Structural Realism/Offensive and Defensive Realism

Abstract

Structural realism, or neorealism, is a theory of international relations that says power is the most important factor in international relations. First outlined by Kenneth Waltz in his 1979 book Theory of International Politics, structural realism is subdivided into two factions: offensive realism and defensive realism. Structural realism holds that the nature of the international structure is defined by its ordering principle, anarchy, and by the distribution of capabilities (measured by the number of great powers within the international system). The anarchic ordering principle of the international structure is decentralized, meaning there is no formal central authority. On the one hand, offensive realism seeks power and influence to achieve security through domination and hegemony. On the other hand, defensive realism argues that the anarchical structure of the international system encourages states to maintain moderate and reserved policies to attain security. Defensive realism asserts that aggressive expansion as promoted by offensive realists upsets the tendency of states to conform to the balance of power theory, thereby decreasing the primary objective of the state, which they argue is ensuring its security. While defensive realism does not deny the reality of interstate conflict, nor that incentives for state expansion do exist, it contends that these incentives are sporadic rather than endemic. Defensive realism points towards “structural modifiers” such as the security dilemma and geography, and elite beliefs and perceptions to explain the outbreak of conflict.

Targeted Human Trafficking - The Wars between Proxy and Surrogated Economy

“…[32] [29] The inviolability on the sacredness of LGBTQIA + marriage in public international law thus transcends the public-private dichotomy in the spirit of liberal internationalism. [33] However, sheer power might see this differently, and the defense on aggression is a gendered one in undemocratic civil structures. [34] [4] In the latter regimes, the historic injustices are exactly reproduction that underlies the core policy interests of dictatorial rules balancing between the production & distribution of recourses.…”

From friend to foe: Post-9/11 Pakistan–US relations; a realist perspective

“…In addition, structural realism-a variant of realism-blames not human nature but the international system, as it promotes anarchy and insecurity between states. The systemic pressures of the global system greatly influence the behavior of a state (Lobell, 2010). They rationalize the phenomenon of self-help and maximization of security.…”

Sanctions and human rights: the role of sanction in international security, peace building and the protection of civilian's rights and well-being: case studies of Iran and Zimbabwe

“…However, structural realists are divided into two categories with contrasting assumptions: defensive realists and offensive realists (Millier 1996;Frankel 1996;Brooks 1997;Lobell, 2000;James, 2002;Walt 2002;Schweller, 2003 andNexon 2009). Defensive realists such as Kenneth Waltz (1979) contend that it is unnecessary for a State to amass power because such attempt will result to punishment.…”