Identify and evaluate the reasons for the long term success of Realism as an approach to international relations

Résumé du document

In order to answer this question, it is necessary to first expose the core assumptions of Realism and Neo-realism. The main idea of classical realism is that the international system is anarchic, and therefore no higher controlling entity above states can exist to control them. In fact, states are the major rational actors of this system and they act towards their own national interests, which are security and survival. For classical realism, this characteristic derives from a certain perception of mankind as self-centred and competitive. The relations between states are thus determined by the resources they own and by the comparative levels of power. These assumptions are one of the reasons of the theory's success, as they have a strong empirical support in the international landscape at the beginning of the XXth Century, especially after the First World War and the failure of the League of Nations.

Extraits

[...] These assumptions are one of the reasons of the theory's success, as they have a strong empirical support in the international landscape of the beginning of the XXth Century, especially after the First World War and the failure of the League of Nations. The failure of cooperation caused the loss of strength of the Liberal theory, the main opponent of Realism, and reinforced a pessimistic idea of state interaction. However, some pressures on Realism appeared, especially with the end of the Cold War, as the realist concept of balance was challenged by the appearance of new types of conflict at other levels, including identity and regional tensions. [...]

[...] Another reason for the success of Realism derives from the controversies it generates, not only in the debates with its critics, but also between different realist conceptions. One of the central divisions of Neo-realism is the one opposing defensive realists and offensive realists. The firsts, among who Waltz, are the ones who consider defence as essential, and in that logic believe that maximizing state power can be dangerous, as others could perceive this state as a threat, and focus more on the possibility of balancing power. [...]

[...] Identify and evaluate the reasons for the long term success of Realism as an approach to international relations Realism has been a dominant theory of International Relations, mostly after the Second World War. Its origins are however far more ancient, going back to Thucydides and his description of the war between Sparta and Athens, and more recently to the Hobbesian concept of the Leviathan. In the contemporary study of International Relations, Realism remains central, especially through its transition towards Neo-realism. [...]

[...] Bibliography Jeffrey W. LEGRO, Andrew MORAVCSIK, anybody still a realist?”, International Security vol iss Joseph S. NYE Jr, “Neorealism and Neoliberalism”, World Politics vol iss Joseph N. [...]

[...] The critical authors consider Neo-realism as having a paranoiac conception of international relations. The response of Realism is often that other theories are too idealistic, naïve, about the international system, which does not enable them to critically perceive and analyse the world as it is, and that historical events have proved them right. The criticism of Neo-realism also focuses on the fact that it is too state-centred, which makes it unable to consider important actors and levels. To conclude, the main reasons for the long-lasting success of Realism are linked to the testability of its conclusions, to its capacity to evolve and adapt to new world situations, and to its ability to exploit the challenges and debates in order to enrich its theory. [...]