Definitions and Description of Realist Theory.

1. According to professors Kegley & Wittkopf (31), classical realism is a paradigm based
on the premise that world politics is essentially and unchangeably a struggle among selfinterested states for power and position under anarchy, with each competing state pursuing
its own national interests
2. Ray and Kaarbo (p4) write that realism is "a theoretical perspective for understanding
intl. relations that emphasizes states as the most important actor in global politics, the
anarchical nature of the intl. system, and the pursuit of power to secure states' interests."
3. The founding father of this theory is the Greek historian Thucydides, who wrote the
seminal account of the war between Athens and Sparta. In hishistory of the Peloponnesian
War, Thucydides argues that the war broke out b/c Athens was concerned about Sparta's
growing power. His writings greatly influenced theorists and statemen alike through the
next two thousand years, including the modern proponents (Morgenthau, Kissinger, Waltz,
James et al) of classical and neo-realism...
4. In short and in sum, realists see international relations as driven by the unrelenting and
competitive pursuit of power by states in the effort to secure state interests.
5. For realists, the most important source of power is military capability, and the
acquisition and use of that military capability makes the realists' world one prone to
violence and warfare.
6. At the core of this theory is that world politics takes place within a context of anarchy (ie
the absence of world govt. which is different than how the world of domestic politics
functions), which Thomas Hobbes likens to a state of nature. In this state of nature, Hobbes
argues that because there are no rules, no laws, no enforcement mechanisms etc, that
conflict turns into war (he calls it a perpetual "war of all against all") which is why
INSIDE countries, people consent (ie the so-called social charter) to live under a
government that makes and enforces laws, order, security, etc. In this state, people don't
have absolute freedom BUT they sacrifice some liberty to that govt. in order to get order
and security...
7. In world politics, we don't have this, ergo, realists argue that we live in a "state of
nature", or in a world of perpetual conflict. Therefore, the violence, chaos, death and
destruction that often accompany world politics reflect the "war of all against all" that intl.
anarchy directly implies...
8. Realists also assume that states, or countries, are the "key actors and determine what
happens in the world" (Ray and Kaarbo: 5). Ray and Kaarbo (p. 5) add that "states can, if
they choose, control all other actors, according to realism."
9. State interests, rather than human rights or ideological preferences, are the reason
behind every state action. Ray and Kaarbo (p. 5) suggest that "it is the maximization of
power that is in a state's interest. Thus, everything a state does can be explained by its
desire to maintain, safeguard, or increase its power in relation to other states."
10. In the world of anarchy and state sovereignty, there is no higher authority to impose
order, and there is no intl. 911 number for states to call when their interests are threatened.
States must therefore provide for their own defense and protection. Realists refer to this
effort by states to defend their own interests as SELF-HELP (usually though the
acquisition of military capacity or joining alliances...)

11. In short and in sum, without an "intl. world authority, they must look out for their own
interests" which realists suggest is all about securing and maintaining their power. To
realists, this is the only rational way to behave in an anarchic intl. realm...
12. The implications of all of the above for realists is somewhat obvious: war is inevitable...this
is b/c in a world with no higher power to impose order and resolve disputes, with almost 200
sovereign actors looking to defend their interests via self-help, and where efforts at self-help
and self-defense can threaten other actors in the system, states sometimes need to use force to
resolve disputes with other states...
13. Realists conclude a few other things--the possibility of cooperation and change is
limited, that world politics is not primarily about good and evil, that power trumps justice,
and that the road to order lies through the balance of power...
a. Ray and Kaarbo site Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait as an example of how states
act to maximize their power above all else...
C. The core of classical realist theory is best summarized in the form of 10
assumptions:
1. People are by nature narrowly selfish and ethically flawed
2. Of all people's evil ways, none are more prevalent or dangerous than
their instinctive lust for power and their desire to dominate others
3. The possibility of eradicating these instincts is a utopian "pipedream"
4. International politics is a struggle for power, "a war of all against all"
5. The primary objective of every state--the goal to which all other
objectives should be subordinated to--is to promote its NATIONAL
INTERESTS
6. The anarchical nature of the intl system dictates that states acquire
sufficient military capabilities to deter attack by potential enemies
and to exercise influence over others
7. Economics is less relevant to ntl security than is military might
8. Allies might increase a state's ability to defend itself, but their loyalty
and reliability should never be assumed
9. States should NEVER entrust the task of self-protection to intl
security organizations or intl law
10. If all states seek to maximize power, stability will result by
maintaining a balance of power

Definitions and Description of Liberal Theory

1. According to Kegley & Wittkopf (2006: 28), liberalism is "a paradigm predicated on the
hope that the application of reason and universal ethics to international relations can lead
to a more orderly, just, and cooperative world, and that international anarchy [lack of a
hierarchy/world government] and war can be policed by institutional reforms that
empower international organizations and laws"

2. Ray and Kaarbo (p. 7) define intl. liberalism as "a theorectical perspective emphasizing
interdependence between states and substate actors as the key characteristic of the intl.
system."
3. Liberalism, or what many also call idealism/idealist theory, can be traced back to Kant's
"Toward Perpetual Peace" though more recently, in the period b/n WWI and WWII, the
major intellectual challenger to the realist paradigm was idealism. Idealists questioned
many of the basic tenets of realism and suggested that it would be possible to transform the
world of power seeking and war into one in which peace and cooperation among states
might prevail...
4. Idealism, in contrast to realism, suggests a well-intentioned but utopian perspective that
realists believe was out of touch with how the real world actually works...which is why the
word idealism was shelved for the world liberalism, which couldn't be tarred as fuzzy
headed and out of touch...
5. Unlike realists, liberals believe that significant global cooperation is possible and that we
can move beyond the power politics at the heart of the realist paradigm.
6. For liberals, the key assumption is that peace and cooperation among states can
produce absolute gains for all. As long as your state is better off as a result of cooperating
with others, the gains of others should not matter...realists are only concerned with relative
gains (why intl. trade isn't the end all be all for classical realists, esp. if you will empower a
rival)
7. BTW, whilst Kant argued that the natural state of humankind is one of war and conflict
he also importantly suggested a state of peace can be established. He argues that this
"perpetual peace" can be established, esp. through the (1) the creation of a loose
"federation of free states" whose members were committed to maintaining intl. order and
security, (2) the "spirit of commerce" which in Kant's view is "incompatible with war" and
which "sooner or later gains the upper hand in every state", and
(3) the creation of republican govts in which executive power is checked by an independent
legislature
8. Liberals argue that realist explanations of anarchy and self-help are wrong b/c they miss
the REAL nature of world politics in the modern world: COMPLEX
INTERDEPENDENCE, which has become the "dominant feature of global politics" (Ray
and Kaarbo: 9).
a. Complex interdependence means that there are multiple channels among a variety of
actors in intl. politics.
b. Where realists see states as the only important actors, liberals see a world where there
are a variety of non-state actors (such as multi-national corporations, intergovernmental
organizations, and governmental organizations), share the world stage with countries.
c. They also argue that multiple issues, not just military security, are vital to the global
agenda...
C. Modern Liberalism based on the following set of assumptions:
1. Human nature is essentially "good"
2. The fundamental human concern for others' welfare makes progress possible
3. Sinful or wicked human behavior such as violence is not the product of
flawed people but of evil institutions

4. War and international anarchy are NOT inevitable

5. War is a global problem requiring collective rather than national efforts to
control it
6. Reforms must be inspired by a compassionate ethical concern for the welfare
and security of all people
7. International society must reorganize itself in order to eliminate the
institutions that make war likely

D. The Post-WWI Liberal Reform Agenda

1. 1st group advocated creating intl institutions which would replace the
anarchic, war-prone balance-of-power system
2. 2nd group emphasized the use of legal processes such as mediation and
arbitration to settle disputes and avoid interstate wars
3. 3rd group followed the biblical injunction that states should beat their
swords into plowshares and disarm
Realis vs neorealis
Asumsi Dasar Filosofis mengenai Kemanusiaan
Asumsi dasar realis berdasarkan pandangan pesimis tentang manusia (human nature).
Realis menganggap sifat alami manusia yang buruk. Karakter manusia selalu mencari
keuntungan untuk memperoleh kekuasaan, bagaimanapun caranya. Manusia memiliki
sifat egois dan hasrat instingtif untuk mendominasi orang lain yang ditunjukkan melalui
cara kekerasan, konflik, dan penyelesaiannya berujung pada perang demi merebut
kekuasaan. Merujuk pada pendapat Einstein yang menyatakan bahwa pasti ada nafsu
manusia untuk membenci dan menghancurkan (Einstein dalam Jackson & Sorensen,
2005:55).
Sifat buruk manusia ini berdampak pada perilaku negara dalam mendapatkan
kepentingan nasionalnya. Manusia sebagai warga negara akan membuat negaranya
bersikap selayaknya manusia untuk memperkuat negara serta memperluas wilayah,
yang semua itu tergabung dalam konsep kekuasaan. Hal ini menunjukkan bahwa sifat
manusia memang buruk yang menyebabkan politik internasional sama dengan
perjuangan demi kekuasaan, tidak ada pemerintahan dunia, yang berarti merupakan
anarkhi internasional (Morgenthau dalam Jackson & Sorensen, 2005:55).
Memiliki prinsip dasar yang sama dengan realisme, kaum neorealis berpandangan bahwa
manusia juga memiliki sifat buruk. Manusia dianggap sebagai makhluk yang normal,
kadang bermanfaat kadang merugikan. Berbeda dengan realis, neorealis menganggap
manusia bisa menggunakan cara-cara yang kooperatif dan konflik untuk meraih
keuntungan. Konflik yang terjadi lebih banyak disebabkan oleh struktur sistem yang
memaksa pemimpin negara untuk menjalankan kebijakan luar negeri sesuai dengan
logika determinisnya (Jackson & Sorensen, 2005, p. 113).

Sistem Internasional
Teori realisme dan neorealisme menganggap anarki dan ketiadaaan lembaga sentral
(sebuah pemerintah) menjadi ciri struktur sistem internasional. Sifat anarkis ini memiliki
pengertian tidak adanya otoritas sentral yang memaksakan tata tertib serta tidak memiliki
wewenang untuk mengatur sikap negara-bangsa (Burchill & Linklater, p. 108).
Kenneth Waltz menjelaskan konsep struktur menurut perspektif neorealisme yaitu sistem
internasional terdiri dari serupa unit: setiap negara menjalankan fungsi pemerintahan
yang serupa, namun berbeda pada kapabilitas relatifnya. Perbedaan kapabilitas itu
menyebabkan konflik dan perang, bukan karena sifat dasar manusia. Sistem internasional
bersifat pelit dan abstrak, serta memiliki elemen yang sedikit (Jackson & Sorensen, 2005,
p. 67).
Negara-negara berkekuatan besar mengatur sistem internasional. Sekali sistem
internasional terbentuk, sistem itu akan menjadi kekuatan yang unit-unit di dalamnya tak
mampu mengontrol, sistem itu membatasi perilaku mereka dan menempatkan mereka
antara niat mereka dan hasil dari tindakan mereka. (Waltz dalam Setiawan, 2008)
Agenda Utama
Realisme menganggap keamanan nasional dan kelangsungan negara merupakan yang
paling penting dibandingkan hal lainnya; merebut kekuasaan; berfokus pada keamanan
negara dan kekuasaan di atas segalanya melalui peningkatan kekuatan militer. Hal-hal
tersebut membentuk inti dari kepentingan nasional dengan adanya asumsi bahwa negara
lain juga akan mencari dan mempertahankan kepentingan nasionalnya
(http://one.indoskripsi.com/).
Pencarian kekuasaan dan keamanan adalah logika dominan dalam politik global, dan
bahwa negara sebagai pelaku utama dalam kancah ini tidak punya pilihan selain
menghimpun cara kekerasan dalam pencarian perlindungan diri (Burchill & Linklater, p.
110).
Fokus mendasar neorealisme terletak pada keamanan dan kelangsungan hidup sehingga
negara bertindak sesuai dengan prinsip menolong diri sendiri dan semuanya
mengusahakan agar bisa bertahan. Sama halnya dengan realisme, kekuatan masih
menjadi konsep sentral neorealisme. Meskipun demikian, masalah merebut kekuasaan tak
lagi dianggap tujuan seperti dalam realisme. Waltz berargumen bahwa dengan dasar teori
neorealisme ini negara akan bersaing dalam peningkatan senjata militer dan strategi
militer sebagai upaya untuk memperluas dan mempertahankan kekuasaannya. Namun,
kekuatan militer ini bukanlah faktor utama yang dapat mempengaruhi perluasan maupun
pertahanan kepentingan nasional. Dalam neorealisme terdapat suatu tujuan
penyamarataan dan peningkatan melalui faktor lain seperti menjalin kerjasama
(http://one.indoskripsi.com/).
Kenneth Waltz menjelaskan, negara berusaha dalam cara yang lebih kurang masuk akal
menggunakan cara yang ada untuk mencapai tujuan yang terjangkau. Cara-cara itu
digolongkan dalam dua kategori yakni usaha internal seperti meningkatkan kemampuan
ekonomi, kekuatan militer, mengembangkan strategi yang lebih pintar, serta usaha

eksternal seperti memperkuat dan memperluas aliansi atau memperlemah dan

membubarkan aliansi musuhnya (Setiawan, 2008).
Aktor Hubungan Internasional
Aktor dalam hubungan internasional menurut perspektif realisme adalah negara yang
berdaulat. Negara memegang peranan penting dalam menentukan kebijakan dalam dan
luar negeri, serta membentuk kepentingan nasionalnya. Non-state actor tidak diakui
dalam realisme.
Sedangkan dalam perspektif neorealisme, aktor utama dalam hubungan internasional
adalah negara. Negara-negara memiliki peran yang bersifat antagonistik demi
mewujudkan kepentingan nasional. Namun kaum neorealis juga mengakui peranan dari
non-state actor dan organisasi-organisasi antar pemerintah.
Kedamaian dan Stabilitas Internasional
Realisme dan neorealisme mengenal istilah balance of power dalam menjaga perdamaian
dan stabilitas internasional. Perimbangan kekuatan berlaku ketika terdapat negara-negara
besar yang memiliki kekuatan berimbang dan saling bersikap defensif demi menjaga
perdamaian dunia. Negara-negara lain akan membentuk aliansi dan bersekutu dengan
salah satu dari negara-negara besar tersebut agar tetap bisa memperoleh kepentingan
nasionalnya. Di sini konsep-konsep menyeimbangkan (meningkatkan kekuasaan untuk
menandingi kekuasaan yang lain) dan bandwagoning (berpihak dengan kekuasaan yang
lain) dikembangkan (http://karmel.web44.net/)
Melalui penggunaan keseimbangan yang tepat, negara bisa mengendalikan
kecenderungan kekerasan dengan mempertahankan keseimbangan strategis antara
kekuatan-kekuatan besar. Menurut para realis, langkah ini bisa mengurangi, meski tidak
menghapuskan, timbulnya perang (Burchill & Linklater, p. 110).
Keseimbangan kekuatan (balance of power) muncul lebih kurang secara otomatis dari
insting untuk bertahan. Kencenderungan keseimbangan kekuatan untuk membentuk
apakah sejumlah negara semua negara secara sadar bertujuan membentuk dan
mempertahankan keseimbangan atau apakah sejumlah atau beberapa negara bertujuan
dominasi universal, (Waltz dalam Setiawan, 2008).
Waltz menyatakan dalam kapabilitas neorealismenya bahwa sistem bipolar bersifat
superior dari sistem multipolar karena bipolar menyediakan stabilitas internasional yang
lebih besar sehingga perdamaian dan keamanan juga lebih mungkin tercapai (Jackson &
Sorensen, 2005, p. 117).