The realist theory is used to evaluate international relations, and its basic principle is that states are the only actors with the power to affect international relationships. Additionally, during times of war, nations act as one voice; hence there is no internal division that would indicate the different viewpoints on the matter. From this perspective, the outcomes of World War II can be evaluated as successful since, over the course of it, the two competing powers, the Allies and Axis, each competed for goals that aligned with the national interests.
Moreover, realists often use war as an example to illustrate the underlying ideas of their theory because, in the state of an emergency on a global scale, the states can only rely on themselves. The coalitions that formed during World War II aligned with this suggestion since the competing states joined forces to protect the ideas they believed in and to avoid being defeated by the enemy. Moreover, some realists believe that politics are rooted in the nature of human behavior; hence, the patterns of both are similar. The goal is to keep and demonstrate power, which for the other party means losing power and influence. From this viewpoint, the states defeated as an outcome of World War II lost their opportunity to extort power on the international level as they were forced to change their political views and the course of the nation’s development. The states of the winning alliance, on the other hand, gained the power to govern international relations in the aftermath of World War II. Hence, the outcomes of World War II are consistent with the basics of the success/failure realist theory.