Class Notes Carina Tenaglia INR 3003 Tuesday 8 28 Introduction to Realism Difference between Classical Neo Realism Classical emphasis on power Neo Realism emphasis on survival security Ex WWII Classical would blame Hitler power Neo Realism Structural Germany was becoming stronger and created a security dilemma I Intro a Importance post world wars i So many deaths concept of sovereignty ii Post European enlightenment 1 Contributes idea of liberalism 2 Supposed to have been a progressive society b Perspective US c Theories emerge i Realism ii Liberalism 1 Still dominant theories today 2 Theory means assumption NOT fact 3 Theories help make predictions about what will happen Classical Realism Hans Morgenthau founded in 1948 Politics Among Nations a Response to US Idealism i Morgenthau saw US foreign policy as na ve ii Woodrow Wilson was architect of American Idealism 1 Thought states were product of 2 POOR leadership Flawed Government Flawed States 3 If problem was broken it could be fixed by bringing everyone together a Increasing communication w other countries b Committed to respecting sovereignty c Continue to spread Democracy i Unlikely to have war w nations ii Led to foundation of League of Nations 1 Didn t work b c we had WWII b Realists felt that conflict was a natural part of the int l system i Would point to nature of leaders leadership flawed states ii Outcome different than idealists don t think it can be fixed expect war as outcome 1 Hobbesian approach Thomas Hobbes saw that mankind was inherently selfish aggressive and evil 2 States reflection of leadership by these types of individuals a Antagonistic environment iii One of the best ways to avoid war is to constantly prepare for war II III ii Realists see the state as the PRIMARY ACTOR in int l politics 1 Not vulnerable or easy target deters states from attacking a Identifiable w Realpolitik thru 1960 s c Realism Theory i Dominant from world wars until end of cold war 1 Can be used in context of power gaining exerting politics 2 Can be focused more on security survival of the state iii Don t deny that int l organizations exist deny that they have greater power than the states 1 Viewed as an assertion of state power never more powerful iv Don t see domestic ideology as determining factor of how states interact d Pursuit of Power realpolitik i Realpolitik power politics Neo Realism a AKA Structural Realism not as pessimistic as original realism shift i Dominant view of realism today referred to as just realism ii Kenneth Waltz pioneer thinker of this Theory of Int l Politics 79 1 Moves concept away from realpolitik a Didn t believe that conflict developed b c of flawed leadership b Problem had to do w structure of the int l system c Shift away from emphasis of power i States seek SECURITY ULTIMATE GOAL to guarantee its survival b Assumptions i States are Rational Unitary Actors 1 Realists see a map of states w clearly defined borders a Individuals committed to their own survival i They make rational but unitary decisions ii States Seek Security to survive iii Anarchy 1 No body organization that has authority over sovereign states a The UN can t violate state sovereignty 2 No one out there to punish states a States have to look out for themselves self help Waltz i Breeds insecurity 3 Expect war to still be common competition differences a Increase security expense of neighbors antagonism c Balance of Power answer to decrease war etc i Alliances 1 Best way to balance strong and or weak states join forces 2 Good as long as they serve to benefit the state s 3 Realists can be distrustful of alliances a Not permanent b Level of commitment drawn into others wars c National sovereignty d Over dependence on allies e Allies switching stances turning on each other ii Bandwagoning iii Balancing 1 Form of alliance 2 Weaker states drawn to alliance w more powerful states a Powerful states know about weak states weaknesses b Can exploit turn on weaker allies for selfish advantage c Alliances that can reverse in the strong powers favor i Ex Chinese Sung Dynasty sought alliance w Jurchens to defeat Liao which they did Sung allied w Mongols who defeated the Jurchens and all of that area of China ii Soviet Union bandwagoned with Germany and Germany ditched them 2 years later and invaded Russia 1 Do hope and expect states to someday balance 2 Even balance can create equilibrium security a Ex The Cold War pretty even direct war averted 3 Miscalculations made balance falls apart 4 Changes in structure of the system a Ex States disintegrate fall b New technology weaponry c A new state i Unification of Germany as result of 19th century wars ii Upset balance in Europe Realists see this as pivotal event on road to WWI structure change create of massive security dilemma i Uni Polarity Hegemonic Stability Theory 1 When there is one major pole power as hegemon 2 Today as USA unipolar world 3 Used to be thought that hegemon could deter all threats a Thinking before terrorism unconventional enemies ii Bi Polarity 1 Thought by most to be the most stable configuration 2 Both poles thought to offset each other a USA v USSR during Cold War iii Multi Polarity 1 Multiple seats of power 2 Most realists see this as unstable a One of the more likely times to see war b Believe we are currently moving towards multi polarity i China as rising challenge economically population etc ii EU represents potential 3rd pole collectively e Security Dilemma Prisoner s Dilemma Game Theory i Cooperation 1 Purpose of diplomacy creating beneficial relations a Realists don t think we should rely on this for security d Polarity a Relative gains i Talks can fail 2 Pres Teddy Roosevelt Speak softly but carry a big stick 3 We risk making ourselves vulnerable giving another state the upper hand i Realists prefer this one gains at other s expense ii Makes winner better off i Everyone gains something out of it ii Liberals prefer this The Prisoner s Dilemma b Absolute gains Non Zero Sum Zero Sum Prisoner B s Strategies s e i g e t a r t S s A r e n o s i r P DO NOT CONFESS CONFESS DO NOT CONFESS One Year One Year Life Parole CONFESS Parole Life 20 Years 20 Years Both choose to CONFESS b c chance of best outcome Parole instead of Life Price to pay but trying to avoid worst outcome Change Do Not Confess to Disarm and Confess to Take up Arms which one would a state choose They would choose to take up arms b c other option too risky Could get into an arms race and have higher risks but
View Full Document
Unlocking...