Monday, September 23, 2013

The Past, the Present and the Now


In every species, be it physical, like an organism, or abstract, like a state, the primary goal of existence is survival. This goal is apparent throughout the theory of realism as explained in Measrsheimer’s article “Anarchy and the Struggle for Power.” As it is every state's goal to survive, this theory can be applied to explain the world of international relations. In the following paragraphs, I will argue, using Measrsheimer’s article and the foreign policies of states, that all governments, in the past, present and future, compete ruthlessly for power in the anarchic system and use any means to obtain and keep the status of regional hegemony.
            The foreign policies of the United States within the past seventy years have generally included maintaining a global peace and spreading democracy throughout the world. Though these goals can be linked to aspects of realism’s rivaling theory, liberalism, the sole reason for these pursuits is to defend the state in order to protect its title of a great power. When our foreign policy is stripped down to the bare bones, it is clear that, though it may seem the main goals are peace and democracy, these are only covers for the true ambition of survival. Measrsheimer explains, “Survival dominates other motives because, once conquered, it is unlikely to be in a position to pursue other aims,” (Measrsheimer). If states fight for lesser goals such as peace, it will become increasingly hard to maintain their survival. Therefore, any and all states will choose to survive over lesser pursuits that simply help maintain survival. An example of this policy in use is the Vietnam War. On the surface, this war was seen as a defense of democracy; however, the United Sates faced clear threats to their survival. Vietnam was in a state of turmoil and the government that was beginning to emerge was communist. Communism was seen as a threat to the United States as a global power, as its rival power at the time, the Soviet Union, was also a communist state. Because of the stand off between these two powers, the Soviet Union had the ability to jeopardize the United State’s status of regional hegemony, and they therefore needed to enter a war to keep communism from becoming a dominant form of government.  This struggle for power is a prime example of how states follow the aspects of realism to survive. Even now, the United States is still fighting other states, such as Afghanistan and Syria, in the pursuit to maintain their power.
            Realism has been driving the intentions of states throughout history because of its basic principle of the need to survive and, while doing so, achieve and maintain absolute power. All global struggles, including anything from small stand-offs to global wars, can be attributed to the need to survive. We will continue to see these ideologies define the foreign policies of all states throughout the world because in the struggle to survive, those who fight the hardest will be successful. 

4 comments:

  1. Interesting essay. But would a realist really say that Vietnam is a good example of a state following its national interests?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree with your argument that the driving force behind a state's decisions is the need to survive. However, I would not consider peace a lesser goal in the international system as many threatening situations occur as a result to a lack of peace among nations.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I agree with Jordan; while peaceful alliances may be seen as a lesser goal, I think that these alliances and a state's meticulous neutrality are just as indicative of their want to survive. While realists may not acknowledge tactics of survival other than physical aggression towards opposing states, the fact remains that cooperation and peaceful actions may be just as effective in ensuring the continuance of a state.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I agree with both of your points. The point I was trying to make with this essay was that these other goals, such as peace, are representative of the main goal of survival. Looking back, I would edit my essay to make this point much more clear in the thesis.
    In regards to whether a realist would consider Vietnam as a good example of a state following its national interests, I would say its not the best example, however, I would argue that because the US felt as though the spread of communism was a threat to their survival, it can still exemplify a state following its national interests.

    ReplyDelete