Is Realist Approach the best method to understand International Relations? Examine this in the context of Classical Realism. (UPSC CSE Mains 2017 - Political Science and International Relations, Paper 2)
Realism, set of related theories of international relations that emphasizes the role of the state, national interest, and power in world politics. Since World War II, realism has been considered the most dominant school of thought, and it remains an ever-present in twenty-first century politics. The theory of realism posits five basic outlines:-
-
- International politics are anarchic;
- Sovereign states are principal actors in international politics;
- States are rational unitary actors acting under their own national interests;
- The state’s primary goals are its own national security and survival;
- National power and capabilities are a key litmus test for relationships between states.
- Responding to neo-realism, Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye have given their concept of complex interdependence. They have argued that complex interdependence is closer to reality of world politics than realism. Further, they state that states are not the only actors in international politics and there is presence of multinational corporations and international non-governmental organizations which connect societies.
- Neo-liberals have accepted that the international system is anarchic but they do not believe it will lead to conflict and emphasis centrality of cooperation in international politics. Realism would not have predicted the fall of Soviet Union and the end of Cold War as it gives more focus to state as a unit and ignores certain actions of citizens that can threaten the survival of a state. One of the main reasons for the fall of USSR was that in many of its republics, citizens revolted against the Soviet leadership and demanded freedom and independence. Realist approach does not address the new threats to a state – climate change and terrorism. Terrorist groups like the Islamic State or Al Qaeda are also called non-state actors and realism does not have much to say about non-state actors.
- Critical perspective has challenged the inequality and injustice in IR and raised issues that are often ignored by mainstream theories like realism. For instance, feminists have argued that the role of women in creating and sustaining international politics has remained on the fringes and feminist approach tries to analyze international politics from the eyes of women.
- Contrary to materialist and individualist interpretation of IR given by realism, constructivism gives more importance to ideational factors like norms, rules and identity. They argue that identity is socially constructed. Instead of focusing on distribution of power, constructivism gives importance to distribution of identities.
Despite all the criticism, realism has an important role to caution policymakers against high idealism and morality so that they do not lose touch with the real picture based on power and national interest. However, if it becomes a dogmatic practice, realism can be used to justify aggression and war. Realism has proven so durable as a theoretical lens to understanding international relations and as a guide to statecraft because it is based upon a cold-blooded recognition of the realities of international relations: the best way to take care of yourself is to have sufficient power to do so.
Next
previous
Latest News
EDITORIALS & ARTICLES
General Studies