Realist Approach To Military Security

Looking back over the development of the Security Studies field, there can be no doubt that the realist tradition has exercised enormous influence. Even the harshest of critics can acknowledge that with their focus on power, fear, and anarchy, realist theories have provided centrally important explanations for conflict and war (Williams, 2013). One interpretation of realism that is unbroken amongst most commentators of the theory is that realists are individuals that believe the State is the principle actor in international politics and that they are very concerned with the balance of power (Marsalis, 2013). They argue that all the State’s actions and choices are a reflection of the collective will of the people, which is also an argument

This fact undoubtedly is a result of the uncertainty which still remains between states regardless of the numerous progressive moves in a liberal direction for the international community such as the establishment of the United Nations (UN) and the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO). In spite of this liberal progression the traditional realist approach still and perhaps will for the foreseeable future remain at the crux of military security regardless of whatever shortcomings. An easy explanation for this is that the very concept of military security is based on realist thought, realist vision, the very instinct to defend, protect and attack if necessary are the fundamentals of military security but also of realism. The world continues to be a dangerous and ruthless place as any traditional realist would agree. The inherent dark side of humanity remains giving optimum reason as to why the strengths of the traditional realist approach to military security outweigh the weaknesses. As the realist school of thought suggested, each state has one agenda, to survive and will therefore go through any means necessary to ensure this. However there will always be others who believe there is more to human nature and more to state agenda than realism allows for. In conclusion, realism has dominated the study of security significantly and in turn has dominated the concept of military security. Realism in relation to military security will continue to dominate as its fundamentals encompass what military security is all about. It may have flaws and weaknesses, it may be deemed regressive in some aspects by critics but it reflects accurately in essence what military security is and what it aims to achieve. The capability to defend