There has been numerous studies and scholarly works pertaining both realism and structural realism (neo-realism) which developed aggressively during Cold War which according to Krause (1998; 301), are usually characterized by bipolarity, nuclear deterrence, MAD (mutually assured destruction), détente, and state survival. That was then when the approach was greatly impacted to particular historical moment. However, as of now, since the nature of international relations is constantly changing and fickle, realism in international relations “emphasize(s) the competitive and conflictual side of international relations” in an anarchic world system. (Buzan 1996; 51) The end of Cold War indicated the end of bipolarity, which also made realism hard to adjust itself in the complex dynamic of international relations right now. But, fret not, there is however, an existence of a strong realist dimension in the practice of security in the Asia Pacific.
According to Mastanduno (1997; 50), he describes that realist doctrine is comprised of extensive range of ontological ideas which resulted in the birth of different theories. However, Hans J. Morgenthau (1954) in his book called ‘Politics Among Nations’, argues that self-interest and relative power expansion are the two key elements that drive states as rational actors to act, and also he further describes that it is possible to study the world because the world contains universal laws of human nature (Morgenthau cited in Jørgensen 2010;