Realism and Hans Morgenthau in International Relations Essay

Realism and Hans Morgenthau in International Relations - Essay Example The former is most likely the case to occur when changes have occurred in the society structure as to require the reconstruction of the political constitution. Construction of solid political institutions requires the involvement of realism which must draw a clear line between wishful thinking and truth. Political realism2,3 is a study and practise of politics that contends that all nations are guided by their personal interests which are claimed to be their benefit and are disguised as moral concerns. A rational theory which clearly states what are these rational concerns that imprint a nation's need is necessary and requires thinking of the actual needs of a nation rather than what such a nation would like to see achieved. Such objectives of a nation follow a generic model that may apply for thousands of years and the same "moral" concerns that fall under the disguise of personal interest have found applicability since the ancient times. These fall under the territorial security of a nation primarily which once it has been secured the nation might contend the territory expansion for the establishment of a nation's security. Other than territorial expansion purpose of the personal interests a nation might pursue and disguise under morality is the accumulation of power. One however, should not see such claim... Even though international politics call for a clear distinction between personal concern and preservation of one's identity it may not always be the case that such distinction is probable. Morgenthau performs a system level analysis of political realism; he identifies the dependent and independent variables of the system, how these operate within the system and the effects they have on the system functionality. In this case the dependant variable is the foreign policy that states need to follow taking into consideration properties of the problem at hand, alternative solutions and the impact these may have on the involved parties. The independent variables are the drive of the initiative taking party that may be hidden under the disguise of state, or country, rights preservation or moral principles. The question here is what are the rights a country is entitled to as to take any kind of initiative on foreign policy as to proceed to battle and to what extend is one entitled to take any kind of initiative based on these rights or moral conflicts. The danger-action relation is perpetual circular; once danger is identified action is taken and such action breeds changes that keep the danger hint alive. The point here is the criteria to set as to separate rational from irrational behavior; who is to make such distinctions free of bias and finally what behaviour makes moral or amoral perception as to justify any kind of foreign policy initiative with the side-effects that might have. For danger to initiate action and the other way around the one does not necessary call for the other; just a hint is adequate basis for anyone to claim that certain clues call for immediate action. The author claims