3 realist works comparison

Classical realism is well recognized as a philosophy concerned with foreign affairs and has long sought to understand the very existence of humans. The aim of this thesis is to compare and contrast the work of three realists in order to illustrate the main and secondary trends in the realist school of thought. It will also contain classical and contemporary realist components. Scholars such as Thomas Hobbes and Niccolo Machiavelli, Kenneth Waltz, as well as other contemporary thinkers such as Reinhold Niebuhr, Hans Morgenthau, and Carl von Clusewitz, have been identified with the philosophy of classical thought and realism. Realism in modern society has been classified into Neo realism and Classical realism based on how the scholars have developed their works.
Realism has been illustrated to be a broad paradigm of the classical realism that was established in 1979. Works developed by Walt have been analyzed by other scholars, and Keith Shimko states that the theory developed by Waltz can be viewed “as a ‘significant rupture’ with classical realist theory and as a fundamentally different conception of international politics” (Denny, Hayes, Rademacher, 2015, 67). In this argument, the author tries to relate to the fact that Waltz theory is aimed at explaining some significant and certain big things, which can also be explained otherwise by other scholars.
Differences between works developed by realists
Realism can be primarily classified into classical and neo-realism. There are differences that exist between various works developed by researchers, which should be clearly understood, especially in the institutions of learning across the globe. Classical realism assists in making certain that diverse issues related to the contemporary events have been highlighted. The world we inhabit cannot be easily explained through the application of only one theory. Researchers illustrate the notion that “Whilst maintaining the centrality of the state, structural realism reaffirmed the logic of power politics within an international system lacking authority to govern state behavior; this was termed the ‘anarchic structure’” (Bova, 2016, 89). The concept applied when defining a theory explains the extent to which an author values either structural or classical realism. According to Waltz who is ascertained to be one of the realists over the years, theories can be described as statements that help in explaining laws. Theories are constructed through recognizing the significance of diverse factors that are above others and also singling out the principles that are propelling the factors, despite the fact that the principles might be working. Waltz states that “whilst structural realism cannot explain every aspect of international relations, it explains certain ‘important things’. Whether or not we view structural realism as successful in explaining the most important phenomena in international relations, goes a long way to determining whether we deem it a suitable as a tool for analyzing current affairs” (He, 2012, 183).
There are some limitations that exist about various works that have been developed by realists over the years. Despite these limitations, it is evident that the structural approach has much power especially with its explanations, which are related to the prominence of the state at the global level within the interactions as well as regarding the manipulation and abuse that has been continuing that also includes the international law. Diverse institutions across the globe play a significant role in making certain that international relations have been carried out successfully as a means of structural realism and has also helped in ensuring that it is regarded the best tool in analyzing diverse aspects of the current affairs. There are realists that argue that institutionalization of international law is aimed at nullifying the primary claims developed by Waltz about the anarchy, which has been ascertained as not being the case.
The nations found to be among the most powerful across the continent have been explained by scholars to continue breaking and bending the primary rules of the international law with the aim of securing their personal interests. In some instances, there have been arguments that states follow the law that has been developed internationally, but the fact remains that there are some instances where violations may occur and might lead to serious problems being experienced in the nation. Despite this notion, structural realism has been ascertained to have its limitations. For instance, after the end of the Cold War, it was proved that that were some unconvincing ideas based on the explanations of wars, changing relations and foreign interventions between diverse states. Waltz failed to take into account the non-state actors, domestic factors, ideologies as well as the complexities of interdependence that had its abilities limited to the analysis of the current affairs in the nation. Therefore, structural realism can be applied to a section of pluralistic approach, especially with dealing with international relations.
The primary difference existing between various works developed by realists is based on the concept that the theories are used to determine behavior among states in a nation. Despite the fact that some realists have a different perception about the significance of human nature, the concept has not been accepted by classical realists. However, it is essential to note that the concept developed by the theorists has been among the primary factors that classical realists used in determining the state behavior. All realists have one thing in common, which is the struggle for power. Over the years, scholars explain that realists need power as the primary motivator in their political lives. Morgenthau is one among the many realists who was ascertained to have written the ‘will to power’ and was unlimited. He also “highlighted the influence of nationalism, ideologies, imperialism in a variety of forms, the diplomatic skills of the domestic government and popular support both domestically and internationally” (Egg, 2013, 199). Therefore, Morgenthau recognized a concept that had been considered critical by Waltz and it is the plurality of influences upon the behaviors developed by the state.
On the one hand, Morgenthau illustrated that although the anarchy could not be significant in preventing diverse states from trying to attain some dominant powers, it was to be considered a permissive force other than being a causal one. On the other hand, Waltz “maintained the importance of power politics and the centrality of the state, however; he ignored the role of the domestic sphere attributing the ‘self-help’ nature of the international realm as the sole factor in deciding states’ behaviors” (Wardner, 2014, 56).
Waltz claims can be justified by the events that are being undertaken after the implementation of the international laws. The argument is based on the notion that the anarchical nature of the system applied international causes the primary powers to be pursued following personal interests of the states. In a case where the major powers are not working according to the international laws that have been set, the leading powers would then be required to be involved in ensuring that the benefits have been attained and the law has been created successfully. Research illustrates the notion that an instance where a great power operates within the boundaries of the international law, it serves its interest and will be restricted to the principles developed for the powers. Diverse powers have been ascertained to have a selective engagement, especially when dealing with the international law. For instance, “the US favoured the proposals of the Uruguay Round as it would lead to an increase in US exports by reducing tariffs abroad more than in the US, however they refused to sign the Ottawa Treaty regarding the use of landmines which was perceived as detracting from US security interests” (Egg, 2013, 199).
John Herz illustrates that uncertainty that has been experienced about the state’s intention are a security dilemma and is inherent to the system that had been developed by the anarchical system. Powerful states have also been ascertained use the enforcement of the laws applied internationally to influence the behavior and policies of other nations across the globe. Scott, a realist “highlights the Nuclear Non – Proliferation Treaty as an example of the US and the existing nuclear powers negotiating agreements weighing heavily in their favour and thereby maintaining their superior military capabilities” (He, 2012, 98).
There are various critics of structural realism that have been developed over the years, and the arguments state that the “involvement of states in international institutions disproves the theory as it fails to recognise the positive relationships that can be created between states” (He, 2012, 90). Waltz tries to prove his theory by referring to the concept of the extension and the continued existence of the North Atlantic Treaty Alliance, which is explained to be beyond the original purpose that was aimed at highlighting how various institutions in the international market would be made to be subordinate to the national purposes.
Mixed Motivation
Iraq’s invasion in the year 2003 can be used as a significant example of the anarchic system, which led to the development of the most powerful states that violated the international laws to as to suit their intentions. In most instances, it has been evident that structural realism does not illustrate the various issues that have caused the requirements of invasion as well as the subsequent wars in the nation. War motivation in diverse instances lies within the system levels that have been developed over the years. Michael Byers explains the notion that when different states are considered to implement either multilateral or unilateral action, there are some forms of military pressure or political economy can be introduced so as to bear the affairs carried out globally.
The invasion that was undertaken in 2003 is explained by researchers to be as a result of a policy that was introduced by an idealist American foreigner and does not make sense from the point of view of a realist. It is also explained that “classical realism goes much further in analysing such an event than structural realism, as it takes a wider range of factors into consideration. Morgenthau recognised the importance of ideology and nationalism, which are key themes of the rhetoric of the ‘war on terror.' He claimed politics by its nature ‘compel the actor … to use ideologies to disguise (his) immediate goal’. Similarly, analysis of state behavior is impossible without considering the influence of nationalism, particularly as it is in the ascendancy” (Bova, 2016, 78).
The realist Mongenthau is explained to have recognized the significance of nationalism and ideology, which he applied in developing most of his studies. Regardless of the oppositions that were developed by other realists, it is certain that he had to prove his argument true compared to the theory and argument that had been developed by Waltz. The factors like nationalism and ideology formed the basis of development of the key themes of the war on terror rhetoric suggestions that were explained by Mongenthau. Research explains that “Mongenthau recognised that ‘universalistic nationalism’ enabled states to claim ‘the right to impose its own values and standards of action upon all the other nations.' Thus without considering a wider range of factors than structural realism will allow, it is impossible to fully understand motivations for war” (Bova, 2016, 89).
Also, there are some systems that have been developed internationally and are considered as being more complex than the single cause that it had been intended, and also has the primary effects as explained by Waltz. However, in some cases, the systems have been used by researchers to explain the significance of innovation and introduction of new concepts in the society. Structural realists state that various systems may be used as interdependent, and they include the mixed motive games and the global economic systems. Despite the significance, they have failed to recognize the fact that they can have adverse impacts on the European Union and the global economy over the years. Therefore, stern measures should be taken into consideration to ensure that various arguments developed by realists have been understood clearly.
Conclusion
Despite the faith that had been developed by realists including Waltz, some theories are no longer used in the current society to explain the existence and occurrence of some events. For instance, Waltz faith is no longer used in explaining the ‘big important things’ as it used to be in the previous years. Schmidt and Dunne are also illustrated to have argued that the rise of India, Brazil, and China are based on the realistic view of things so as to exist successfully. However, it is clear that the neo classical realists have developed some form of opposition towards the concepts that are being developed. Therefore, despite the notion that there are various cases of illustrations developed by realists, some of them have been opposed and have been the basis of diverse debates across the globe. National interest has been the primary aim of carrying out various actions by government administration in different nations. It is explained that “National interest is becoming increasingly complex and states are being forced to take a variety of factors into account when deciding upon the appropriate course of action.  Until there are an effective means of authority above the state level, states will continue to act in a self-interested manner thus structural realism remains a valuable approach. However, it cannot be used on its own or as a sole determinant of state behavior” (Egg, 2013, 200).
References
Bova, R., 2016. How the world works: a brief survey of international relations. Pearson.
Denny, C., Hayes, P. and Rademacher, N. eds., 2015. A Realist's Church: Essays in Honor of Joseph A. Komonchak. Orbis Books.
Egg, M., 2013. John Wright, Explaining Science's Success. Understanding How Scientific Knowledge Works, Durham: Acumen Publishing, 2013, 199 pp., GBP 45 (US $75)(Hardcover), ISBN 978‐1‐84465‐532‐8. dialectica, 67(3), pp.367-372.
He, K., 2012. A Realist's Ideal Pursuit. The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 5(2), pp.183-197.
Wardner, P.A.M.E.L.A., 2014, May. Explaining mixed-use developments: A critical realist's perspective. In 20th Annual Pacific-Rim Real Estate Society Conference (19-22 January 2014), Christchurch, New Zealand. Retrieved (Vol. 27).

Deadline is approaching?

Wait no more. Let us write you an essay from scratch

Receive Paper In 3 Hours
Calculate the Price
275 words
First order 15%
Total Price:
$38.07 $38.07
Calculating ellipsis
Hire an expert
This discount is valid only for orders of new customer and with the total more than 25$
This sample could have been used by your fellow student... Get your own unique essay on any topic and submit it by the deadline.

Find Out the Cost of Your Paper

Get Price