Realism and Foreign Policy January 9, 2014

Overview What is realism? The development of realist theories Realist analysis of foreign policy Using Realism in analysing foreign policy Academic vs Foreign Policy Analysis (Hedgehogs and Foxes)

What is realism? Realism is based on 3 assumptions about how the world works: Groupism Egoism Power-centrism

So translating that into more familiar concepts: Groupism => states Egoism => self-interest Power-centrism => power

Implications for Foreign Policy These assumptions about the world have important consequences for international politics which leads to an identifiably realist approach to foreign policy

Realist foreign policy An orientation towards the most powerful groups at any given time Scepticism towards the professed aims of foreign policy other than the state interest Tendency to question the ability of any state’s foreign policy to transcend power politics

Tendency to look beyond rhetoric to the power realities that realists expect nearly always underlie policy Look for where the power is, what the group interests are, and to the role that power plays in reconciling interests

The development of realist theories The first and most general of all realist theories, and the one from which most others proceed, can be stated simply: if human affairs are indeed characterized by groupism, egoism, and power-centrism, then politics is likely to be conflictual unless there is some central authority to enforce order. When no authority exists that can enforce agreements, a condition theorists call anarchy, then any state can resort to force to get what it wants.

Realism’s sub-schools As an academic theory, realism informs the analysis of foreign policy. Theoretical sub-schools within realism:  classical realism  neorealism  defensive realism  offensive realism  neoclassical realism

Implications So what would the implications be from taking each of these perspectives in foreign policy analysis? How might the various sub-schools change our analysis? Sub-schools Classical realism Neorealism Defensive realism Offensive realism Neoclassical realism

Specific theories within realism Balance of power theory Balance of threat theory Hegemonic stability theory Power transition theory

Assumptions, conditions and theories The challenge for foreign policy analyst: how do we know which of these sub-schools or particular theories applies to a specific foreign policy issue?

Morality and power Standards of right and wrong tend to be defined by the powerful in ways that further their narrow group interest (E.H. Carr)  US in Serbia (Kosovo)  Russia in Georgia (South Ossetia and Abkhazia) Both US and Russian diplomats use same arguments justifying their own actions.

Using Realism in Analysing Foreign Policy Examples that clarify the potential pitfalls of realism as a guide to foreign policy:  The Never-Ending Cold War  Major power war in 1990s Europe  Anti-US counterbalancing in the 1990s

Avoiding Pitfalls Avoiding inaccurate foreign policy analyses: Know the theories and the case Need careful thought about how the theories relate to realism’s core assumption and expected outcomes – i.e. need to know the theory Need to know the specifics of the foreign policy case at hand

Hedgehogs and Foxes ‘The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing.’ (Archilochus) Academic realists can fall into trap of treating their theories as universal Academic theorists tend to be hedgehogs

Idea that for good foreign policy analysis need to be able to understand an issue from many angles as possible Foxes are better at practical tasks like foreign policy analysis. They should know theories without becoming overly committed to any one