Realism

what is a state

• A state is a political + legal entity, with certain characteristics, it is The most important actor- what they do largely determines what happens in global politics

what do some argue about the power of the state

 it is in decline + other actors (IGOs, regional organisations) are becoming more important

key characteristics of a state

1. Clearly defined territory- a border that defines it geographically

2. Permanent population (citizens)

3. Central govt that controls how the state is run

4. Sovereignty- freedom from outside interference

5. Recognition by other states (accepting sovereignty)

6. Monopoly over the legitimate use of force within their borders (only they have a police force, army, etc)

States aren’t the same as nations?

Some will overlap but many states contain multiple national groups, there are cultural identities (religion, language, customs, etc). They may see themselves as distinct from the state. This can create tension

what type of world view does realism have?

 a pessimistic world view- see the world as unsafe, uncertain, unpredictable

as a result of the realism world view, what must states do?

states must seek power + security - you can never have too much power

what type of system is the world in the eyes of realism?

• It’s a self-help system- you cannot rely on others, so must seek autonomy (self-reliance)

according to realism what is the only way states can act?

 in their national interest, rather than ‘moralising’ (seeking to spread their own ideas/ world view

what does realism see global politics as?

 a ‘war of all against all’ as there is no overarching authority

realism beliefs around international anarchy?

• Realists believe that nation states are the most legitimate + powerful actors in global politics in a system of international anarchy, where there is no higher authority that can control states

realism, international anarchy + sovereignty

• Authority of IGOs should be limited, so as to not restrict N-S sovereignty. N-S may choose to work w others, but don’t abandon self-interest

realism, international anarchy + self-reliance

• Global anarchy means states must be self-reliant, not dependent on others for protection. This creates a security dilemma

realism, international anarchy + states are rational

• This means their main priority is defending their national interests + particularly security

realism, international anarchy + power maximisers (zero-sum view)

• All states are constantly trying to increase their power + influence (often, but not always, at the expense of others)

realism, international anarchy + competition + comflict

Natural global order is one of competition. This often causes conflict, as states come into conflict w each other

key principles of international anarchy according to realism?

sovereignty

self-reliance

states are rational

power maximisers (zero-sum view)

competition + conflict

Implications of international anarchy

IGOs such as the EU + the UN will be limited in their impact + effectiveness.

Unlike national law, rules in global politics (international law) doesn’t always apply.

States will also want to prevent IGOs from making decisions that aren’t in their national interest.

International courts may be ignored or may not have decisive powers to investigate at all.

why IGOs such as the EU + the UN will be limited in their impact + effectiveness due to international anarchy?

because states determine the success or failure of these international efforts. States have created IGOs, + IGOs ultimately serve state interests (when they no longer to this, they collapse- such as the League of Nations- or states leave, as seen in Brexit)

how Unlike national law, rules in global politics (international law) doesn’t always apply under international anarchy?

In an anarchical world system, no international body can force states to sign up to international law. Customary international law, which in theory applies too states regardless of whether or not they have signed + ratified a law, does exist for abuses of humanitarian law. The Geneva conventions for e.g. are cons to Mary international law + apply to all states, but the decision to enforce the law is ultimately the political decision of international bodies, i.e. the UN, or individual, esp powerful states

where is it often seen that States will also want to prevent IGOs from making decisions that aren’t in their national interest under international anarchy?

in the veto powers that the 5 UNSC permanent members (china, France, Russia, UK, + USA) wield, which frequently prevent coordinated action on matters ranging from Israel + Palestine conflict to the Syrian civil war

where it is seen that International courts may be ignored or may not have decisive powers to investigate at all under international anarchy

The international criminal court (ICC) has limited powers to hold states to account for the most serious crimes against humanity. In reality tho, the states that haven’t fully agreed to the ICC’s founding Rome statute are able to escape justice, as there is no authoritative global force to bring states + those responsible for international crime before the court. The ECtHR (European court of human rights) experiences similar difficulties 

Examples that show an anarchical world order in action

the Iraq War 2003

China + Taiwan

Russian annexation of Crimea 2014

War in Afghanistan 2001-14

Syrian Civil War 2011

Brexit 2016

how the Iraq War 2003 shows an anarchical world order in action

• Countries acting in national interest- rational defence on security based on fears on WMD

• Ignores UN/ collective approach

• Didn’t want to rely on international system for protection

how China + Taiwan shows an anarchical world order in action

• Seeking to maximise power through control of resources (micro ships)

• All abt sovereignty - who recognises chine + who doesn’t

• Security dilemma- has caused USA to build up military in pacific

• Increased military presence (risk of conflict)

how Russian annexation of Crimea 2014 shows an anarchical world order in action

• Maximising power through territory + strategic port at Sevastopol

• Acting in national interest -as a warning to other neighbours

• Unilateral - in defiance of international law

• As part of wider competition w NATO

how War in Afghanistan 2001-14 shows an anarchical world order in action

• USA/UK acted unilaterally w/out UN backing

• Intervention in order to protect national interest in War on Terror

• Self-reliance- couldn’t rely on Afghanistan’s rules (Taliban) to not harbour terrorists intent on attacking West (Al-Qaeda)

how Syrian Civil War 2011 shows an anarchical world order in action

• Use of chemical weapons in violation of international law

• Assad argues he represents the state, so can maintain security against ‘terrorists’ by any means

• Russia exploiting as an opportunity to extend power + has vetoed any UN involvement

• Lack of coordinated action- states unwilling to intervene- as it is not in our national interest + could make things worse

how Brexit 2016 shows an anarchical world order in action

• ‘take back control’= arguments over sovereignty - trade deals, EU| law, control of immigration etc

• Competitive negotiating stance- ‘drive a hard bargain’

• Nationalist rhetoric of GB as great country- maximise influence or reverse decline

• Self-reliance- want to strike our own global trade deals, contempt for multilateral institutions