Understanding Global Politics Student ID : 4173829

Understanding Global Politics __________________________________________________ 2. What are the main differences between classical and neo realism? Your answer should make reference to Morgenthau and Waltz

University of Nottingham School of Politics and International Relations Student ID: 4173829 Word Count: 1490 Date: 15th of November 2011

Understanding Global Politics Student ID : 4173829

2. What are the main differences between classical and neo realism? Your answer should make reference to Morgenthau and Waltz The intellectual roots of realists can be traced to the classic account of the Peloponnesian War by Thucydides in the fifth-century BC. However, it was not until the 1930s when the concepts of classical realists were strongly highlighted by E.H Carr when he argued with the Idealists on how to deal with Nazi Germany. Although Carrs views have stayed significant, Hans Morgenthau came to have the most influence on classical realism and his book Politics Amongst Nations enjoyed intellectual domination over the realm . Despite the fact that classical realism had been predominant during much of this time, the theory was inept to clarify the events that had occurred in the Cold War. This led to the advent of a neo realist school of thought by Kenneth Waltz who introduced a systematic and scientific realism in his book Theory of International Politics. The theory of neo realism sought to strengthen and clarify the concepts of realism by looking at international relations from a more methodological perspective and as a result, improved conclusions could be attained. Although there are various differences between the two realist theories, this essay will focus on the three significant disparities which are the properties of power, the role of human nature and the conditions of international order. There is a substantial disparity on how classical and neo realists view the connection between world politics and human nature. The basis of state behaviour in classical realism is human nature. According to classicists, politics is a representation of mans behaviour and subject to the same methods.1 This can be clearly seen in realist writings such as Hans Morgenthaus,

Dunne, T. et al. (2007) International Relations Theories: Discipline and Diversity, New York: Oxford University Press, p.55. 2

Understanding Global Politics Student ID : 4173829

the social world [is] but a projection of human nature onto the collective plane.2Therefore, classicists believe that human nature is the source of conflict. Hobbes furthers this idea by emphasizing that the desire to invade for safety, reputation and gain are the foundations of human nature which ultimately leads to conflict. Neo-realists, on the other hand, have an entirely altered view on both the concepts of human nature and the causes of conflict. According to neo realists, human nature has no significance in analysing international politics and is instead substituted by the existence of anarchy. Anarchy as a concept in realism is seen as the state of the international structure, in which each state is a sovereign entity and there is an absence of political authority. Waltz rejected the role of human nature because an anarchic system is viewed as the basis of state behaviour3. Due to this, no state can foresee the future and thus they will have to adapt to unfamiliar situations. This concept of neo realists highlights that human nature can be characterized as an individual variable amongst all people, and if human nature mirrors the actions of the state, then identical actions will be observed within all nations. Waltz provided an example that is if the cause of war in 1914 was human nature then by the same understanding it was also the cause of peace in 1910.4 Therefore the existence of human nature becomes a flaw in the classical realist concept, as states respond in a different manner to an equivalent set of conditions. Both of the realist schools highlight that power is significant to the continued existence of the state in the global anarchic arena. Morgenthau argued the idea that power is the very essence of human existence5 and that international politics is all about the struggle for power. The classicist theory and goal is to obtain the maximum power capability possible. For classical realists, power is an end in itself while for neo realists its a means to an end. Due to the fact
Morgenthau, H. (1973) Politics Among Nations, New York: Alfred A. Knopf Inc, p.7. Waltz, K. (1959) Man, the State and War,2nd ed. New York: Columbia University Press, p.28. 4 Brown, C. (2009) Structural Realism, Classical Realism and Human Nature, International Relations, 23(2), p.13. 5 Morgenthau, H. (1973) Politics Among Nations, New York: Alfred A. Knopf Inc, p.63.
3 2

Understanding Global Politics Student ID : 4173829

that neo realist theory sets its foundations on a global anarchic arena, the main goal of a state is for its continued existence and not power. The schools of thought also argue on the extent of power a state must desire. While classical realists strive to be all powerful due to their belief in human nature as a source of behaviour, there is a difference within the school of neo realism itself. The neo realists are divided into defensive and offensive through which both argue what the maximum power required. Defensive realists argue that a state must not pursue domination as it rather makes the state less secure while offensive realists maintain that to be the most secure and to ensure survival, states must seek hegemonic goals. Classical realists also believe in the idea that power can be classified in relation to military strength. However, the neo realists observe this to be a flaw in the overall measure of power . The neo-realist theory of power states that military power is significant to the continued existence of the nation but there must also be a consideration of economic factors in order to measure how powerful a state is. Neo realism further states the idea that each state has its own unique power system relative to its military strength and its resources. The addition of economic resources to the concept of power gives attention to other nations who had been unacknowledged in the past due to their weaker military power. An example of todays global world could be of Kuwait which even though is oil rich country is weaker to the United Kingdom in terms of military power. However, Kuwait has a huge impact over the United Kingdom oil markets and of its allies which could possibly be a restraint for these two countries to ever engage in war. There are clear differences in the manner, both classical and neo realists offer their own explanation of international relations. Classical realistic believe in the constant environment of anarchy wherein it is necessary for the empowerment of the state so for it to survive. This however must take into account the feature of human nature in classicist theory and thus

Understanding Global Politics Student ID : 4173829

classical realists observe the necessity of logical leadership as a method to empower the state using military power. The utilization of military power does not necessary mean that a state is preparing itself for a war but it is rather assuring and securing its own survival. If this concept is further analysed, it can be seen that the method of military build- up creates a domino effect where another state would also prepare for strong military capability to secure itself. The neo realists present a concept named self-help which means that nations with identical aims will ally with each other in order to build an alliance which would secure survival. The development of these collective power bases could be in challenge to the presence of a dominating force which challenges the survival of various states. The concept however states that nations must only be concerned with its own survival and not that of the collective power base. In regards to the international system, neo realists argue that the structure is the explanation that can be provided in order to explain how states act in the way they do. Waltz argues that the anarchic global area leads to international politics 6. He further establishes his point by mentioning history will repeat itself as the anarchic system will cause various nations to behave in identical ways when put into identical circumstances. In the analysis of international relations, this saying is unanimously relevant, theory is always for someone, and for some purpose7. Classical realists, post WW1 tried to put in a new outlook to the events while neo realism was utilized to provide an explanation of the Cold War events. In Conclusion, it has been highlighted that both theories have similar concepts such as power, sovereignty and anarchy. However there are also key differences which lie in the fundamentals and the methods these theories utilize. The global world is developing and changing swiftly which will undoubtedly mean new theories would be
Keohane, R. (1986) ) Realism, Neorealism and the Study of World Politics in Neorealism and its Critics, New York: Columbia University Press, p.14. 7 Cox, R. (1981) Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory, Millennium : Journal of International Studies10, 10(2), p.128. 5
6

Understanding Global Politics Student ID : 4173829

developed and older theories such as realism will further progress. What is significant to understand however, is the idea that these theories by Morgenthau and Waltz are a reflection of the events during their time when nations were engaged in various wars and other conflicts.

Understanding Global Politics Student ID : 4173829

Bibliography
Brown, C. (2009) Structural Realism, Classical Realism and Human Natur, International Relations, 23(2). Baylis, J. et al. (2001) The Globalization of World Politics, 2rd Edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Cox, R. (1981) Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory, Millennium : Journal of International Studies, 10(2). Dunne, T. et al. (2007) International Relations Theories: Discipline and Diversity, New York: Oxford University Press. Keohane, R. (1986) ) Realism, Neorealism and the Study of World Politics in Neorealism and its Critics, New York: Columbia University Press Morgenthau, H. (1973) Politics Among Nations, New York: Alfred A. Knopf Inc. Waltz, K. (1959) Man, the State and War,2nd ed. New York: Columbia University Press.

Waltz, K. (1986) Neorealism and Its Critics, New York: Columbia University Press.