Neorealism (international relations)
Neorealism is a theoretical framework in international relations that analyzes and predicts the behavior of nation-states based on their pursuit of self-interest in an anarchic global system. Pioneered by Kenneth Waltz in his 1979 work "Theory of International Politics," neorealism posits that there is no overarching authority governing states, which allows them to act independently, often masking their pursuit of national interests with moral justifications. A key assumption of neorealism is that power is unevenly distributed among states, influencing their interactions and decisions. This school of thought draws from classical realism but distinguishes itself by focusing more on the anarchic structure of international relations rather than human nature as the source of conflict.
In the neorealist perspective, nations are in a constant quest for power, be it military, economic, or diplomatic, and the relative strength of states significantly impacts their actions and security strategies. Neorealism emphasizes a more scientific, behaviorist approach to understanding these dynamics, asserting that all states act rationally within the constraints of their power. This framework highlights the competitive nature of international politics, where weaker states often band together to counterbalance stronger nations, illustrating the complexities of global interdependence and rivalry. Overall, neorealism is a foundational theory that continues to shape discussions and analyses of international relations today.
On this Page
Subject Terms
Neorealism (international relations)
Neorealism is a school of thought used for analyzing, explaining, and predicting international affairs. It was first defined and pioneered by the political theorist Kenneth Waltz in his 1979 publication Theory of International Politics.
According to neorealism, all nation-states act in their own best interest at all times. While they may appear to act for moral reasons, these are simply a cover for pursuing national interests. Neorealism assumes that there is no overarching authority governing these nations, and that they are free to pursue their interests in whatever manner they choose. It also assumes that power is unevenly balanced between nation-states, and this heavily influences their actions.
Neorealism draws its roots from classical realism. The two are similar but have several key differences. These include the cause of conflict between nation-states, views on nation-states as forms of government, and philosophical versus scientific attitudes toward analyzing international relations.
Background
Neorealism in international relations developed as a secondary development of realism. A realist approach to international relations does not focus on any type of ideals. Instead, realism focuses on interactions between nation-states. It assumes that each nation-state will act in its best interests and not out of moral concern. However, it does acknowledge that some states will disguise pursuing their national interests as pursuing moral concerns.
Realist philosophy argues that most nations are constantly in search of additional power. However, it notes that absolute power is fictional. Instead, power should be defined by comparing a nation with its peers. If two nations are equally powerful, then neither is powerful. However, if one nation is significantly stronger than another, one nation is powerful while the other is weak.
Political realists prefer the decentralized authority inherent in a multistate system. They argue that numerous competing nation-states cause diversity and development. In an ideal realist system, competition drives development in a similar manner to a capitalist economy. For this reason, such nation-states fear higher authorities. Empire-style governments stifle competition, stopping nations from pursuing power with the single-minded efficiency of an independent government. According to a realist, this also stifles progress.
Realism as a defined school of political thought began in the middle of the twentieth century. It was extremely influential, and quickly became a common means of predicting and interpreting international political events. In 1979, political theorist Kenneth Waltz published his book Theory of International Politics. Waltz's work divided the popular styles of realist political philosophy into two schools: classical realism and neorealism. This was the first time neorealism was defined as a school of political thought regarding international relations. While the two groups were similar, there were significant differences between them. Over time, classical realism was superseded by neorealism.
Overview
Neorealism works under the assumption of several constants. The first of these is that the world exists in a constant state of anarchy. In this context, anarchy does not refer to a total lack of laws or operating procedures. Instead, it means that nation-states exist in an anarchic state in which they exercise their own sovereignty. In this scenario, there can be no powerful overarching government imposing laws on the actions of nations. While nations may impose laws on their own territories, they must be able to act without answering to a specific higher authority.
The second tenet of neorealism is that power is not distributed equally among the states in an international environment. In this context, power can be interpreted in a number of ways. It can refer to economic power, military might, diplomatic prowess, or other forms of influence. All that matters is that the relative power between nations varies significantly.
According to neorealist thinking, these variations in power are what truly drive the actions of nation-states. It is in the national interest of every state to amass power in some form. However, even in an anarchistic international arena, severe variations of power impose limits on the actions of nations. For example, a nation with a weak military will not attack a nation with a large military. Similarly, when one nation supports the economy of another, the supporting nation gains significant influence over the supported nation.
Neorealism does not view these actions in a negative light. According to neorealist theory, nations that wish to stay secure in a system without an overarching authority should pay careful attention to the limits imposed by imbalances in power. Nations with more power can keep their power secure by intentionally imposing limits on weaker nations. They may be able to leverage their power over weaker nations to secure more power. Nations with less power need to stay within the bounds of their limits, because openly challenging stronger nations could result in the loss of the limited power they have. Fear of such reprisals can cause small nations to band together, combining their resources to allow them to openly challenge stronger nations.
Neorealism diverges from classical realism in several ways. According to classical realism, power imbalances, war, and conflict can be attributed to human nature. If humans were more perfect, such imbalances would not exist. However, according to neorealism, these imbalances exist because of the anarchistic international environment. In classical realism, the state is inherently the most superior system. In neorealism, there is no assumption that the state is superior. In classical realism, some nation-states function as enforcements of the status quo. These nations are usually the most powerful states, or states who benefit from the current system. Other nations act as revisionist powers, who seek to upset the status quo. In neorealism, all nation-states are assumed to be acting in their own self-interest. Theorists draw no distinctions between various states. Finally, neorealism takes a more scientific attitude than its classical predecessor. It has been influenced by behaviorism and other schools of psychology.
Bibliography
"Anarchy in International Relations Theory: The Neorealist-Neoliberal Debate." International Organization, vol. 48, no. 2, Spring 1994, pp. 313–44, pdfs.semanticscholar.org/5f8d/839490bab5319111bb19d78c6e16c2b62fcd.pdf. Accessed 6 Mar. 2018.
Art, Robert, and Robert Jervis. "Kenneth Waltz and His Legacy." Foreign Affairs, 22 May 2013, www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2013-05-22/kenneth-waltz-and-his-legacy. Accessed 6 Mar. 2018.
"Comparing and Contrasting Classical Realism and Neorealism." E-International Relations, 23 July 2009, www.e-ir.info/2009/07/23/comparing-and-contrasting-classical-realism-and-neo-realism/. Accessed 6 Mar. 2018.
"History and Neorealism." Times Higher Education, 21 Oct. 2010, www.timeshighereducation.com/books/history-and-neorealism/413906.article. Accessed 6 Mar. 2018.
Jakobsen, Jo. "Neorealism in International Relations – Kenneth Waltz." Popular Social Science, www.popularsocialscience.com/2013/11/06/neorealism-in-international-relations-kenneth-waltz/. Accessed 6 Mar. 2018.
McKeown, Timothy. "Neorealism." Oxford Bibliographies, 19 May 2017, www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780199743292/obo-9780199743292-0037.xml. Accessed 6 Mar. 2018.
Mearsheimer, John J. "Structural Realism, University of Chicago, 31 July 2006, mearsheimer.uchicago.edu/pdfs/StructuralRealism.pdf. Accessed 6 Mar. 2018.
"Political Realism." Mount Holyoke, www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/pol116/realism.htm. Accessed 6 Mar. 2018.