ipl-logo

Us Grand Strategy Must Be Built Upon Liberalism Rather Than Realism

1323 Words6 Pages

Response to Question Two:
“Given the nature of the current and likely future international security environment, U.S. grand strategy must be built upon liberalism rather than realism. Realism is insufficient; it may not even be necessary.” Agree or disagree (or both) and explain why. While many believe that realism holds a diminished relevance today, as David L. Anderson notes in Christopher Layne’s The Peace of Illusions, “realism is not beyond criticism, but since the time of the Greek historians it has provided a behavioral paradigm of rational cost-benefit calculations of the national interest in an essentially anarchical international environment.” 1 As such, realism has dominated western political thought for centuries and its longevity …show more content…

If liberalism was the correct interpretation of the world, international institutions would prohibit states from maximizing their pursuit for power. After all, international institutions facilitate interaction amongst nations, and liberalism supposedly emphasizes the importance of international institutions in constraining state power and preserving peace. To this end, Posen and Ross note that the United Nations and European Union remain weak institutions, and while they are comprised of democratic, peace-loving states, it does not mean that they will always cooperate to settle disputes at the margins of traditional national interests. 8 Thus, irrespective of intentions, power reigns supreme. However, liberalism is disadvantaged as it overvalues states’ commitment to liberal values and ignores the role of power and its effect on these institutions. For the liberalist, security and stability, both domestic and international, is interconnected with these institutions. While proponents of liberalism agree with realists that the main actors are states, their concern for power is overridden by political considerations. This is problematic as power is the sole factor that drives state’s actions in the international political

Show More
Related
1519 Words | 7 Pages

Viewing Ambassador Power’s statements through both the lens of liberalism and realism allows one to better understand the policies and ideas which she presents throughout her speech. The theoretical tradition of liberalism, specifically the neoliberal framing of it, assists in clarifying why it is necessary, in Ambassador Power’s mind, that states both cooperate and create a shared understanding of expectations by abiding to rules which have previously been defined and outlined. Ambassador Power argument shows that it is imperative that states join and posture to prevent Russia from taking any further actions, specifically ones which may jeopardize the security of the United States. Realism explains how the pursuit of power dictates the behaviors of states and the policies which they push. Given that there is a net amount of power, the prevention of another state, in this instance Russia, from gaining power inherently increases the power of all other states while at the same time escalating the security of said states.

Read More
2425 Words | 10 Pages

... Behind closed doors, however, the elites who make national security policy speak mostly the language of power, not that of principle. ... In essence, a discernible gap separates public rhetorics from the actual conduct of American foreign policy.” [ John Mearsheimer, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, New York: W. W. Norton, 2001] 2.2.1 Realism Policies and Liberalism Rhetorics Foreign policies also produce soft power when they promote broadly shared values such as democracy and human rights. Americans have wrestled with how to integrate our values with other interests since the early days of the republic.

Read More
1107 Words | 5 Pages

Idealism emphasizes the promotion of values such as democracy, human rights, and international cooperation. It emphasizes the moral and ethical dimensions of foreign relations and seeks to advance American interests by promoting global stability and spreading democratic ideals. Realism, on the other hand, places greater emphasis on power, national interest, and the balance of power among states. It takes a more pragmatic and skeptical view of international relations, recognizing the importance of self-interest and the limitations of idealistic

Read More
693 Words | 3 Pages

My initial thought about privilege when I read the paper written by Peggy McIntosh was to instantaneously think about entitlement and the minimization of a cultural and a class of people. It’s not that whites are exclusive in the usage of systematic racial intolerance, it’s that they appear to be oblivious to the benefits of this entitlement. The author attempts to debase and use some forms of lightheartedness to point out the luxury she possessed as a result of simply being white but it’s much more than simply being white.

Read More
1335 Words | 6 Pages

From these, liberal ideals are portrayed to have two main strands with one founded on liberal nationalism while the other on liberal internationalism (Reitan 43). The rational foreign policy approach that that elite policy-makers can consider when confronted with an international hurdle would be similar to the approach adopted in the film. By first securing themselves, the focus is first given to the maintenance of the national sovereignty and the security of liberal institutions at home. In that case, foreign policy should begin with liberal nationalism. Such was evident in the movie as the United States began by securing itself (Reitan 43).

Read More
1446 Words | 6 Pages

The first Liberal Internationalists, including Wilson, were a very ethnocentric, non diverse group. They had two driving questions that they wanted to have answered from their new ideology. Those questions were, how do we prevent war, and what causes war? When analyzing these questions, liberal internationalists focused on both the domestic and international level. When examined at the domestic level, Liberal Internationalists concluded that illiberal, nondemocratic regimes are to blame for wars, and the only way to prevent wars was by allowing nations self determination through democracy.

Read More
216 Words | 1 Pages

As the presidential election quickly approaches, it is easy to see ideas of both Liberalism and Realism in political parties. With Donald Trump making promises of stricter immigration and giant walls, a large movement of people believing in power and self-preservation now seek to "Make America Great Again. " This example of Realism stands in direct opposition to Hillary Clinton 's liberal message of peace and unity. I mention the election because it often makes me question how such contrasting beliefs can exist after 200 years as a sovereign state.

Read More
2260 Words | 10 Pages

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

Read More
902 Words | 4 Pages

The theory unleashes such dynamic forces that from the time of its inception up till now it has governed the international system of the world however things one day itself fall apart. The Realists mark the State as the locus of different international circles and these sovereign states have vested interests which are always selfish. Realism is a heartless theory, man is not supposed to be selfish in the way exaggerated by the Realist thinker however [he] is a seeker of knowledge and what so ever he stumbles upon, he keeps

Read More
1207 Words | 5 Pages

The world in which Carr knew and wrote this book about may have change greatly, however I think one can say the world is once again experiencing s transitional moment where answers no longer suffice, and affirming this books continued relevance. To conclude, the book shows us how Carr was convinced the realities of Global Power and not Utopians normative morality would shape a new international order. Carr’s work can be understood as a critique of Liberalism internationalism or what he referred to as

Read More
939 Words | 4 Pages

Liberal is a paradigm which is a belief in the positive uses of government to bring justice, equality of opportunity, peace and looks more to the nature of state. Liberalism is a philosophy based on the belief about the ultimate value of individual freedom and the opportunities for human progress. Liberalism is talking about rationality, moral autonomy, human rights, democracy, opportunity, and choice that built upon commitment to the principles of freedom and equality. There is a long traditional in Liberal thinking about international relations’ characteristic. . Liberalist are thinking how to create a peaceful relation among country up to relation among individual and one of the sytemic and deeper explanation is brought by a German philospher, Immanuel Kant with his essay entitled “Perpetual Peace” .

Read More
897 Words | 4 Pages

Idealism and Realism are two strongly opposed views of foreign policy. At the core of this opposition is the issue of power and security in politics. Realism establishes a separation between politics and ethics in order to understand and comprehend international events. Realists don’t oppose morality to politics, nor power to law, but rather oppose the utopian peaceful society to the nature of society.

Read More
795 Words | 4 Pages

Therefore, it provides differences between the status quo power and progressive states, while maintaining and emphasizing the importance of government at the same time. In contrary, Structural Realism is more concerned on ensuring their survival, by seeking and maintaining that power. Structural Realism would treat states as they are black boxes: they are assumed to be alike (Mearsheimer). Furthermore, Classical Realism and Structural Realism differ in their views of interconnection in international politics, fundamentally what causes the observed outcomes in relations among states. Classical Realists believe that the international world is one of interacting states, and causes run in one direction.

Read More
1282 Words | 6 Pages

Assess the claim that Neo-Realism and Neo-Liberalism have far more similarities than differences. Neo-Realism and Neo-Liberalism, two of the most influential contemporary approaches to international relations, although similar in some respects, differ multitudinously. Thus, this essay will argue it is inaccurate to claim that Neo-Realism and Neo-Liberalism have far more similarities than differences. On the contrary, it will contend that there are, in an actual fact, more of the latter than there are of the former on, for example, the nature and consequences of anarchy, the achievement of international cooperation, and the role of international institutions. Moreover, it will be structured in such a way so as to corroborate this line of argument.

Read More
1938 Words | 8 Pages

The current work is meant to explain the differences and similarities between the most dominant theories in international relations, Realism and Liberalism, both theories have some similarities and differences but much more important and interesting is to discuss and explain what differs and makes similar both theories. Conflicts and wars, Similarities and differences between Realism and Liberalism: Both Liberalism and Realism believes that there is no world government that can prevent countries to go to war on one another. For both theories military power is important and both Realism and Liberalism can understand that countries can use military power to get what they need or want. Also, both theories are conscious that without military

Read More

More about Us Grand Strategy Must Be Built Upon Liberalism Rather Than Realism

Related Topics

Open Document