Abstract
When the study of IR first emerged in the world as an academic discipline in the UK after the First World War,1 Realism was from the start one of the core doctrines that were taught to IR students. Most of the early scholarship and concepts to emerge from IR studies were based on Realist models, and over the decades Realism became the most influential school of thought in IR in both the US and in Europe.2 IR scholar Michael Doyle considers it to be the “dominant” theory of IR and reminds us of the overwhelming number of IR theorists working within the Realist tradition.3 Indeed, since the end of the Second World War it is reported that over 90% of the hypotheses tested were Realist in inspiration. It has produced creative new works in applications of game theory, political psychology, and political economy.4 And equally significant, as the dominant framework for understanding the relations between states, Realism has shaped the thinking of almost every person involved in foreign policy making in the US and much of the rest of the world.5 As noted by IR scholar Stephen Walt, as much as academics hate to admit it, Realism remains the most compelling framework for analyzing international affairs.6 The impact that Realism has had in the development of IR scholarship and the importance of Realism for many IR scholars and foreign policy makers will thus hopefully be sufficient reason for the reader to allow my use of Realist theory later, to analyze the origins of the Pacific War.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Williams, Phil, Goldstein Donald, Shafritz, Classic Readings of International Relations, Harcourt Brace & Company, 1999, p. 8.
Wilkinson, Paul, International Relations, Oxford University Press, 2007, p. 2.
Fukuyama, Francis, The End of History and the Last Man, Free Press, 2006, p. 246.
Daddow, Oliver, International Relations Theory, Sage Publications Ltd., 2013, p. 121.
Dougherty, James E., Pfaltzgraff Jr., Robert L., Contending Theories of International Relations, Addison Wesley Longman Inc., 2001, p. 63.
Burchill, Scott, Linklater, Andrew, Devetak, Richard, Donnelly, Jack, Patterson, Matthew, Reus-Smit, Christian, True, Jacqui, Theories of International Relations, 3rd edition, Palgrave Macmillan, 2005, p. 30, Daddow, International Relations Theory, p. 121
Weber, Cynthia, International Relations Theory, Routledge, 2001, p. 15, pp. 17–18.
Machiavelli, Nicolo, The Prince, Encyclopaedia Britannica Inc., 1982, p. 25.
Theodore de Bary, Wm., Bloom, Irene, Adler, Joseph, Sources of Chinese Tradition, 2nd edition, Volume 1, Columbia University Press, 1999, pp. 179–183.
Hobbes, Thomas, Leviathan, Encyclopaedia Britannica Inc., 1982, p. 76.
Brown, Chris, Nardin, Terry, Rengger, Nicholas, ed., International Relations in Political Thought, Cambridge University Press, 2010, p. 54.
Morgenthau, Hans J., Politics Among Nations, McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1985, p. 31.
Hobson, John A., The Economic Taproots of Imperialism, in Williams, Phil, Goldstein, Donald, Shafritz, Jay, eds, Classic Readings of International Relations, Harcourt Bruce, 1999, p. 61.
Beasley, W.G., Japanese Imperialism 1894–1945, Clarendon Press, 1991, pp. 12–13.
Waltz, Kenneth N., Theory of International Politics, McGraw Hill, 1979, p. 102.
Quigley, Carroll, The Evolution of Civilizations, Liberty Fund, 1961, p. 309.
Dougherty, Pfaltzgraff Jr., Contending Theories of International Relations, p. 79, Kaplan, Robert D., The Revenge of Geography, Random House Trade Paperbacks, 2013, p. 90. An example is the geopolitics theorist Nicholas J. Spykman, who held the view that the balance of power preserved peace because it corresponded with the “law of nature and Christian ethics.”
Ibid., Wohlforth, William C., Little, Richard, Kaufman, Stuart J., Tin-Bor Hui, Victoria, Eckstein, Arthur, Deudney, Daniel, Brenner, William L., Kang, David, Jones, Charles A., Testing Balance of Power Theory in World History, European Journal of International Relations, Volume 13, Number 2, 2007, p. 157.
Kugler, Jacek, Organski, A.F.K., The Power Transition: A Retrospective and Prospective Evaluation, Handbook of War Studies, Routledge, 1989, pp. 172–173.
Tammen, Ronald L., Kugler, Jacek, Lemke, Douglas, Stam III, Allan C., Alsharabati, Carole, Abdolahian, Mark Andrew, Efrid, Brian, Organski, A.F.K., Power Transitions, CQ Press, 2000, p. 8.
Kang, David C., East Asia Before the West, Columbia University Press, 2010, pp. 17–18.
Midlarsky, Mansul, ed., Handbook of War Studies, Routledge, 1989, p. 173.
Organski, A.F.K., World Politics, Alfred A. Knopf Inc., 1968, p. 426.
Karnow, Stanley, Vietnam: A History, Penguin Books, 1997, p. 116.
Berry, Mary Elizabeth, Hideyoshi, Harvard University Press, 1982, p. 213.
Copyright information
© 2016 Ko Unoki
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Unoki, K. (2016). Realism and Power Transition in International Relations. In: International Relations and the Origins of the Pacific War. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-57202-8_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-57202-8_2
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-56390-6
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-57202-8
eBook Packages: HistoryHistory (R0)