Realism Theory

Realism Theory is a paradigm that explains international relations in terms of states’ struggle for power and argues that in an anarchic international system, every state prioritizes its own security and interests. According to this approach, conflict on the international stage is inevitable and states act as rational actors driven by the goal of survival. Realism, one of the major paradigms of International Relations, stands out due to the depth of its historical origins, theoretical consistency, and explanatory capacity. This theoretical framework posits that sovereign states are the fundamental and rational actors in the international system.^【1】 According to Realism, the ontological priority of these actors is to consolidate their national security, protect their vital interests, and maximize their relative power. From a realist perspective, states operate within an anarchic international structure devoid of any overarching authority. This structural condition necessitates a self-help system, which by its very nature transforms international politics into a domain of perpetual competition, unpredictability, and potential conflict.^【2】

Historical Background

The realist paradigm interprets not only the modern international system but also historical processes stretching from Thucydides’ account of the Peloponnesian War to the present through its conceptual apparatus.^【3】 Phenomena such as the formation and dissolution of alliances, the outbreak of wars, diplomatic crises, mercantilist policies, and struggles for hegemony are interpreted as historical manifestations of power politics, central to realist theory. Classical Realism, grounded in a pessimistic anthropological assumption about human nature—the Hobbesian view that “man is a wolf to man”—argues that states, like individuals, are by nature selfish (egoistic) and driven by the pursuit of power.^【4】

Thucydides, one of the early thinkers of Realist Theory (Generated by Artificial Intelligence).

In the twentieth century, the hegemonic position of realism within the discipline was solidified by the historical failure of the idealist paradigm that dominated the period after World War I. Idealism, shaped by the vision of Woodrow Wilson to construct a peaceful world order through international law, collective security, and moral norms, lost its predictive and explanatory power in the 1930s amid rising aggression and the outbreak of World War II. The devastation caused by the war demonstrated that state behavior could not be constrained solely by normative and legal frameworks and that an analytical framework centered on power was necessary to understand the dynamics of international politics. At this historical turning point, thinkers such as E.H. Carr positioned Realism as a “realistic” alternative to the “utopianism” of Idealism, gaining academic and political credibility.

Principles of Realism Theory

Realist thinkers viewed idealist approaches as lacking a scientific foundation and inadequate for understanding the nature of international politics. Modern Realism, built upon this critical foundation, was systematized particularly through Hans J. Morgenthau’s work Politics Among Nations. Morgenthau formulated Realism around six fundamental principles. According to his formulation, international politics is subject to objective and universal laws rooted in the unchanging characteristics of human nature.

The six core principles of Morgenthau’s Classical Realism theory can be summarized as follows:^【5】

1. Objective Laws: Politics is governed by objective laws derived from human nature. Understanding these laws enables the development of a rational theory of foreign policy.
2. Interest Defined as Power: The key concept in realist theory is “interest,” defined as “power.” Statesmen act in accordance with this interest, and analysts of foreign policy must evaluate their actions through this lens.
3. Universality and Variability of Interest: While the concept of interest defined as power has universal validity, its content and meaning may vary according to political and cultural context.
4. Distinction Between Morality and Politics: Realism acknowledges the moral dimension of political action but argues that universal moral principles cannot be directly applied to state behavior. For statesmen, the highest virtue is not adherence to abstract moral rules but prudence—the ability to anticipate the political consequences of actions.
5. Autonomous Political Sphere: Realism defends the autonomy of the political realm. When evaluating state actions, political standards—the impact on state power—should take precedence over legal, moral, or economic criteria.
6. State-Centrism: The sovereign state is the primary and most important actor in the international system. Non-state actors such as international organizations, multinational corporations, or civil society groups occupy a secondary role in relation to the power and interests of states.

According to these principles, Realism envisions the international system as a scene of unchanging power struggles throughout human history. In this struggle, the most rational behavior for states is to prioritize national interests and effectively employ all military, diplomatic, and economic means to achieve them. According to Realism, history is not a record of peaceful ideals but of the pursuit of power and the inevitable conflicts it generates.

Modern Development of Realism Theory

Over time, realist theory has diversified internally into various sub-schools. A fundamental distinction has emerged based on levels of analysis:

• Classical Realism (Morgenthau): Attributes the root causes of conflict and power struggles to the human desire for power (animus dominandi) (First Level of Analysis).
• Structural Realism or Neorealism (Kenneth Waltz): Locates the source of power struggles not in human nature but in the anarchic structure of the international system (Third Level of Analysis). According to Waltz, the absence of a central authority in the system creates a “self-help” environment that compels states to ensure their own security. This structure drives states into competition for power and the security dilemma regardless of their intentions; defensive steps taken by one state may be perceived as threats by others, triggering an arms race. Neorealism has also developed different approaches regarding the primary motivations of states:
• Defensive Realism (Waltz, Walt): Argues that the primary goal of states is not to maximize power but to ensure their security. States seek sufficient power to survive and typically pursue balancing policies in response to threats.
• Offensive Realism (John Mearsheimer): Asserts that the anarchic structure compels states to continuously maximize their power and seek regional or global hegemony. According to this approach, the most rational path to security is to establish overwhelming power superiority over potential rivals.

Realism aims to be one of the major traditions developed to explain the fundamental dynamics of international relations. It provides a robust analytical framework for understanding state foreign policy strategies, great power competition, the causes of war, and the logic of alliance systems. By placing core concepts such as power, interest, security, anarchy, and sovereignty at its center, it claims to reveal the “is” rather than the “ought” of international politics. Although challenged today by liberalism, constructivism, and other critical theories, Realism continues to preserve its intellectual and theoretical legacy in comprehending the fundamental structure and logic of the international system, despite changes in actors and instruments.