Realism in international relations is one of the most influential theories explaining how nations interact in the global system. It emphasizes power, national interest, and survival as the main drivers of state behavior. Realists believe that the international system is anarchic, meaning there is no central authority to enforce rules or maintain order. As a result, every state must rely on its own capabilities to ensure security and protect sovereignty. Understanding examples of realism in international relations helps us see how these ideas play out in real-world politics, conflicts, and alliances.
Understanding Realism in International Relations
Realism is based on the idea that the international system is governed by the struggle for power among states. According to realist thinkers such as Hans Morgenthau, Kenneth Waltz, and Thucydides, human nature drives competition and conflict. Because no global authority exists to prevent war or enforce peace, nations act in their own self-interest to survive. This often means prioritizing military power, economic strength, and strategic alliances.
There are several forms of realism, including classical realism, neorealism (or structural realism), and offensive and defensive realism. Each variation emphasizes different aspects of power and security, but they share a common belief that cooperation is limited and that peace is temporary. The theory has shaped foreign policies of major powers for centuries and remains highly relevant today.
Key Principles of Realism
Before examining examples of realism in international relations, it is important to understand its fundamental principles. These ideas form the foundation of realist thought and influence how states make decisions on security and diplomacy
- AnarchyThe international system lacks a central governing authority, so states must ensure their own survival.
- State-Centric ApproachStates are the primary actors in world politics, not international organizations or individuals.
- National InterestEvery state acts in pursuit of its national interest, usually defined in terms of power and security.
- Self-Help SystemStates cannot rely on others for protection; they must strengthen their own capabilities.
- Balance of PowerStability arises when power is distributed among states to prevent any one nation from dominating.
With these principles in mind, we can explore real-world situations where realism clearly influenced state actions and international outcomes.
Examples of Realism in International Relations
1. The Cold War (1947 1991)
One of the most prominent examples of realism in international relations is the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union. Both superpowers sought to expand their influence globally while maintaining a balance of power to prevent direct conflict. The arms race, formation of military alliances like NATO and the Warsaw Pact, and proxy wars in countries such as Vietnam and Afghanistan all demonstrate realist thinking.
During this period, both nations acted based on national interest and survival rather than ideology or morality. The concept of deterrence using nuclear weapons to discourage attacks was a realist strategy rooted in the idea that power ensures security. The Cold War illustrates how states behave rationally to preserve dominance and stability in an anarchic world.
2. The Balance of Power in Europe (19th Century)
In the 19th century, European powers such as Britain, France, Russia, Austria, and Prussia maintained a balance of power system to prevent any one state from becoming too dominant. This arrangement, known as the Concert of Europe, was created after the Napoleonic Wars to ensure stability and peace through power equilibrium.
Realism is evident in this system because each state acted to protect its interests and maintain security through shifting alliances. For example, Britain often supported the weaker side in continental conflicts to prevent a single hegemon from controlling Europe. The system successfully maintained relative peace for nearly a century, proving that balance of power is a practical expression of realist theory.
3. The U.S. Invasion of Iraq (2003)
The 2003 invasion of Iraq is another modern example of realism in international relations. The United States justified the war by arguing that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction and posed a threat to global security. However, from a realist perspective, the invasion was primarily about maintaining U.S. influence in the Middle East, securing oil interests, and asserting military dominance.
Realists interpret this event as a demonstration of how powerful states use military intervention to protect strategic interests rather than humanitarian or ideological goals. The focus on power projection and national interest over moral considerations aligns closely with realist principles.
4. The Rise of China in Global Politics
China’s rise as an economic and military power in the 21st century reflects realist dynamics. As China’s influence grows, it seeks to secure resources, expand trade routes, and strengthen its military capabilities, particularly in the South China Sea. Its actions, such as building artificial islands and asserting territorial claims, demonstrate a pursuit of regional dominance and security.
From a realist viewpoint, China’s behavior is predictable in an anarchic system where survival depends on power accumulation. Other states, such as the United States, Japan, and India, have responded by strengthening alliances to counterbalance China’s influence, showing the ongoing relevance of balance-of-power politics.
5. Russia’s Annexation of Crimea (2014)
When Russia annexed Crimea from Ukraine in 2014, many analysts viewed it through a realist lens. Russia’s actions were driven by national interest securing control over the Black Sea and protecting its sphere of influence from Western expansion. Despite international condemnation, Russia prioritized strategic advantage over global opinion or legal norms.
This incident also shows how realism explains conflicts that emerge when great powers perceive threats to their influence. For Russia, NATO’s expansion and Ukraine’s alignment with the West were seen as security risks. The annexation, therefore, was an assertion of power in response to perceived encirclement.
6. U.S. Foreign Policy Toward Iran
The long-standing tension between the United States and Iran also demonstrates realism. The U.S. seeks to limit Iran’s nuclear capabilities and influence in the Middle East to maintain its dominance and protect allies such as Israel and Saudi Arabia. Similarly, Iran pursues regional influence through proxy groups and strategic partnerships to ensure survival and independence from Western control.
Both nations act out of self-interest rather than ideology. The sanctions, negotiations, and occasional military strikes are part of a power-based struggle, emphasizing security and strategic balance core ideas in realist thought.
7. The Formation of Military Alliances
Military alliances such as NATO and the AUKUS pact between the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia are modern examples of realism in action. These alliances exist not because of shared values but because of shared security interests. States form alliances to balance against common threats and enhance their defense capabilities.
For instance, NATO’s existence during and after the Cold War reflects the realist principle of collective defense in an anarchic system. Each member benefits from the security provided by the alliance while maintaining national sovereignty and autonomy.
8. The U.S.-China Trade War
The trade war between the United States and China that began in 2018 highlights the economic dimension of realism. Both countries engaged in tariffs and restrictions to protect domestic industries and maintain economic power. While the dispute appeared economic, it was deeply rooted in strategic competition for global influence.
From a realist perspective, economic tools such as tariffs and sanctions are extensions of power politics. The trade war demonstrated how states use economic strength to challenge rivals and maintain their positions in the international hierarchy.
Realism and International Organizations
Although institutions like the United Nations and World Trade Organization promote cooperation, realism argues that states use these organizations only when it serves their interests. For example, powerful nations often ignore international laws or UN resolutions when they conflict with national goals. This selective cooperation underscores realism’s claim that states remain the ultimate decision-makers in global affairs.
A clear example is the use of veto power in the UN Security Council. Permanent members such as the U.S., Russia, and China use their veto to protect national interests, often blocking resolutions that go against their strategic goals. This behavior aligns perfectly with realist predictions about power politics and self-interest.
Criticism of Realism
While realism provides a practical framework for understanding international relations, it is often criticized for being too pessimistic and power-driven. Critics argue that realism overlooks the role of cooperation, morality, and international norms. Theories such as liberalism and constructivism emphasize diplomacy, economic interdependence, and shared values as ways to promote peace and stability.
However, despite its limitations, realism remains one of the most accurate explanations of how states behave under uncertainty and competition. The persistence of conflict, arms races, and strategic alliances shows that power continues to shape the global order.
Examples of realism in international relations from the Cold War to the rise of China demonstrate that power and national interest remain central forces in world politics. States act rationally to ensure their survival, protect sovereignty, and maintain influence in an unpredictable and anarchic international system. While globalization and diplomacy have changed the landscape of global interactions, realism continues to explain why nations compete, form alliances, and sometimes go to war. Understanding these examples not only deepens our knowledge of political theory but also helps us interpret the realities of today’s complex world of international relations.