•           Rationality Or Egoism

                                       States act in their rational self-interest within the international system. States built up their militaries to survive, which may lead to a security dilemma.

•           Power

                      States desire power to achieve their national interest but to attain power it become ultimate goal of states.

MAIN THINKERS

•          E. H. Carr             

                               Book – “ Twenty Years Crisis (1939)

•           Severely criticized Liberals and called them utopian.

•           International Relations is more about conflict rather than cooperation.

•          There is conflict between people and countries. Some are stronger than others. Stronger will attempt to preserve their position and weak will try to change the status quo.

•           Britain, France and USA was stronger that time and Germany, Italy and Japan wants to change that status quo by use of force.

•          Hans J Morgethau               

                Book - Politics among Nations: Struggle for Power and Peace (1948)

•           Human Nature is at the base of IR. Because Humans are self interested power seeking so that states also are self interested power seeking.

•           Nature of International Relations is Anarchic because there is no World Government. Armed Sovereign states facing Each other. International Politics different from domestic politics. Self help is only way to survive.

•           International Politics like all politics is a struggle for power. Whatever the ultimate aim of International Politics, Power is always the immediate aim.

Cyclic view of History

                      According to Hans J Morgenthau History is non progressive. It means it ends in war. In International System there is anarchy because there is no world government or authority, states only depends on self help. They always struggle for power and after gaining power two or more countries make a balance of power. It creates peace for some time but when power balance disturbed  war automatically came into existence.

CONCLUSION

•          Realism became the dominant way of thinking about International Relations. Popular among scholars and Politicians.

•           Liberalism did not disappear. Post war European integration did not follow Realist Logic . There ware cooperation and collaboration.