Bring out the major differences between the Classical Realism of Hans Morgenthau and the Neorealism of Kenneth Waltz. (2018, 10 Marks)
Realism studies the world as it is, not as it ought to be. Hans J. Morgenthau‘s Politics Among Nations (1948; its six principles were added in 1954) defined the school for a generation. Kenneth N. Waltz‘s Theory of International Politics (1979) rebuilt it. Both see rational states in a world of power, but they disagree on why states compete and how that competition should be studied.
Criteria-wise contrast
| Criterion | Morgenthau: classical realism | Waltz: neorealism |
|---|---|---|
| Root of conflict | Human nature, the animus dominandi | Anarchic structure of the system |
| Level of analysis | Human nature and the statesman | International system (third image) |
| Power | An end in itself and a means | A means to security |
| What states seek | Interest defined as power | Survival and their position in the system |
| Method | Historical, philosophical, interpretive | Deductive, parsimonious, modelled on economics |
| Morality | Prudence the supreme political virtue | Set aside; theory explains, not prescribes |
| Stable polarity | Flexible multipolar balance | Bipolarity |
| Scope | Guides foreign policy | Explains international outcomes |
What the contrast shows
- From psychology to structure. Morgenthau’s first principle holds that politics obeys objective laws “rooted in human nature”. Waltz replied that a constant cannot explain variation between peaceful and warlike eras.
- Power versus security. For Morgenthau the lust for power has no natural limit. For Waltz, states seek enough power to stay secure, because too much provokes balancing. Here lies the later split between offensive and defensive realism.
- Polarity. Classical realists valued a multipolar balance in which shifting coalitions restrain an aspirant. Waltz held bipolarity more stable: fewer powers mean fewer miscalculations and no chain-ganging behind allies.
- Agency. Morgenthau called the quality of diplomacy the most important, if most unstable, element of national power. Waltz’s structure largely pushes the statesman out of the explanation.
- An Indian illustration. India’s Treaty of Peace, Friendship and Cooperation with the Soviet Union (August 1971) reads, for Morgenthau, as Indira Gandhi’s prudent statecraft before the Bangladesh war. For Waltz it is external balancing compelled by the United States’ and China’s alignment with Pakistan.
Conclusion
The two differ in foundation and method, not in their picture of the world: both remain state-centric and sceptical of law and institutions. Waltz bought scientific rigour at the cost of agency, which is why neoclassical realism, named by Gideon Rose in 1998, has since tried to put Morgenthau’s statesman, with his perceptions and domestic constraints, back inside a Waltzian structure.