Measrsheimer, Realism, and its Relevance

In Anarchy and the Struggle for Power, Measrsheimer discusses competition between states from a realist point-of-view.  A realist believes that security is survival, and this article supports that with “the principle motive behind great power states is survival,” so it is therefore in a state’s best interest to think offensively and gain power over other states.  Measrsheimer paints an “every-man-for himself” picture whilst describing states’ struggle for power maximization in the international community.  He writes, “Great powers, I argue, are always looking to gain power over their rivals.” Though a realist standpoint does not always directly reflect my own beliefs, I think that Measrsheimer’s idea of a state’s desire for power maximization for the sake of security can be recognized in most international conflict amongst nations. The United States, for example, finds security in being a great military and economic power.  If our security were to be threatened by another nation or terrorist group, it would be in our best interest to do whatever we need to “gain power over our rivals.” 

Looking at past and current terrorist conflicts is the best way for me to connect reality with Measrsheimer’s beliefs.  He believes in anarchy, the desire to survive encourages states’ to behave aggressively.  Looking at 9/11, its obvious that the United State’s security was threatened, there was chaos, and it can be argued that we did not have the “upper-hand.”  In this case, I agree that Measrsheimer is accurate in saying that this encouraged offensive action in the sake of the state- the Iraq War. (Obviously there were other things to contribute to declaring a war with Iraq but that’s another blog post.)  This is also applicable to our current situation with ISIS.  Bombing their territories was an offensive move to remain the greater power.  Acting under fear, for loss of power and state security, the United State’s made offensive military decisions.  That alone is Measrsheimer’s whole argument, which is why I agree that his ideas are so relevant when it comes down to international conflict. 

It is difficult attempting to apply such a broad idea like realism to such complex international situations, but I think that Measrsheimer’s ideas are an acceptable outlook on international relations.  (His ideas are so similar to Machiavelli’s in The Prince, too, to bring up another realist-like outlook on relations among states.)  I agree with him in that power maximization and fear for security is a basis for understanding many nations’ military decisions.  Though I also believe any international situation can be logically examined and explained through a realist, liberal, or constructive lens.