Introduction
Political scientists identify two main theories of international relations such as realism and idealism. These theories are fundamentally opposite since their representatives believe that a different nature guides people and states. While realists believe that all states’ actions are based on their national interests and the desire for power, idealists believe that cooperation between states can lead to world balance and order (Griffiths 1992; Weber 2010). These principles also explain the attitude of the two theories to nuclear weapons; realists believe that disarmament is impossible, while idealists claim that the abandonment of nuclear weapons will lead to the development of international cooperation.
Main body
The theories of realism and idealism have many opposing ideas, which are based on their belief about states’ motives. The main idea of realism is that the world is anarchic, and there are no world laws or organizations that could control states’ actions (Weber 2010). This concept does not contradict the current world order, where the UN, NATO, or the International Court of Justice exist. According to realists, countries can adhere to the law if this is consistent with their goals and threatens their security (Payne 2020). However, numerous examples from history demonstrate that countries, in their pursuit of power and security, often disregard international laws and regulations, conquering or occupying other countries if they have sufficient resources, military or political power. At the same time, international organizations have no real control, other than the military, to influence the situation. For example, Russia annexed Crimea in 2014, which violates international laws (“Seven years,” 2021). However, economic sanctions are not enough to punish and impact it, and military actions against Russia pose a threat to other countries of the world. Thus, basically, the word has no effective means of influence.
Consequently, the basic idea of realism is that countries are guided by their national interests and security, and the pursuit of power is a means to ensure them. The states that have more power dictate the rules of the world order. However, this desire for power, at some point, leads to violence and war when one state has more resources and strengths. For this reason, realists place emphasis on the military, economic, and political balance of power, which forces states to choose non-violent measures in their policies (Griffiths 1992). In other words, as long as powerful states, for example, Russia, are opposed by another state or a group of states, such as the United States and the EU, an open violent conflict is unacceptable as it poses serious threats to all parties.
This concept also underpins the attitude of realists to nuclear weapons as a deterrent in international relations. Since realists believe that sufficient global interest and trust do not exist in an anarchic world, disarmament is impossible because some states will retain nuclear weapons to ensure their security (Payne 2020). In other words, currently, one hypothetical state does not use nuclear weapons since another or another hypothetical state can use nuclear weapons in response. Consequently, disarmament is not possible until the international system transforms in such a way that there is absolute trust between all countries (Payne 2020). However, disarmament before transformation will lead to an imbalance of power, in which one or more countries will have military might that will force the whole world to obey its interests.
The theory of idealism in international relations has an opposite view of the nature of human interaction and states’ motives. According to idealists, all people have a “good core” that can be corrupted by bad organizations (Weber 2010). Consequently, good organizations and the creation of world cooperation will allow all countries to achieve peace and prosperity. Idealists also see the system of international relations as anarchic, but in their understanding, it is a threat, not an excuse for violence and war (Payne 2020). At the same time, idealists find confirmation of their arguments in the existence of such international organizations as the League of Nations or the UN and the subsequent cooperation of countries to solve global problems. Thus, idealists believe that there is a shared global interest that will transform the world and create institutions that will reduce the system’s anarchy (Payne 2020; Weber 2010). This approach helps to reduce violence, war, and poverty.
Idealists’ attitude to nuclear weapons and disarmament is also based on these principles. Idealists believe that nuclear weapons’ global threat is the reason for the disarmament of all states since this will increase trust between them and is a global interest (Payne 2020). In other words, if all countries give up nuclear weapons, trust and cooperation will increase between them. Such a step, according to idealists, will become an impetus for the transformation of society and the creation of a cooperative system under the control of international institutions (Payne 2020). Consequently, the fundamental belief in the good beginning of all people and states makes idealists believe that disarmament is possible if all countries agree to these conditions.
Conclusion
In conclusion, idealism and realism are the main theories of international relations, which differ in their vision of the nature of society’s and states’ motives and behavior. While realists believe that the anarchy of the system forces the state to pursue its goals and resort to violence for its safety, idealists claim that cooperation and global institutions can solve war and inequality. These ideas are also reflected in the attitude of representatives of ideologies to nuclear weapons. While realists believe that disarmament is impossible without transforming the system because it leads to an imbalance of power, idealists argue that disarmament is necessary to transform society.
References
European Union External Action Service. 2021. “Seven Years Since Russia’s Illegal Annexation of Crimea.” Web.
Griffiths, Martin. 1992. Realism, Idealism, and International Politics: A Reinterpretation. London: Routledge.
Payne, Keith B. 2020. Shadows on the Wall Deterrence and Disarmament. Fairfax: National Institute Press.
Weber, Cynthia. 2009. International Relations Theory: A Critical Introduction. 3rd ed. London: Routledge.