Keeping in mind that realism as a political school only appeared when first used by the international relations theorists E. H. Carr and Hans J. Morgenthau, the basic principles have a rich history. One of the most common historical examples of this tradition is the Ancient Greek historian Thucydides and his History of the Peloponnesian Wars, dating back more than 2400 years.

In a nutshell, Realism is considered to be a set of laws for elites that span both time and space i.e. history and geopolitics. Those laws have common strands threading throughout history. Of course, there are a wide variety of different schools within realism (far too many to cover here) but all of them contain some basic principles.

One of the most important of these is that the state is the key actor in International Relations, and its ultimate goal is recognised as to seize power (this means that Realism is “statist”). The state’s statesmen must therefore pursue this goal rationally in order to ensure the survival of the state in what is seen as an anarchical and hostile world.

These ideas are demonstrated by Thucydides in what is known as the Melian Dialogue where the Melians are trying to convince the Athenians not to go to war with them. As the Athenians point out:

�??the strong do what they have the power to do and the weak accept what they have to accept [and] by conquering you we shall increase not only the size but the security of our empire �?� it is a general and necessary law of nature to rule whatever one can�?�.

Keep in mind that Athens is considered one of the oldest examples of a democracy, a fact which didn�??t prevent them from massacring as many males of enemy states (such as Melos) as possible, selling the enemy’s women and children into slavery, and raising cities to the ground!

Now, as a result of this state of anarchy in the world, states should always pursue their own security needs without regard for others, and without relying on others, if possible. An example of this principle comes from the Italian political philosopher Niccolò Machiavelli who wrote in his work The Prince (a classic in realism):

�??it is necessary for a prince wishing to hold his own to know how to do wrong, and to make use of it or not according to necessity �?� it will be found that something which looks like virtue, if followed, would be his ruin; whilst something else, which looks like vice, yet followed brings him security and prosperity.�?�

As a result of these principles, several conclusions follow. For example, international law or morality do not exist, except perhaps when it suits your aims, and force is a legitimate tool for the state to achieve power. As the philosopher Jean-Jacques Roussea put it in The State of War, �??the rule of the world�?� is that �??Justice and truth are commanded to give way before the interest of the powerful�?�.

In more recent history, Realism is considered by many to have guided the actions of the United States in fighting the Cold War. This is best illustrated by the following excerpt from one of US President Truman’s policy planning teams headed by George Kennan (who helped found the policy of containment):

We have about 50% of the world’s wealth, but only 6.3% of its population. … Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity….. To do so, we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and day-dreaming; and our attention will have to be concentrated everywhere on our immediate national objectives…. We should cease to talk about vague and … unreal objectives such as human rights, the raising of living standards, and democratization. The day is not far off when we are going to have to deal in straight power concepts. The less we are then hampered by idealistic slogans, the better.

All this sounds pretty hypocritical - after all, we’re expected to be law abiding citizens and altruistic, and we’re told that spreading democracy and freedom is important - but realists would argue otherwise. While it�??s recognised that a dual morality exists within realism �?? one set of laws for the state�??s citizens, and the morality of political necessity for the state �?? this apparent hypocrisy is justified with the belief that the state’s external amoral attitude allows that state�??s internal morals and culture to thrive and survive. As Hans Morgenthau explains, “The moral aspirations of a particular nation [are not the same as] the moral laws that govern the universe”.

What this all means is that you�??re alive in the UK or the US (or any other state) because the state does whatever it thinks it needs to so that you can live. When UK Prime Minister Tony Blair and U.S. President George Bush talk about the War on Terror and the threat to our values and way of life, they are in fact using this principle in justifying actions such as torture, removal of civil liberties, and so on: these are necessary evils in order to ensure the survival of our morality and values.

Don’t you just feel so much safer?