The Importance of Conceptual Clarity in International Relations Theories: Offensive and Defensive Realism
Abstract
Among the theories of international relations, realism, perhaps the most preferred one, continues to be the favorite of academics and experts despite all the criticism. As in other theories, there are also distinctions within realism itself and these distinctions have strong implications about the vision it offers for the nature of international politics. Although this distinction is addressed in the literature as offensive and defensive realism, we have difficulty understanding why the two differ when the neo-realist foundations are taken into account. This study aims to make this difference more apparent. In doing so, not only the points in which offensive and defensive realism differ but also their common arguments will be revealed. In addition, the arguments that defensive and offensive realism do not receive the necessary importance in the literature will be examined in detail and the fact that offensive and defensive realism actually have the same starting points but the differences in the results they reach will be emphasized. The study will first focus on a brief evaluation of realist theory and then the arguments defended by offensive and defensive realism will be explained in detail. Afterwards, it will be stated that although defensive and offensive realism emerged as a result of an internal debate, the ideas they defend in explaining international relations contain quite different differences. Although the study is descriptive in terms of research methods, it also aims to eliminate the theoretical deficiency in the literature. The fact that there are very few similar studies in the literature on offensive and defensive realism and that offensive and defensive realism differ in sharper lines than they seem constitutes the importance of the study. Finally, this study, which is a detailed examination of the theoretical internal debate, will be completed with a discussion and conclusion section.
Keywords
Security Studies International Relations Theories Realism Offensive Realism Defensive Realism.
References
- Brooks, S.G. (1997). Dueling realism. International Organizations, 51(3), 445-477.
- D’Anieri, P. (2019). Magical realism: assumptions, evidence and prescriptions in the Ukraine conflict. Eurasian Geograpy and Economics, 60(1), 97-117. https://doi.org/10.1080/15387216.2019.1627231
- Evera, S.V. (1999). Causes of war power and the roots of conflict. Cornell University Press.
- Frankel, B. (1995). The reading list. Security Studies, 5(1), 183-194. doi:10.1080/09636419508429258.
- Frankel, B. (1996). Realism: restatements and renewal. Frank Cass.
- Glaser, C.L. (1994/95). Realists as optimist: cooperation as self-help. International Security, 19(3), 50-90.
- Glaser, C.L. (2010). Rational theory of international politics: The logic of competition and cooperation. Princeton University Press.
- Golovics, J. (2017). Contemporary realism in theory and practise the case of ukranian crisis. Polgari Szemle, 1(3), 362-369. https://doi.org/10.24307/psz.2017.0930
- Grieco, J.M. (1988). Anarch and the limits of cooperation: A realist critique of the newest liberal institutionalism. International Organization, 42(3), 485-507.
- Hamilton, E.J. ve Rathbun, B.C. (2013). Scarce differences: Toward a material and systemic foundation for offensive and defensive realism. Security Studies, 22(39), 436-465. https://doi.org/10.1080/09636412.2013.816125
- Inan, A.F. (2004). What moves man the realist theory of international relations and its judgement of human natüre. State University of New York Press.
- James, P. (2009). Elaborating on offensive realism. Anette, F.I., Ewan, H. Ve Patrick J. (Eds). Rethinking Realism in International Relations (pp. 45-62). Johns Hopkins University Press.
- Jill, S., Pettiford, L., Diez, T. ve El Anıs, I. (2010). An introduction to ınternational relations theory. Pearson.
- Labs, E.J. (2007). Beyond victory: Offensive realism and the expansion of war aims. Security Studies, 6(4), 1-49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09636419708429321
- Layne, C. (2002). The poster child for offensive realism: America as a global hegemon. Security Studies, 12(2), 120-164. https://doi.org/10.1080/09636410212120011
- Lobell, S.E. (2010). Structural realism/offensive and defensive realism. Robert A. Denemark (Ed). The International Studies Encyclopedia. Wiley-Blackwell, 6651-6669.
- Mearsheimer, J. (1994-1995). The false promise of international institutions. International Security, 19(3), 5-49.
- Mearsheimer, J. (2001). The tragedy of great power politics. W.W. Norton & Company.
- Mearsheimer, J. (2013). Structural realism. Dunne, T., Kurki, M. ve Smith, S. (Eds.), International relations theories discipline and diversity (pp. 77-93), Oxford University Press.
- Rossecrance, R. (2001), Has realism become cost-benefit analysis? A review essay. International Security, 26(2), 132-155.
- Schmidt, B.C. (2004). Realism as tragedy. Review of International Studies, 30(3), 427-441.
- Schweller, R. (2007). Neorealism’s status-quo bias: What security dilemma? Security Studies, 5(3), 90-121, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09636419608429277
- Snyder, J. (1991). Myths of empire: Domestic politics and international ambition, Cornell University Press.
- Snyder, G. H. (2002). Mearsheirmer’s world-offensive realism and the struggle for security: A review essay. International Security, 27(1), 149-173.
- Taliaferro, J.W. (2000-2001). Security seeking under anarchy: Defensifive realism revisited. International Security, 25(3), 128-161.
- Walt, S.M. (1985). Alliance formation and the balance of Power. International Security, 9(4), 3-43.
- Walt, S.M. (1987). Origin of alliances, Cornell University Press.
- Walt, S.M. (1997). The progressive power of realism. American Political Science Review, 91(4), 931-935, https://doi.org/10.2307/2952177.
- Waltz, K. (1979). Theory of ınternational politics. Addison-Wesley Publising Company.
- Waltz, K. (1989). The origins of war in neorealist theory. R. Rotberg and T.K.Rabb (Eds). The origin and prevention of major wars (pp. 39-52), Cambridge University Press.
- Waltz, K. (2004). Neorealism: Confusion and criticism. Journal of Politics and Society, 15, 3-6.
- Wolfers, A. (1962). Discord and collaboration essays on international politics. The Johns Hopkins Press.
Abstract
Uluslararası ilişkiler teorileri arasında en çok tercih edilen realizm tüm eleştirilere rağmen akademisyenlerin ve uzmanların gözdesi olmaya devam etmektedir. Diğer teorilerde olduğu gibi realizmin kendi içinde de ayrımlar yaşanmakta ve bu ayrımların uluslararası politikanın doğası için sunduğu vizyon hakkında güçlü çıkarımları bulunmaktadır. Söz konusu ayrım literatürde ofansif ve defansif realizm olarak ele alınmasına karşın neorealist temeller göz önüne alındığında ikisinin neden farklılaştığını anlamakta güçlük çekmekteyiz. Bu çalışma yaşanan bu farklılığı daha belirgin hâle getirme amacı taşımaktadır. Bunu yaparken ofansif ve defansif realizmin sadece farklı olduğu hususlar değil aynı zamanda ortak argümanları da ortaya konacaktır. Bununla birlikte defansif ve ofansif realizmin literatürde gereken önemi görmediği argümanlar detaylıca incelecenek olup, ofansif ve defansif realizmin aslında çıkış noktalarının aynı ancak ulaştıkları sonuçların farklılıkları üzerinde durulacaktır. Çalışma öncelikle realist teorinin kısa bir değerlendirmesi üzerinde duracak, devamında ise ofansif ve defansif realizmin savunduğu argümanlar detaylıca açıklanacaktır. Sonrasında defansif ve ofansif realizmin her ne kadar bir iç tartışma sonucu ortaya çıkmasına karşın uluslararası ilişkileri açıklamaya dair savunduğu düşüncelerin oldukça farklılıklar barındırdığı belirtilecektir. Çalışma araştırma yöntemlerinden betimsel nitelikte olmakla beraber yazındaki teorik eksikliği giderme amacı da taşımaktadır. Ofansif ve defansif realizme yönelik literatürde benzer çalışmaların oldukça az olması, ofansif ve defansif realizmin görünenden daha keskin çizgiler bağlamında farklılaştığının ortaya konması çalışmanın önemini oluşturmaktadır. Nihai olarak teorik içi tartışmanın detaylı bir incelemesi olan bu çalışma tartışma ve sonuç bölümüyle tamamlanacaktır.
Keywords
Güvenlik Çalışmaları Uluslararası İlişkiler Teorileri Realizm Ofansif Realizm Defansif Realizm
References
- Brooks, S.G. (1997). Dueling realism. International Organizations, 51(3), 445-477.
- D’Anieri, P. (2019). Magical realism: assumptions, evidence and prescriptions in the Ukraine conflict. Eurasian Geograpy and Economics, 60(1), 97-117. https://doi.org/10.1080/15387216.2019.1627231
- Evera, S.V. (1999). Causes of war power and the roots of conflict. Cornell University Press.
- Frankel, B. (1995). The reading list. Security Studies, 5(1), 183-194. doi:10.1080/09636419508429258.
- Frankel, B. (1996). Realism: restatements and renewal. Frank Cass.
- Glaser, C.L. (1994/95). Realists as optimist: cooperation as self-help. International Security, 19(3), 50-90.
- Glaser, C.L. (2010). Rational theory of international politics: The logic of competition and cooperation. Princeton University Press.
- Golovics, J. (2017). Contemporary realism in theory and practise the case of ukranian crisis. Polgari Szemle, 1(3), 362-369. https://doi.org/10.24307/psz.2017.0930
- Grieco, J.M. (1988). Anarch and the limits of cooperation: A realist critique of the newest liberal institutionalism. International Organization, 42(3), 485-507.
- Hamilton, E.J. ve Rathbun, B.C. (2013). Scarce differences: Toward a material and systemic foundation for offensive and defensive realism. Security Studies, 22(39), 436-465. https://doi.org/10.1080/09636412.2013.816125
- Inan, A.F. (2004). What moves man the realist theory of international relations and its judgement of human natüre. State University of New York Press.
- James, P. (2009). Elaborating on offensive realism. Anette, F.I., Ewan, H. Ve Patrick J. (Eds). Rethinking Realism in International Relations (pp. 45-62). Johns Hopkins University Press.
- Jill, S., Pettiford, L., Diez, T. ve El Anıs, I. (2010). An introduction to ınternational relations theory. Pearson.
- Labs, E.J. (2007). Beyond victory: Offensive realism and the expansion of war aims. Security Studies, 6(4), 1-49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09636419708429321
- Layne, C. (2002). The poster child for offensive realism: America as a global hegemon. Security Studies, 12(2), 120-164. https://doi.org/10.1080/09636410212120011
- Lobell, S.E. (2010). Structural realism/offensive and defensive realism. Robert A. Denemark (Ed). The International Studies Encyclopedia. Wiley-Blackwell, 6651-6669.
- Mearsheimer, J. (1994-1995). The false promise of international institutions. International Security, 19(3), 5-49.
- Mearsheimer, J. (2001). The tragedy of great power politics. W.W. Norton & Company.
- Mearsheimer, J. (2013). Structural realism. Dunne, T., Kurki, M. ve Smith, S. (Eds.), International relations theories discipline and diversity (pp. 77-93), Oxford University Press.
- Rossecrance, R. (2001), Has realism become cost-benefit analysis? A review essay. International Security, 26(2), 132-155.
- Schmidt, B.C. (2004). Realism as tragedy. Review of International Studies, 30(3), 427-441.
- Schweller, R. (2007). Neorealism’s status-quo bias: What security dilemma? Security Studies, 5(3), 90-121, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09636419608429277
- Snyder, J. (1991). Myths of empire: Domestic politics and international ambition, Cornell University Press.
- Snyder, G. H. (2002). Mearsheirmer’s world-offensive realism and the struggle for security: A review essay. International Security, 27(1), 149-173.
- Taliaferro, J.W. (2000-2001). Security seeking under anarchy: Defensifive realism revisited. International Security, 25(3), 128-161.
- Walt, S.M. (1985). Alliance formation and the balance of Power. International Security, 9(4), 3-43.
- Walt, S.M. (1987). Origin of alliances, Cornell University Press.
- Walt, S.M. (1997). The progressive power of realism. American Political Science Review, 91(4), 931-935, https://doi.org/10.2307/2952177.
- Waltz, K. (1979). Theory of ınternational politics. Addison-Wesley Publising Company.
- Waltz, K. (1989). The origins of war in neorealist theory. R. Rotberg and T.K.Rabb (Eds). The origin and prevention of major wars (pp. 39-52), Cambridge University Press.
- Waltz, K. (2004). Neorealism: Confusion and criticism. Journal of Politics and Society, 15, 3-6.
- Wolfers, A. (1962). Discord and collaboration essays on international politics. The Johns Hopkins Press.
Details
| Primary Language | Turkish |
|---|---|
| Subjects | International Relations (Other) |
| Journal Section | The Journal of Defence and War Studies June 2025 |
| Authors | |
| Publication Date | June 18, 2025 |
| Submission Date | February 11, 2025 |
| Acceptance Date | March 21, 2025 |
| Published in Issue | Year 2025 Volume: 35 Issue: 1 |
