Aron Abrahamsen

Realism is a theoretical perspective in international relations that posits world politics as a continuous competition among states driven by self-interest and the pursuit of power within a global system lacking central authority. States are considered the primary rational actors, prioritizing national interests, security, and self-preservation. This framework emphasizes the strategic use of military might and alliances to maintain influence and a balance of power, viewing war as an inherent feature of global anarchy. Unlike idealism or liberalism, realism highlights the conflictual nature of international affairs, asserting that cooperation is secondary to the advancement of national interests and security.

Key tenets of realism include state-centrism, the acknowledgment of international anarchy, the assumption of rational or egoistic state behavior, and the pursuit of power for self-preservation. While associated with Realpolitik in its focus on power, realism is a broader theoretical paradigm. It posits that human nature is inherently self-centered and competitive, leading states to act in their own interest. This perspective suggests that ethical considerations or universal principles may not guide state actions in the international arena, which is often characterized by mistrust and competition.

Realism is built upon several fundamental propositions. Central to its view is state-centrism, asserting that states are the paramount actors in global politics, overshadowing leaders or international bodies. The international system is characterized by anarchy, meaning there is no overarching authority to enforce rules or regulate interactions between states. Consequently, states must navigate this system independently. Realists also assume that states act rationally and/or out of egoism, consistently pursuing their own self-interests. The primary driver for these actions is the desire for power, which is seen as essential for ensuring self-preservation and security in a dangerous world. This pursuit of power, particularly military capabilities, can lead to a security dilemma where actions taken to enhance one's own security inadvertently provoke insecurity and arms buildups in other states, fostering a climate of constant antagonism and competition.

The roots of realist thought can be traced back to ancient thinkers like Thucydides and Machiavelli, with later contributions from Hobbes, Rousseau, and Clausewitz, who viewed war as a tool of statecraft and emphasized hard power. Realism experienced a resurgence in the 1930s, challenging the optimistic liberal internationalism of figures like Woodrow Wilson. Modern classical realism, represented by theorists such as Reinhold Niebuhr and Hans Morgenthau, evolved into neorealism, a more scientific approach developed during the Cold War. Contemporary proponents like John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt continue to shape the discourse. Realism encompasses various schools of thought, including classical realism (attributing conflict to human nature), neorealism (attributing conflict to systemic anarchy), and neoclassical realism (blending both factors with domestic politics). These variants further explore defensive versus offensive approaches to state security and power.

Realism stands in contrast to other major theoretical frameworks in international relations, particularly idealism and liberalism. While idealism often emphasizes cooperation and ethical considerations, and liberalism champions cooperation and democratic peace, realism underscores the inherently competitive and conflictual nature of global politics. Realists argue that states are primarily driven by their national interests and the need for security, rather than by universal moral principles or the potential for widespread cooperation. They contend that the international arena is a realm where justice is not inherent and ethical norms may be secondary to the pragmatic pursuit of power and survival. This perspective views international institutions and non-governmental actors as having limited independent influence compared to sovereign states.