Session 12: Realist explanation of power

Mearsheimer provides an adequate analysis between the different strands of realism that elucidates the point that the paradigm has a rich tradition of explaining the dynamics of power in the international politics. One thinks that such profound and deep understanding of “power" in international politics explains many affairs of the states that they encounter in their everyday interactions with each other.

Power for human nature realists as Mearsheimer says, is the inherent lust of states that they aspire to gain as much as they can. (Mearsheimer, Pg 22) The use of the word lust is thought provoking, because it implies that there would never be cooperation and peace among states, as they always pursue to gain power that is their organic behavior. However, one believes that Mearsheimer answer to the human realists' claim for power is slightly suitable, because the anarchic structure of international arena draws states' thinking to seek survival by increasing their relative power such that they become hegemon in the system. (Mearsheimer, Pg 22) However, the contentious issue here is again the assumption of Mearsheimer that the states naturally do not want to cooperate with each other; rather they are fearful of each other's additional power capacities.

One agrees that states keep in mind the evilness that other states could exert on them, but one believes that states as liberals argue would not fight against each other if there is an economic interdependence among states. Of course, one might say that it is not the sufficient condition to make a claim that states will be least aggressive if they are economically interdependent. Other cases such as the "form of the government and internal arrangements" should also be considered to look into factors whether or not states become aggressive against each other. One thinks that structure of the international system is a big contributing factor in states' approach to become aggressive, but it is not the sufficient condition.