Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM

Copy

Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.

DeleteCancel

Make your likes visible on Facebook?

Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.

No, thanks

Realism in International Relations

No description
by

Jepoi Ordaniel

on 17 March 2013

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Realism in International Relations

photo credit Nasa / Goddard Space Flight Center / Reto Stöckli Yoo-jin Lee
Jeffrey REALISM In International Relations Soo-young Kim
Rasim REALISM in INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Thucydides Machiavelli Hobbes Out side of academy , Realism has a much longer history in the work of classical political theorists such as Thucydides, Machiavelli, and Hobbes *deficiencies of idealist thinking raison d’tat, or reason of state. ~ dual moral standard

~ one moral standard for individual citizen living inside the state

~ a different standard for the state in its external relations with other states Levels of Power determined by


-economic size
- The State's Military Economic Size Political Capability Levels of Power Levels of Power National Interest include
self-preservation
military security
economic prosperity
influence over other states REALISM: Four Basic Assumptions: 1) The state is the most important actor in international relations REALISM: Four Basic Assumptions: 2) -The state is a unitary and rational actor "the state speaks with one voice" REALISM: Four Basic Assumptions: 3) International relations are essentially conflictual because of anarchy. China's Carrier Killer Senkaku Dispute Sinking of Cheonan China-Philippines
Stand Off REALISM: Four Basic Assumptions: 4) The most basic concern of all states is survival e.g. North Korea REALISM: One or Many? 1) CLASSICAL REALISM Key thinker – Thucydides International politics is driven by an endless struggle for power which has its roots in human nature. * Asserting over the Melian in the logic of power politics, based of their superior military force.

* ‘Submit peacefully or be exterminated,’

* The strong do what they have the power to do and the weak accept that they have to accept. * Appealing justice, God, and their allies the Spartans

* Reject the suggestion and believe the support from Sparta

* Athenians killed all men and sold the women and children. MELIAN DIALOGUE Athenians Melians 2) STRUCTURAL REALISM Anarchical system fosters fear, suspicion and insecurity and leads to a logic of self-help that states seek to maximize their security.

Two parts: defensive realism and offensive realism. Kenneth Waltz 3) NEOCLASSICAL REALISM The systemic account of world politics provided by structural realism is incomplete. It needs to be supplemented with better accounts of unit level variables such as how power is perceived and how leadership is exercised. 3) NEOCLASSICAL REALISM "refine, not refute, Kenneth Waltz", by adding domestic intervening variables between systemic incentives and a state's foreign policy decision.

Thus, the basic theoretical architecture of Neoclassical Realism is: Distribution of power
in the international system
(independent variable) Domestic perception
of the system and/or
domestic incentives
(intervening variable) Foreign Policy decision
(dependent variable) REALISM in REALITY LIANCOURT ROCKS Japan and South Korea have conflicting sovereignty claims over the Liancourt Rocks.

-DOKDO in Korean
-TAKESHIMA in Japanese

The status quo favors Seoul because it is currently under the jurisdiction of South Korea. JAPANESE POSITION: Let's go to ICJ! Pinnacle Islands Japan vs China China and Japan are locked in a bitter dispute over the Pinnacle Islands; known in Chinese as Diaoyu and in Japanese Senkaku. Late last year, China submitted its claim to the United Nations Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, an institution established under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Both Beijing and Tokyo are signatories to the UN Law of the Sea Convention. Japanese Position:
UN SHOULD NOT BE INVOLVED. DOUBLE STANDARD Dokdo/Takeshima Dispute: Diaoyu/Senkaku Dispute: YES to INT'L INSTITUTIONS NO to INT'L INSTITUTIONS Is this unique to Japan? NOTEWORTHY CASES in EAST ASIA 1) Japanese Policies on Territorial Disputes
2) Chinese Policies on Territorial Disputes
3) North Korean Nuclear Weapons Program China's 9-line map Beijing wants to involve a UN institution on its dispute with Japan but it does not want any international institutions to get involved on its disputes with the Philippines and other ASEAN countries. Apparently, if a state views a particular institution as supportive to its national interests, then it would embrace that institution. However, if a state views the same as too compromising or threatening to its national interests then it would reject the involvement of that institution. It all comes down to: NATIONAL INTERESTS & POWER With these cases, we could conclude that the basic tenets of Realism are very apparent: • First, national interests on countries’ territorial disputes prevail over compliance to international norms and legal institutions.

• Second, in East Asia, international institutions are not superior to states; rather institutions are subordinate to states. North Korean Nuclear Weapons Program SURVIVAL & POWER Fall of Saddam Hussein Fall of the Talibans
in Afghanistan Fall of Qaddafi in Libya Chaos in Syria REALISM Has NO NUCLEAR
WEAPONS PROGRAM Has NUCLEAR
WEAPONS Program Taliban/Afghanistan
Iraq
Libya
Syria Iran
North Korea
Israel (Assumed) FAILED SURVIVING Conclusion We think ‘Realism’ is still superior than other IR theories because it recognizes reality as it is, which in turn enables it to explain state behaviors and foreign policies more convincingly. THANK YOU 감사합니다 The reality is, a state will always pursue its security and national interests, and maximize its power whenever it can, to survive and to thrive in an anarchic international system. Discussion Questions: Q. In the future, do you think states will become subordinate to international institutions? Explain.

Q. Can realism help us to understand the globalization of world politics?

Q. Is our perspective on LOVE based on realism or idealism? Contents I. Introduction to Realism

II. Realism: One or Many?
The Different Versions of Realism

III. Realism in Reality
Case Studies

IV. Conclusion

V. Discussion Questions
Full transcript