Realism generally treats states as fundamentally similar to one another with one exception. What is the only important difference between states according to realism?
As Kenneth Waltz posits, ‘Political actors are formally differentiated according to the degree of their authority.’ (Waltz, 2000) Power distribution is the only important difference between states according to Realism. When looking at states from the realist’s viewpoint, there are many features, scope conditions, and assumptions that apply to all states in the international system. In the course of the Melian Dialogue, Athens asserted that ‘We have come here for the interests of our empire,’ indicating one of the core assumptions of realists that self-interest drives states' behavior in the international system. This is also seen to play out as the Lacedemonians decide against going into war alliance with the Melians against Athens as it did not align with her national interest. As states are fundamentally self-centered, states are therefore pushed to adopt self-help mechanisms to ensure their survival. Also, there is a realist notion of groupism which generally means that humans face one another mainly as members of groups — nation-states.
The core assumption of realists which answer the question above is that ‘power is the fundamental feature of politics.” (Wolforth, 2008). This is to say that states calculate interest in terms of power. For realists, the international system is anarchical in nature with the absence of a central authority to enforce order, and therefore a state must pursue and possess power in order to achieve its foreign policy goals. A state should develop its internal military and economic abilities if she hopes to achieve her national interests cum foreign policy objectives. Therefore, Drezner asserted that “those with greater security and communications infrastructures should be able to put down any internal zombie insurrections and reestablish domestic order or block cross border zombie incursions.” However, states have the option to enter into an alliance with more powerful states in order to achieve their interests. This assumption helps to understand the current international system on the reason why developing and least developed countries seem to have little influence on international politics.
Countries like North Korea have been able to shape global politics to its terms as a result of her nuclear armaments. This is where the important difference between states, according to realists, can be found. All States are not equal. Some states due to geographical positioning, natural resources and robust economies, agricultural production capacity, and large population have become more powerful than others. Athens echoed this in the course of the Melian Dialogue by saying, “Right is only a question between equals in power. The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must (Betts, 2017)”
References
1. Waltz, K. N. (2000). Structural realism after the Cold War. International Security, 25(1),5–41.
2. Betts, R. K. (Ed.). (2017). Conflict after the Cold War: arguments on causes of war and peace. Taylor & Francis.
3. Drezner, D. W. (2014). Theories of International Politics and Zombies: Revived Edition.Princeton University Press.
4. William Wohlforth C. (2008). Realism and Foreign Policy. In Foreign Policy, Theories, Actors, Cases. 3rd Edition. Edited by Steve Smith, Amelia Hadfield, Tim Dunne. 35–50.Oxford University Press. Third Edition.
