Classical realism is one of the international relations theories, which follows the assumption that: states only act to better their self-interests, states work towards increased power to preserve themselves, and no supranational international authority (Ashworth, 2017, 311). The theory emphasizes on human nature, which is the main factor when explaining behaviors depicted by states. The theory explains that human nature is the cause of international conflicts, whereby people want to be the best within their space. Classical realism theory also assumes the pessimist human nature, whereby it argues that human beings are never benevolent, but are driven by fear while embracing self-interests (University of Buffalo, 2020). Human nature is characterized in the anarchical conditions in international politics. The theory was developed and became popular during the Great Wars (1918-1939) when states depicted their self-interests.
Strengths
Classical realism presents numerous strengths and weaknesses. The theory recognizes the importance of societies in maintaining order within their territories. One of the theory's main strength is its recognition of the similarities between global political and domestic political spheres. In classical realism, the stability of a community relies heavily on preconditions and society's common values. The theory explains the decrease in violence in the 20th century, whereby various communities had set rules, countries with common goals and values, and common interests (Behr and Williams, 2017, 6). With shared perceptions and values, people became more controllable, leading to better societies and decreased violence across the world. Additionally, the theory can explain the reasons for identity shifts through the concept of liberal democracy and the integration of nations into the democratic society.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Communities are inherently the building blocks within any society. Through local communities, nations can achieve stability, and international space can have numerous states. By recognizing the role of community instability, the theory enables scholars to distinguish between international and domestic affairs. Classical realism's recognition of communities helps differentiate its advocacies from neo-realists (Peterson, 2018). When local communities maintain law and order, then the nation is stable, while violence among the local communities brews instability at the national level. Similarly, peaceful communities help in stabilizing a region, thus shaping international stability. When discussing this strength, it is critical to consider the conflicts experienced in the Middle East (Leiter, 2011). For instance, the Syrian crises are hugely influenced by local communities, whereby differences between the local tribes have led to increased violence. Similarly, the instability within the Syrian paradigm causes instability across the region. In helping to stabilize such regions, classical realism is critical, as it emphasizes the importance of community involvement and participation in shaping their country and international stability.
In theory, the second strength is that it recognizes the nature of human beings as flawed and callable. Contrary to the other theories that demand human beings to take a perfect nature, classical realism recognizes humans as flawed beings who work on their imperfections for better societies (Clark, 2016). In essence, any bid by political leaders to create utopias only leads to self-destruction or mass destruction. According to this theory, human nature is characterized by self-interest and egoism, whereby self-interests are given more weight than a community's moral principles. By recognizing human nature in a pessimistic nature, the theory helps formulate accurate assumptions based on the true nature of human beings.
In international relations, nations act out of self-interest, rather than for the good of the world. A country can only indulge itself in a conflict that directly or indirectly impacts it. For instance, in the 20th-century world wars, nations formed allies based on the individual states' beliefs and interests. Socialist countries fought to protect their socialist neighbors' interests, while the nations that supported democracy fought on the same front. Additionally, this concept of human nature can also explain the role of European nations in the colonization of African and Asian countries in the 19th and 20th centuries (Orme, 2018, 280). During the colonization era, Great Britain and other European powers established colonies in Africa, based on their interests within the territories. For instance, after acquiring Egypt as a reliable route to Africa and the Middle East, Great Britain had to secure Egypt's stability, as it would directly influence Britain. In this case, Great Britain acquired Sudanese, Ugandan, and Kenyan territories to protect Egypt's greatest water source, the Nile River. Classical realism, therefore, shows strengths in explaining why nations take specific actions for self-interests.
The classical realism theory also shows strengths in explaining human nature as untrustworthy, insecure, and rational. In essence, countries exist on the perception of untrustworthiness and insecurity across all the avenues. Due to human nature's untrustworthiness, countries have established international treaties that help in defining several international laws and regulations. If human nature were trustworthy, then some organs like the United Nations and spying intelligence agencies on the international sphere would not exist. Classical realism theory, therefore, helps in explaining the role of human nature in international relations.
Weaknesses
Numerous weaknesses can be drawn from classical realism theory based on the theory's argument on state levels and human analysis. The classical theory leads to an international-domestic split in the world. The theory cannot define the decision-making process among domestic and international governments (Solomon, 2015). This weakness explains the theory's contribution to domestic and international division. Realistic little interest in decision-making processes comes as a surprise to scholars due to its role in defining the various organs that need a decision. Realists regard the role of decisions in the community as insignificant about nations and other actors within the global decentralization system and those with shared norms of interaction. In the realists' views, all the competitive pressures witnessed within the paradigms of decentralized systems characterize persistence among local governments.
Classic realism also focuses on actions within the highly competitive national systems whereby state leaders, diplomats, and other rulers are perceived as the key stakeholders in decision-making. During the 17th and 18th centuries, the European nations were in high competition for territorial politics and states, leading to the establishment of numerous states in the current world (Stanford University, 2017). During this era, most countries depicted little accountability to the existing populations; cross-border interactions were modest; hence, the governments maintained the separation between foreign and domestic diplomacies. However, by the 18th and 19th centuries, there was an increasing quest for nationalism and democracy. The period was also characterized by increased border interaction, travel, science, trade, culture, and financial reasons leading to increased cross-border interactions. By the 1930s, the world was preoccupied with three major ideological divides: Leninist, democratic, and fascist blocs. The blocs led to an increasing separation between the foreign and domestic policies.
This argument from critics of classical realism theory can be refuted by understanding the role of independent states and international agencies in enforcing domestic and international policies. Even with the political and social divides caused by ideological differences in the 20th century, there was a clear distinction on who should formulate laws among all the existing states. Both the democratic and nationalists governments had distinct systems of policy formulation and regulation. At the international level, the United Nations, through its organs, ensures adherence to international laws.
The second weakness presented by the classical realism theory is its assumption that only states are the main actors of importance in international relations. The theory does not focus on modern non-military security issues like refugees, political economies, and environmental issues, critical in the international space. On the contrary, the theory emphasizes the importance of states in global stability. Issues like refugees, environmental implications, and political economy can be detrimental to a state, yet the theory does not consider such critical factors. China presents a perfect example when considering other factors for a state's stability. While the country has in the 20th and 21st centuries experienced massive growth in the political economy, its environmental implications have a huge impact on the country's international relations (Kirshner, 2012, 54). While the environmental problems may not be short-term, they may weaken the country's future stability. While other theories like the liberalists account for such weaknesses in China's stability, classical realism fails to consider such elements contributing to a state.
In defense against this argument, it is critical to consider that giving the state-factor much weight helps define all the other insignificant factors. For instance, environmental pollution issues can easily be addressed through the basic elements of classical realism theory. For instance, by assuming that human nature is based on self-interest, the theory accounts for a country's need to disregard international requirements for self-interests. For instance, the Chines government could sacrifice the elemental factor for military stability and political, economic stability.
References
Ashworth, L.M., 2017. David Mitrany on the international anarchy. A lost work of classical realism?. Journal of International Political Theory , 13 (3), pp.311-324. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1755088217714010
Behr, H. and Williams, M.C., 2017. Interlocuting classical realism and critical theory: Negotiating ‘divides’ in international relations theory. Journal of International Political Theory , 13 (1), pp.3-17. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1755088216671735
Clark, A., 2016. Classical Realism and Human Nature. https://prizedwriting.ucdavis.edu/sites/prizedwriting.ucdavis.edu/files/users/mtrujil3/148PW%20Clark.pdf
Kirshner, J., 2012. The tragedy of offensive realism: Classical realism and the rise of China. European Journal of International Relations , 18 (1), pp.53-75. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1354066110373949
Leiter, B. 2011. Philosophical Issues Vol. 11, Social, Political, and Legal Philosophy: Classical Realism. Ridgeview. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3050603?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents
Orme, J.D., 2018. Classical Realism and History: Findings and Implications. In Human Nature and the Causes of War (pp. 279-286). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1134/S0030400X17090077
Peterson, M. J. 2018. Why IR Realism Persists. International Relations. https://www.e-ir.info/2018/02/06/why-ir-realism-persists/#:~:text=First%2C%20Realism%20has%20typically%20relied,involving%20unending%20competition%20for%20advantage .
Solomon, H. 2015. International Political Economy Series: Realism and Its Critics. Springer. https://page-one.springer.com/pdf/preview/10.1057/9781403901019_3
Stanford University. 2017. Political Realism in International Relations. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/realism-intl-relations/#:~:text=(1)%20Human%20nature%20is%20a,self%2Dinterest%20overcomes%20moral%20principles .
University of Buffalo. 2020. Classical Realism is based on the following assumptions. https://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~mbenson2/Classical%20Realism.doc
