Realpolitik

REALISM OR REALPOLITIK is the school of thought that posits that international relations are governed by power and national interest, not morality. The personal relationships of politicians and diplomats are irrelevant in the realist view, for nations base their decisions on the demands of national interest, not on the basis of friendship. The goal of international relations, from a realist perspective, is to seek a balance of power [Page 836]rather than the triumph of ideals. One of the most famous and earliest examples of a consciously realist diplomacy is presented in the fifth book of the Greek historian Thucydides' The History of the Peloponnesian War. In the so-called Melian Dialogue, presented by Thucydides, the Athenians memorably told the Melians that the strong would do what they wished and the weak would have to endure. In 416 b.c.e., the Athenians invaded Melos, massacred the adult male population, and enslaved the rest of the population. The Prince, written in 16th-century Italy by Niccolò Machiavelli, offers another blueprint for anyone seeking to practice Realpolitik. Machiavelli advocated ruthlessness in the pursuit of power and advised that rulers are better off if feared by their citizens rather than loved. He also advised readers that a prince should devote himself above all else to preparing for war. In the early 19th century, Prussian general and military scholar Carl von Clausewitz wrote his treatise On War, which offered another famous realist proscription. For Clausewitz, war was an instrument of statecraft, or, as he phrased it, “a continuation of policy by other means.”

European leaders have often employed realism when conducting their diplomacy. During the Thirty Years' War, French leader Cardinal Richelieu subsidized the army of Protestant King Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden, and later made an alliance with Sweden in order to achieve a balance of power in Europe. In the 20th century, a superb example of cynical Realpolitik was the Nazi-Soviet Pact. By that 1939 nonaggression agreement, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union agreed not to attack each other but to invade and absorb Poland.

Realism has enjoyed a checkered history in the United States. As American policymakers discovered during the Vietnam War, it is difficult for America to sustain a strong moral commitment to a war to maintain a balance of power or for reasons of national interest. In both the 1991 and 2003 invasions of Iraq, large numbers of Americans vocally opposed conflicts waged in America's national interest.

The Persian Gulf War of 1990–91 offers superb insight into America's difficult relationship with realism. American dependence on Middle Eastern oil meant that Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait was intolerable to America. Nevertheless, President George H.W. Bush conceived of the war as a struggle against aggression rather than one waged in defense of America's national interest. Even in defense of so valuable a commodity as oil, America would not tolerate a conflict waged along realist lines. Few American politicians clearly identify themselves as realists. Theodore Roosevelt employed a kind of modified realist view. He acted ruthlessly to foment revolution in Panama in order to be able to build the Panama Canal; building a canal that would allow the American ships to move rapidly from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean with-out sailing around South America was clearly in America's national interest. Yet Roosevelt's strong ideals and moral sense leavened his pursuit of the balance of power.

...