“Power” man’s control over the minds and actions of other men

Relational Power – directed towards something or someoneRelative Power – considers the other actors

capabilities“Survival” precondition for attaining other goalsAnarchic” absence of an overarching central

authority

Proponents of “Raison de tat” Dual Moral StandardsOne Moral Standard for individual

citizens living inside the stateDifferent standard for the state in

its external relations with other states

Thucydides: Peloponnesian War International Law is driven by an

endless struggle for power that has its roots in human nature

Median Dialogue: The strong will do what it has the power to do and the weak accept what it has to accept

Machiavelli: The Prince Political realism recognizes that principles are subordinate to policies

The end justifies the means It is better to be feared than loved

Morgenthau: Politics among nations Politics is governed by laws that are created by human nature

The main signpost of political realism is the concept of interest defined in terms of power

Thucydides Representation of power politics as a law of human behavior

Drive for power and will to dominate are held to be fundamental aspects of human nature

Human Nature explains International Politics

Nature for man: competition, fear, and war explained

The Struggle for belonging, a struggle is often violent

Rousseu: The State of War It is not human nature but the

anarchical system that factors fear, jealousy, suspicion

Waltz: Theory of International Politics States maximize their securities Polarities: unipolarity, bipolarity,

multipolarityMersheimer: Tragedy of great power

States maximize their powers

Security competition and inter-state conflict to the lack of an overarching authority above states that have relative distribution of power in the international system

Waltz-> security maximizers Mersheimer-> no satisfied status quo: he

argues that states recognizes that the best path to peace is to accumulate more power

Bipolarity-> nuclear weapons to preserve peace

Multipolarity->competition

Zakaria: From Wealth to Power Actions of States can be explained by:

▪ Systematic variables▪ Cognitive variables▪ Domestic variables

Bring individual and unit variation back into the theory

One important intervening variables is leaders themselves namely how they perceive the international distribution of power

STATISM sovereign states are the primary

actorsSURVIVAL

the pre-condition for attaining all other goals

SELF-HELP No other state can be relied on

Relationships: Zero-sum (Relative gains) My gain is your loss Characterized by competition

Concentration of economic controls and planning in the hands of highly centralized government often extending to government ownership of industry

Distinguishing trait= “sovereignty” State has supreme authority to make and enforce laws

Moves of the state▪Organize power domestically▪Accumulate power internationally

State power is challenged from above and below

States are unable to respond to collective global problems

Realism does not explain the existence of non-state actors

The pre-eminent goal in international politics

This involves conquest or merely independenceDEFENSIVE OFFENSIVE

Kenneth Waltz Who? John MersheimerSecurity Goal of State? Power

The existence of status quo powers

lessens the competition for power

What now? Competition is always present

Dual Moral Standard One moral standard for an individual

citizens living inside the state and a different moral standard for the state in its external relations with other states

Ethnic Responsibility Machiavelli Individual acts of an immoral kind might

have to be performed for the greater good

Are there no limits to what actions a state can take in the name of the greater

good?

Under anarchy, security can only be realized through self-help

Security dilemma (Spiral of power)Absence of trust in international

relationsDOMESTIC POLITY INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM

Citizens do not have to defend themselves

There is no higher authority to prevent and counter the use of force

Self-help is not an inevitable consequence of anarchy

Historical and contemporary security examples where:

▪ States have preferred collective security systems or forms of regional security systems

▪ NATO, UN with a common goal of security