Understanding great power politics and rivalries

(Mains GS 2 & 4 : Bilateral, Regional and Global Groupings and Agreements involving India and/or affecting India’s interests & Ethical Concerns and Dilemmas in Government and Private Institutions; Laws, Rules, Regulations and Conscience as Sources of Ethical Guidance)

Context:

• Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has rekindled the realism versus liberalism debate in international relations.
• While the realism versus liberalism debate can go on with no consensus, it’s important to understand the basic tenets of the two theories that are fuelling it.

Different perspectives:

• While liberals in general call the war an attack by “authoritarian Russia” on “democratic Ukraine”, realists argue the war was the culmination of the post-Cold War power games in Europe. 
• Basically, both theories try to understand the behaviour of states, especially great powers, from different perspectives.
• While liberalism offers an optimistic view of the global order, it’s more about what the world ought to be but realism is more about what the world is.

Internal characteristics of states:

• After the end of the Cold War, liberal West defeated the communist Soviet Union, so, liberals emphasise on the internal characteristics of states which, they argue, impact states’ external policies. 
• According to them, good states are supposed to make peace while bad states could seek to expand their power at the expense of others.
• Within the liberal framework, there are three different but interconnected theoretical approaches i.e. economic interdependence, democratic peace and international institutions.

Maintain peace and order:

• The proponents of economic interdependence argue that a liberal economic order is essential for a stable international order.
• Democratic peace theorists claim that democracies do not go to war with each other, so, to create a world without war, according to this theory, a world of democracies should be built.
• In such a world of democracies, the role of institutions, according to them, is critical to maintain peace and order in the global system.

Realist’s view:

• For realists, a peaceful global order is desirable, but that’s far from reality, hence, they are pessimists.
• Realists, like liberals, also consider nation states as the primary actors in the international system but for them, the world is basically an anarchic place with no supreme authority to maintain order; therefore, this makes the world a dangerous place.
• Realism “tends to emphasise the irresistible strength of existing forces and the inevitable character of existing tendencies, and to insist that the highest wisdom lies in accepting, and adapting oneself to these forces and these tendencies”.

Conclusion:

• While defensive realists argue that great powers seek to maintain the existing balance of power, offensive realists argue that status quo powers are rarely seen in international politics. “A state’s ultimate goal is to be the hegemon in the system.