The specificity of international relations is that they have an anarchic character. Each participant is guided primarily by its own interests performing its actions. National interests are the main category of the theory of political realism. The main motive and key stimulus policies in the international arena are the stability and prosperity of the country. In international relations, there is no supreme authority, which would have a monopoly on legitimate violence. Therefore, the basic principle of the behavior of states in the world is the principle of self-help. I do my term paper for me and try to analyze all the aspects of this issue.
Anarchic environment actions are based on the state interests even if they conflict with the interests of other states that are participants of international relations. This means that according to the theory of political realism, the main international process is an interstate conflict, and extreme form of its manifestation is the war.
According to Aron, the specificity of international relations is that they are deployed in the shadow of war. Realists recognize that conflicts are not the only kind of international processes, however, emphasize the secondary role of cooperation in relation to the conflict. According to realist point of view, an ideal international cooperation is the military, military-political alliances, and alliances formed by the States to provide the common defense (Aron 2003).
The state of peace between the nations is ideal for all times, but when it is possible to achieve a long-term stability of international relations, it is important to remember that it is a temporary state.
The anarchic nature of international relations suggests that they are full of dangers and threats for the public interest. That is why the main goal of the state in international politics is to ensure its own safety. The great powers have great resources but the countries that have them can never feel safe and are constantly striving to build up their own resources and improve their quality (Donnelly).
In this case, the most important resource of the state is the power that is understood in the broadest sense as a military and economic power of the state and a guarantee of maximum security and prosperity. This power provides fame and prestige to the country and gives an opportunity to spread the state’s ideological and spiritual values. But the main feature of the power is the ability to control the behavior of other participants of international relations.
That is why each state tries to build up its strength. By doing so, it violates the security of other states that are trying to catch up, and then surpass the power of a leading state. The race for safety takes the form of a vicious circle in which the states develop in the process of competition with each other.
The notion of balance of power develops out of the growing volumes of power that are centered in every state that participates in international relations. The main objective of the balance of power is to prevent the domination of the international system or a group of states (Little). The balance of power is one of the key concepts in the theory of political realism and neorealist. Representatives of these paradigms consider it as the way to stabilize the international system, the foundation of the international order and security (Little). Theorists of international relations constructed a typology of international systems on the basis of political realism, including six types of systems. One of them is the system of balance of power (Little).
Realists have formulated six main principles of the realism in international relations including the fact that policies have freedom of action and strive to achieve the most rational decisions. The next fact is that politicians think and act according to the interests of the state. The essence of world politics is the struggle of sovereign states for their national interests. Moral principles cannot be applied in relations between the states (Donnelly). The main thing is the results. The actions of other nations should be judged by the same moral principles as the actions of the nation. The state is completely autonomous in the questions of economics and law. The sole purpose of the policy is to increase the strength of the country in the international arena and demonstrate its power (Donnelly).
One of the examples that challenge the theory is that morality cannot be taken into account in the sphere of international relations. The states act only in accordance with their own interests that can contrast the interests of other countries, which might lead to the international conflicts and even war.
The historical example of such actions is the war in Iraq that vividly showed the violation of several principles of realism. It is possible to observe the facts which smack of realism in President Bush’s speech that became the declaring of war towards Iraq.
By announcing the inevitability of war, President Bush justified the military attack on Iraq, the danger that the country will pose to the United States in the future. “We are taking action now because inaction could pose a much greater danger – President Bush said. – In a year or in five years, the risk of inaction may be higher and will increase Iraq’s ability to cause harm to other countries”. This is one of the clearest passages in which it is possible to observe that President Bush acts in the interests of his own country (Mockaitis).
The leading principle of realism in the sphere of international relations is presented in the words of the President as he points out the major importance of his country’s interests over the interests of other countries.
The declaration of war in the speech of President Bush gives a number of examples that have a meaning of realism.
Bush also declared that “The United States has the sovereign right to use force to ensure its national security”. The literal meaning of this statement is that the United States rejects any limitations on the part of the international community regarding the use of military force to achieve their goals (Mockaitis). The war is the best way to demonstrate the country’s power and show the rest of the world that the balance of power is still not reachable because of the weakness and lack of power of other countries. The war meant to establish the basic principles but the problem of morality was not the leading one while the amount of forces presented a significant proof of the military power.
The theory of realism sets a number of principles that characterize it and it is possible to observe them in the international policies of many countries. The most vivid example of such politics is presented in the President Bush’s speech and the declaration of war against Iraq. The interests of the country should be achieved by any possible way and war is the best way to produce an image of a powerful country. The demonstration of military forces and arms has a great impact and form an image of the US as the most powerful country of the present.
Works Cited
Aron, Raymond. Peace and War: A Theory of International Relations. New Brunswick: Transactions Publishers, 2003. Print.
Donnelly, Jack. Realism and International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. Print.
Little, Richard. The Balance of Power in International Relations: Metaphors, Myths, and Models. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007. Print.
Mockaitis, Thomas R. The Iraq War: A Documentary and Reference Guide. Santa Barbara, Calif.: Greenwood, 2012. Print.
