Realism | Study Notes, Study notes of Political Science

These notes provide a comprehensive overview of realism as a theoretical perspective, particularly within political science and international relations. They examine its core assumptions, including the centrality of the state, the pursuit of power, and the role of national interest in shaping political behavior. The material explores key concepts such as anarchy in the international system, balance of power, and security dilemmas, while also engaging with contributions of major realist thinkers. Additionally, the notes consider both classical and contemporary strands of realism, along with critical perspectives on its limitations. Suitable for students of political science, international relations, and related disciplines, these notes aim to offer both conceptual clarity and analytical depth.

Typology: Study notes

2025/2026

Available from 04/05/2026

diya-sarah
diya-sarah 🇮🇳

6 documents

1 / 10

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
REALISM
Prominent among its earlier advocates were Indian scholar Kautilya, Chinese strategist Sun Tzu, and
Greek scholar Thucydides. Much later, Italian scholar Nicolo Machiavelli and English philosopher
Thomas Hobbes also contributed to the evolution of realism. Morgenthau is now considered the principal
classical realist.
1. Realism emerged as a reaction to idealism both in the classical period and in the 20th century,
after the First World War, and again during the Cold War. It derives its name from its advocates'
belief that they are realistic and look at the world as it is.
2. Realism emphasizes relations among nations, as they have been and as they are. It is not
concerned with the ideal world.
3. It is the international interpretation of human behaviour. Individuals are essentially selfish, and
they seek power to serve their interests and to prevail over others. As Morgenthau wrote in the
20th century, power is the control of men over the minds and actions of other men. And, there is
constant strife leading to conflicts and clashes between individuals having divergent interests and
seeking to acquire power. Thus, there is an ever-present struggle for power in the society. The
same is the tone of nations that are guided by the same considerations as individuals.
4. E.H. Carr, who himself was a realist, described realists as pessimists, or children of darkness, who
emphasize power and national interest. As Scott Burchill wrote, 'International realism is
characterized by conflict, suspicion, and competition between nation-states.' He also stated,
'Realism is a pessimistic theoretical tradition.
5. In their account of the conflictual nature of international politics, realists give high priority to the
centrality of the nation-state, acknowledging it as the supreme political authority. Realists argue
that states are the most important actors in the international system. They would exclude all other
actors.
6. Fundamental changes to the structure of the international system are unlikely, even if they are
needed. The apparent immutability of the international system means that it will not come to
resemble domestic liberal orders, however desirable the analogue may be.' It is argued that, for
realists, international politics is a world of recurrence and repetition, not reform or radical change.
7. Realism is a school of thought that explains international relations in terms of power. The
exercise of power by states towards each other is often called realpolitik, or just power politics.
8. The security of the state is the primary motivation for a government's actions. An unguarded state
would certainly become the victim of aggression and even assimilations.
ANCIENT REALISTS
A. KAUTILYA
1. The ancient Indian scholar-statesman Kautilya contributed to the origin of realism by making
power the focal point of his theoretical framework.
2. He concentrated on the concept of power in terms of goal attainment, leading to the development
of intricate set of rules whereby a 'conqueror' could maintain and expand his domain.
3. Propaganda, espionage and assassinations were said to be prescribed techniques of control at
home, and of subversion abroad. These ideas may appear cynical, but Kautilya would argue that
he merely accepted the reality of uncontrolled anarchy in international relations.
pf3
pf4
pf5
pf8
pf9
pfa

Partial preview of the text

Download Realism | Study Notes and more Study notes Political Science in PDF only on Docsity!

REALISM

Prominent among its earlier advocates were Indian scholar Kautilya, Chinese strategist Sun Tzu, and Greek scholar Thucydides. Much later, Italian scholar Nicolo Machiavelli and English philosopher Thomas Hobbes also contributed to the evolution of realism. Morgenthau is now considered the principal classical realist.

  1. Realism emerged as a reaction to idealism both in the classical period and in the 20th century, after the First World War, and again during the Cold War. It derives its name from its advocates' belief that they are realistic and look at the world as it is.
  2. Realism emphasizes relations among nations, as they have been and as they are. It is not concerned with the ideal world.
  3. It is the international interpretation of human behaviour. Individuals are essentially selfish, and they seek power to serve their interests and to prevail over others. As Morgenthau wrote in the 20th century, power is the control of men over the minds and actions of other men. And, there is constant strife leading to conflicts and clashes between individuals having divergent interests and seeking to acquire power. Thus, there is an ever-present struggle for power in the society. The same is the tone of nations that are guided by the same considerations as individuals.
  4. E.H. Carr, who himself was a realist, described realists as pessimists, or children of darkness, who emphasize power and national interest. As Scott Burchill wrote, 'International realism is characterized by conflict, suspicion, and competition between nation-states.' He also stated, 'Realism is a pessimistic theoretical tradition.
  5. In their account of the conflictual nature of international politics, realists give high priority to the centrality of the nation-state, acknowledging it as the supreme political authority. Realists argue that states are the most important actors in the international system. They would exclude all other actors.
  6. Fundamental changes to the structure of the international system are unlikely, even if they are needed. The apparent immutability of the international system means that it will not come to resemble domestic liberal orders, however desirable the analogue may be.' It is argued that, for realists, international politics is a world of recurrence and repetition, not reform or radical change.
  7. Realism is a school of thought that explains international relations in terms of power. The exercise of power by states towards each other is often called realpolitik, or just power politics.
  8. The security of the state is the primary motivation for a government's actions. An unguarded state would certainly become the victim of aggression and even assimilations.

ANCIENT REALISTS

A. KAUTILYA

  1. The ancient Indian scholar-statesman Kautilya contributed to the origin of realism by making power the focal point of his theoretical framework.
  2. He concentrated on the concept of power in terms of goal attainment, leading to the development of intricate set of rules whereby a 'conqueror' could maintain and expand his domain.
  3. Propaganda, espionage and assassinations were said to be prescribed techniques of control at home, and of subversion abroad. These ideas may appear cynical, but Kautilya would argue that he merely accepted the reality of uncontrolled anarchy in international relations.
  1. Kautilya defined power derived from three elements: knowledge, military strength and valour.

B. SUN TZU

  1. The Chinese strategist realist Sun Tzu, who lived some two thousand years ago (at the time of idealist Mo Ti), advised the rulers of states on how to survive in an era when war had become a systematic instrument of power.
  2. Sun Tzu argued that moral reasoning was not very useful to the rulers of states that were faced with armed and dangerous neighbours.
  3. He showed rulers how to use power to both advance and protect their interests and to survive.

C. THUCYDIDES

  1. The famous Greek thinker Thucydides saw the inevitable competitions and conflicts between Greek city-states (together known as Hellas) and between Hellas and non-Greek empires, such as Persia and Macadamia.
  2. Aristotle had said that 'man is a political animal'. But, according to Thucydides, political animals are highly unequal in their power, and they conduct themselves accordingly. If states do that they will survive. But if they fail to do that, they may be destroyed. Thucydides stated that justice has special meaning in international relations. It is not about equal treatment for all; it is all about knowing your proper place, about adapting to the reality of unequal power. Thucydides concluded that 'the strong do what they have the power to do and the weak accept what they have to accept.'
  3. Thucydides further stated that before any decision is made, a decision-maker should carefully think about the likely consequences, both bad, as well as good. He emphasized the ethics of caution and prudence in the conduct of foreign policy in a world of great inequality, of restricted foreign policy choices and ever present dangers and opportunities. Thus, foresight, prudence, caution and judgment are all features of classical realism.
  4. Thucydides, like most other realists, was at pains to distinguish between private morality and the principle of justice.
  5. For realists, the reality of international relations is the anarchy of separate states that have no real choice but to operate according to the principles and practices of power politics in which security and survival are primary values and war is the final arbiter.

REALIST OF RENAISSANCE PERIOD MACHIAVELLI

  1. Italian realist scholar Niccolò Machiavelli of the Renaissance period (around AD 1500) asked the princes (rulers) to concentrate on an expedient action to stay in power and to pay attention to war more than anything else.
  2. His classical realist theory is, according to Jackson and Sorensen, 'primarily a theory of survival'. The main responsibility of rulers is always to seek the advantages and to defend the interests of the state and thus ensure its survival.
  3. The leaders of states should be both lions and foxes. The supreme political value is national freedom. As Jackson and Sorensen opine, the Machiavellian assumption is that the world is at the same time a dangerous place and an opportune place, too. The conduct of foreign policy should be based on the intelligent calculation of one's own power and interests as against the power and interests of rivals and competitors.

consideration in international relations, Carr was convinced that the architects of the Versailles peace had set the world on an inevitable course to further conflict.

  1. For Carr, the pursuit of power by individual states took the form of promoting 'national interests', a term later to be more broadly defined as the foreign policy goals of the nation but understood by realists specifically to mean strategic power. Clashes of national interests were inevitable: it was futile and dangerous to suggest otherwise. The only way to minimize such clashes, and, therefore, the incidence of war, was to ensure that a rough balance of power existed between the states in the international system.
  2. Whatever may be its final form, Carr was convinced that a new international order would be shaped by the realities of global power rather than by morality. He was not arguing that morality was an irrelevant consideration. In fact, he believed that international peace was most likely when the dominant power was generally accepted as tolerant and nonoppressive or at any rate, as preferable to any practical alternative. He preferred to stress that 'power is a necessary ingredient of every political order'.
  3. This conviction exposed Carr to critics who claimed he was privileging power and its pursuit by states above all other factors.

B. HANS J MORGENTHAU

  1. He described politics as a struggle for power.
  2. But, for Morgenthau national interest alone made sense in international relations. He believed, 'once you understand a country's national interest, you can easily predict its foreign policy moves'. Morgenthau defined national interest in terms of power. Therefore, it was largely objective and rational.
  3. He reasoned that no nation had 'God on its side', which means that there was no universal morality. Any action of the states should be based on prudence and practicability. In a world where conflicts are perpetual, moral principles can never be fully realized. They can only be approximated through a temporary balancing of interests. Absolute good can never be achieved, but a system of checks and balances can be deduced from historical experience rather than abstract moral or ethical codes.
  4. According to Morgenthau, 'men and women are, by nature, political animals. They are born to pursue power.' Morgenthau wrote in 1948 about animus dominandi, or the human lust for power. The craving for power dictates a search not only for relative advantage but also for a secure political space within which to maintain and enjoy oneself free from the political dictates of the other. Lust for power inevitably brings men and women into conflict with each other. That creates conditions for power politics, which is at the heart of classical and neo-realist writings.
  5. The ultimate political space within which security can be arranged and enjoyed is, of course, the independent state. Security beyond the state is impossible.
  6. In the first chapter of his famous book Politics Among Nations (1948), Morgenthau states that his theory is called realism because it is concerned 'with human nature as it actually is and with the historical processes as they actually take place'. Thus, realism revolves around power politics, which is real and not the utopian idea of world peace through morality and education.
  7. Morgenthau did not endorse the view of American President Wilson who believed that it was necessary for political ethics to be brought in line with private ethics. 'On the other hand', as Morgenthau wrote, 'Realism maintains that universal moral principles cannot be applied to the

actions of the states in their abstract universal formulation, but that they must be filtered through the concrete circumstances of time and place.

  1. For Morgenthau, international politics was a struggle for power between states, and the pursuit of national interest was a normal, unavoidable and desirable activity. He was opposed to the idea of any state's attempt to universalize its own morality and ethical principles. His emphasis was on human nature, which is fixed and should be accepted for what it is rather than what it might be.

Morgenthau's six principles of realism

  1. Politics is governed by objective laws which have their root in human nature. These laws do not change over time and are impervious to human preference. A rational theory of politics and international relations can be based on these laws; in fact any such theory should reflect these objective laws. Following this approach it is possible to distinguish between truth (facts) on one hand and opinion on the other. These laws provide us with certainty and confidence in predicting rational political behaviour.
  2. The key to understanding international politics is the concept of interest defined in terms of power. Reference to this concept enables us to see politics as an autonomous sphere of action. The idea of interest defined in terms of power reveals the true behaviour of politicians and guards us against two popular misconceptions about the determination of a state's foreign policy- the motives of statesmen and ideological preferences. Whilst political leaders will cast their policies in ideological terms (defense of democracy and so on) they are inevitably confronted by the distinction between what is desirable and what is actually possible. There is no room for moral or ethical concerns, prejudice, political philosophy or individual preference in the determination of foreign policy because actions are constrained by the relative power of the state. The 'national interest', which ought to be the sole pursuit of statesmen, is always defined in terms of strategic and economic capability.
  3. The forms and nature of state power will vary in time, place and context but the concept of interest remains consistent. The political, cultural and strategic environment will largely determine the forms of power a state chooses to exercise, just as the types of power which feature in human relationships change over time. In addition, realists ought not to be wedded to a perennial connection between interest and the nation-state which is 'a product of history, and, therefore, bound to disappear'.
  4. Universal 'moral principles' do not guide state behaviour, though state behaviour will certainly have moral and ethical implications. Individuals are influenced by moral codes but states are not moral agents. Any attempt to explain the international behaviour of states should not, therefore, concentrate on the stated moral principles which are said to underpin the conduct of foreign policy. Whereas ethical behaviour is judged according to whether it conforms to a set of moral principles, political behaviour is evaluated according to the political consequences which ensue: there is a tension between moral action and the expedient requirements of political action. Prudential behaviour based on a judicious assessment of the consequences arising out of alternative political choices is the guiding law for realists.
  5. There is no 'universally agreed set of moral principles'. Though states from time to time will endeavour to clothe their behaviour in ethical terms (human rights advocacy), the use of moral language to justify external behaviour is designed to confer advantage, legitimacy and further the
  1. Drawing inspiration from Hegel and others, realists like Morgenthau and Nicholson identified the state as the guardian of the political community. Dunne concludes, 'In order to fulfil this function, the state must pursue the national interest'.

B. Survival

  1. All realists agree that in international politics the most important goal is security. Survival is a precondition for attaining all other goals, whether these involve conquest or welfare of the people and nations' development.
  2. It is essential for leaders of states to distance themselves from traditional morality. For Machiavelli, the principles of morality were positively harmful if observed by the leaders of a state, who, according to him, must aim at power not only to protect but, if necessary, even to conquer others. It was imperative that the statesmen learned a different kind of morality which 'accorded not to traditional Christian values, but to political necessity'.
  3. Power is the tool for ensuring security.

C. Self-Help

  1. Self-help means that each state must take responsibility for its own security and survival. There is no higher power to turn to in times of threat; international law and institutions may exist, but they cannot be depended upon in moments of existential crisis. As a result, states must continuously accumulate and maintain power —military, economic, and strategic—to safeguard themselves.
  2. Realists like Kenneth Waltz emphasize that self-help is not a policy choice but a structural compulsion. In an anarchic system, even well-intentioned states are forced into competitive behavior because uncertainty about others’ intentions makes trust risky. This leads to the security dilemma : when one state increases its power for defensive purposes, others perceive it as a threat and respond in kind, generating cycles of mistrust and arms accumulation.
  3. Self-help also reinforces the realist claim that power is the primary currency of international politics. Since no external guarantor exists, power becomes both the means and the end —it ensures survival and deters potential adversaries. This explains why alliances, though common, are always temporary and interest-based : states enter them not out of trust, but as instruments of self-help.

NEO-REALISM

OFFENSIVE AND DEFENSIVE REALISM Sean Lynn-Jones and Steven E Miller

  1. The primary attention of aggressive realism is centred on security. It believes that states generally do, and should, ensure their security and expand their resources by coercive means. If a state fails to do so, then other states would use coercive means and expand their power. The country that loses this opportunity has its security threatened and endangered and may often lose its resources. In case of aggressive realism, offensive military activities are increased, and international rivalry is encouraged.
  1. On the other hand, states that believe infinite security exists in the international system adopt defensive strategy in their policies. The countries that believe in defensive realism emphasize on maintaining their security and do not adopt coercive means for enlargement of their resources. The defensive realist countries try to maintain only as much military capability as to ensure their minimum credible deterrent power. The aggressive or offensive realist countries thus, on the other hand, adopt the strategy that would continue to maximize their military capability.
  2. The defensive realist state, on the other hand, is happy and content if its territorial integrity and sovereignty is well protected. It feels that there is no need to increase its military potential and power. The defensive realist state is satisfied with minimum credible deterrent, as is the case with India's nuclear policy.
  3. But aggressive realism does not hesitate in making use of force on its own initiative, as was evident in America's Iraq policy pursued by President George W. Bush.

STRUCTUAL Kenneth Waltz

  1. Neo-realism, advocated mainly by Kenneth Waltz in his book Theory ofInternational Politics (1979), is also known as 'structural realism'. Neo-realism of Kenneth Waltz is both a critique of traditional realism and a substantial intellectual extension of a theoretical tradition which was in danger of being outflanked by rapid changes in world politics.
  2. Waltz' theory focuses centrally on the structure of international system, on its interacting units and the continuities and changes of the system. Waltz takes some elements of traditional or classical realism as the starting point of his theory.
  3. But he departs and, unlike Morgenthau, gives no account of human nature. He ignores the ethics of statecraft. He has tried to present a scientific theory of international relations.
  4. In neo-realism, the structure of the system, in particular the relative distribution of power is the central focus of analysis. Actors (states) are less important because structures compel them to act in certain ways. The structures, more or less, determine actions of the states and their leaders. Waltz insists on anarchical international system, which is decentralized. In the anarchical world, several transnational economic actors threaten to undermine the authority of the states.
  5. Kenneth Waltz insists that in order to understand the behaviour of the international system, we have to start with the system and then move down to individual actors rather than the other way round. This is in contrast to realists like Morgenthau who laid emphasis on innate human nature and then proceeded to build the classical realist theory.
  6. This neo-realist theory is based on the assumption that international system is essentially anarchical and that, in such anarchical system, states are primarily interested in their survival. In order to ensure their survival the states have to maximize power, particularly their military capability. Hence, the will of the states to maximize their power to the point of securing a dominant position becomes an enduring feature of international relations and conflict endemic.
  7. In Waltz's theory there is an implied recognition of the ethical dimension of international politics. Waltz operates with a concept of state sovereignty. But, for him, all states are equal only in a formal-legal sense. Actually, they are unequal in a substantive or material sense. Waltz also assumes that states are worth fighting for. That too indicates that neo-realism is all for security and survival.

just by anarchy, but by colonial histories, economic dependency, and intervention by powerful states.

4. State weakness and legitimacy crisis

Unlike the strong, consolidated states imagined in realism, many post-colonial states face fragile legitimacy, ethnic fragmentation, and contested nationhood. This means the state is not always a unified actor pursuing national interest, but often a site of internal conflict. As a result, security is as much internal as external, if not more.

  1. One of the defining features of post-colonial realism is the shift from external to internal security threats. In many Third World states, the primary dangers do not arise from foreign invasion but from civil wars, insurgencies, separatist movements, and political instability. This fundamentally alters the realist priority of survival. Survival is not only about protecting borders but about maintaining domestic order and regime stability. Governments often allocate significant resources to policing, counterinsurgency, and intelligence rather than conventional interstate warfare. Internal insecurity is also tied to colonial legacies —arbitrary borders, divided ethnic groups, and extractive institutions. These create persistent instability, meaning that the state’s pursuit of power is frequently directed inward. In such contexts, the line between national security and regime security becomes blurred , with ruling elites sometimes prioritizing their own survival over that of the broader political community.
  2. Mohammad Ayub introduces the concept of the “Third World security predicament” to explain how security in post-colonial states differs from the traditional realist model. Ayub argues that, unlike in the developed world where state formation is largely complete, Third World states are still in the process of nation-building. As a result, their main security challenge is not external anarchy but internal consolidation. These states face what he calls a “predicament” because they must simultaneously: build national identity, establish political legitimacy, maintain territorial integrity, all under conditions of economic weakness and external pressure.
  3. This creates a paradox: while realism emphasizes external threats and balance of power, Third World states are often more threatened by internal disintegration than by foreign enemies. However, external actors can exacerbate these internal vulnerabilities through intervention, proxy conflicts, or economic influence.