Realism and Neorealism: Schelling and Waltz’s Theories
Realism and Behaviorism: Schelling
Achieving political objectives through self-interest involves scientifically analyzing politicians’ decisions. This assumes key underlying bases are unexplained. Why this concern? In the context of nuclear conflict, who presses the button? The concern lies in the decision-making mechanisms. The principal national interest objective is to determine tactics.
In the 50s and 60s, mathematics was used to explain the social sciences. Game theory, applied to the prisoner’s dilemma, examines mechanisms and rational decision-making. Two people are arrested and separated, each acting in response to the other:
- If you deny: If the other denies, both get 2 to 6 months. If the other confesses, you get 10 years, and they go free.
- If you confess: If the other denies, you go free, and they get 10 years. If the other confesses, both get 2 to 6 years.
Cooperation is always the best choice, but also the worst option. Looking at self-interest, we gamble because it depends on the other. Game theory is used to activate cooperative relations. What one wins, the other loses. Cooperation can lead to mutual gains. The mechanism generating objective decision-making aims to eliminate the human factor.
Schelling argues that resorting to war is sometimes appropriate, especially when considering nuclear war. He suggests using means other than military force to coerce others into doing what we want. There must be some tension for both parties to reach an agreement.
To meet these objectives, states must sometimes engage in unsavory actions. Extortion becomes an instrumental action, not a moral issue. Schelling justifies these actions, arguing they are necessary.
Kenneth Waltz and Neorealism
Kenneth Waltz reformulates realism, creating neorealism, which differs significantly from historical levels. Climate change aligns with Waltz’s explanations. He is not interested in the moral implications of decision-making. The analysis focuses on the players involved, their weight, and their relationships. This eliminates the human factor. It analyzes how different countries are organized and how they relate to each other.
The structure determines political decisions. The concept is simple, with a few key principles:
- Principle of Competition: States are inherently selfish. Anarchy and chaos are not necessarily bad; the system self-regulates. States do not need external help; they only need to regulate themselves.
- Principle of Differentiation: States are equal in principle but differ in their capabilities. Chaos would arise if everyone were truly equal. States have different capacities (power), which forms the basis of the structure. This structure is intrinsic to the system. Weaker states tend to ally with major powers.
- Principle of Distribution: Each country aims to achieve its objectives.
Types of Structures
What types of structures can emerge? Unipolar, bipolar, or multipolar. Waltz favors bipolarity: fewer actors are monitored continuously, and each system provides symmetrical forces that cancel each other out, leading to a more stable international system. This explanation is less complex and avoids moral complexities.
Multipolar systems have more actors, leading to more conflicts. Waltz uses realism: states are the primary actors in international relations. He also speaks of independence: the ability to act without relying on others. Waltz centralizes structural analysis. Great powers have a responsibility to create structures. International relations should analyze relations between major powers.