Wikipedia

Realpolitik

For other uses, seeRealpolitik (disambiguation).

Realpolitik(/reɪˈɑːlpɒlɪˌtiːk/ray-AHL-po-lih-teekGerman:[ʁeˈaːlpoliˌtiːk]ⓘ;fromGermanreal'realistic, practical, actual' andPolitik'politics') is the approach of conductingdiplomaticorpoliticalpolicies based primarily on considerations of given circumstances and factors, rather than strictly following ideological, moral, or ethical premises.[1][2]In this respect, it shares aspects of its philosophical approach with those ofrealismandpragmatism.[3][4]

While generally used as a positive or neutral term,Realpolitikhas been also used pejoratively to imply political policies that are perceived as beingcoercive,amoral,orMachiavellian.[5]Prominent proponents ofRealpolitikincludeOtto von Bismarck,Henry Kissinger,George H.W. Bush,George F. Kennan,Zbigniew Brzezinski,Hans-Dietrich Genscher,Deng Xiaoping,Charles de Gaulle,andLee Kuan Yew.[6]The opposite ofRealpolitikisIdealpolitik.

Etymology

edit

The termRealpolitikwas coined byLudwig von Rochau,a German writer and politician in the 19th century.[7]His 1853 bookGrundsätze der Realpolitik angewendet auf die staatlichen Zustände Deutschlands( "Principles ofRealpolitikapplied to the national state of affairs of Germany ") describes the meaning of the term:[8]

The study of the forces that shape, maintain and alter the state is the basis of all political insight and leads to the understanding that the law of power governs the world of states just as the law of gravity governs the physical world. The older political science was fully aware of this truth but drew a wrong and detrimental conclusion—the right of the more powerful. The modern era has corrected this unethical fallacy, but while breaking with the alleged right of the more powerful one, the modern era was too much inclined to overlook the real might of the more powerful and the inevitability of its political influence.

HistorianJohn Bewsuggests that much of what stands for modernRealpolitiktoday deviates from the original meaning of the term.Realpolitikemerged in mid-19th century Europe from the collision of theEnlightenmentwith state formation and power politics. The concept, Bew argues, was an early attempt at answering the conundrum of how to achieveliberalenlightened goals in a world that does not follow liberal enlightened rules.

Rochau coined the term in 1853 and added a second volume in 1869 that further refined his earlier arguments. Rochau, exiled in Paris until the1848 uprising,returned during the revolution and became a well-known figure in theNational Liberal Party.As the liberal gains of the 1848 revolutions fell victim to coercive governments or were swallowed by powerful social forces such as class, religion and nationalism, Rochau—according to Bew—began to think hard about how the work that had begun with such enthusiasm had failed to yield any lasting results.

He said that the great achievement of the Enlightenment had been to show that might is not necessarily right. The mistake liberals made was to assume that the law of the strong had suddenly evaporated simply because it had been shown to be unjust. Rochau wrote that "to bring down the walls of Jericho, the Realpolitiker knows the simple pickaxe is more useful than the mightiest trumpet". Rochau's concept was seized upon by German thinkers in the mid and late 19th century and became associated withOtto von Bismarck's statecraft inunifying Germanyin the mid 19th century. By 1890, usage of the wordRealpolitikwas widespread, yet increasingly detached from its original meaning.[9]

Political realism in international relations

edit

WhereasRealpolitikrefers to political practice, the concept of political realism in international relations refers to a theoretical framework aimed at offering explanations for events in theinternational relationsdomain. The theory of political realism proceeds from the assumption that states—as actors in the international arena—pursue their interests by practicingRealpolitik.Conversely,Realpolitikcan be described as the exercise of policies that are in line with accepted theories of political realism. In either case, the working hypothesis is generally that policy is chiefly based on the pursuit, possession, and application of power (see alsopower politics). However, some international relations realists, such asKenneth Waltz,have viewed state policy in terms of the pursuit of survival or security, rather than the pursuit of power for its own sake.

History and branches

edit

Seepolitical realismfor branches and antecedents more relevant to contemporary diplomacy and the particular modern, international relations paradigm.

China

edit

Even prior to the contemporaryRealpolitikterm, China has had a "realistic" tradition in its governance dating back thousands of years. Often referred to asChinese Legalism,the spirit of its content may be most readily recognised by Western viewers through one of its kindred,The Art of War.[11]Chinese administrative organisation significantly influenced other Asian nations as well as Western administrative practices not later than the 12th century, playing a significant role in the development of the modern state, including the usage ofexaminations[note 1]for entry to thecivil service.[12][13][14][15]

Starting in theSpring and Autumn period(771–476/403 BC), a trend of "realistic" reformers were taken on to advance the material interest of their respectivestates,with theQin statefounding the first Chinese Empire,Qin dynastyin 221 BCE, ending China'sWarring States period.The political theory developed during the era, including that ofConfucianismwould influence every dynasty thereafter.

Those termed Legalist are more purely "Realpolitikal"[note 2]in contrast to Confucianism and include non-legalShen Pu-haiderived political technique, which charges the ruler engage inpassive observationto determine facts rather than take on too much himself.SinologistHerrlee G. Creelwrites: "If one wishes to exaggerate, it would no doubt be possible to translate (foundational Realist) Shen Buhai's term Shu, ortechnique,as 'science', and argue that Pu-hai was the first political scientist, "though Creel does" not care to go this far ".[12]

During the Spring and Autumn period,[14]the prevalent philosophy had dictated war as a gentleman's activity; military commanders were instructed to respect what they perceived to be Heaven's laws in battle.[16]For example, whenDuke Xiang of Song[note 3]was at war with the state of Chu during the Warring States period, he declined an opportunity to attack the enemy force (commanded by Zhu) while they were crossing a river.

Germany

edit
Further information:Politique
Otto von Bismarck,a German statesman often associated withRealpolitik

In the United States, the term is often analogous topower politicswhile in GermanyRealpolitikhas a somewhat less negative connotation, referring to realistic politics in opposition toidealistic(or unrealistic) politics. It is particularly associated with the era of 19th centurynationalism.Realpolitikpolicies were employed in response to the failedRevolutions of 1848as means to strengthen states and tighten social order.

"Politics is the art of the possible."
– Bismarck, 1867 interview

The most famous German advocate ofRealpolitik,what was uniquely possible and the applied means to achieve it, wasOtto von Bismarck,the first Chancellor (1862–1890) toWilhelm Iof theKingdom of Prussia.Bismarck usedRealpolitikin his quest to achieve Prussian dominance in Germany. He manipulated political issues such as theSchleswig-Holstein questionand the Hohenzollern candidature to antagonise other countries and cause wars if necessary to attain his goals. Such policies were characteristic of Bismarck, demonstrating a pragmatic view of the "real" political world.

Another example was his willingness to adopt some social policies of the socialists such as employee insurance and pensions; in doing so, he used small changes from the top down to avoid the possibility of major change from the bottom up. Likewise, Prussia's seemingly illogical move of not demanding territory from a defeatedAustria,a move that later led to the unification of Germany, is an oft-cited example ofRealpolitik.[17]

Singapore

edit
Lee Kuan Yew,firstPrime Minister of Singaporeand one of the founders of thePeople's Action Party

Singaporean statesmanLee Kuan Yew,who served as the country's first prime minister, has been considered by many political analysts as a pragmatist for his erudite policies in his governance ofSingapore.He believed that the only way Singapore could survive as a relatively small nation as compared to its neighbours was to contrast itself from them, by building up a highly effective and non-corrupt government, in addition to a civil service, under a meritocratic system.[18][19]He also believed that Singapore was to stay neutral but also possess a strong military capability, believing that it serves as a guarantor of the country's independence due to its strategic position. A strong advocate forAsian values,he argued that Asian societies had different values fromWestern societiesand that practicing such values was vital to succeed as a nation, especially as an Asian country, which includescollectivismandcommunitarianism.[20]

Lee described Singapore's only natural resources as being the grit of its people as well as their strong work ethic, propelling this mindset to all ethnic groups of the country.[21][22]Although Lee supportedleft-wingideas in his young adulthood, he was largelyconservativeas a leader, concluding that extensive state welfare and subsidies blunted the individual's drive to succeed.[21]Nevertheless, his government still enactedsocial policies,which included freepublic educationup until at leastsecondary school,state housing, acompulsory comprehensive savings and pension plan,as well asuniversal healthcare,in addition to acivic nationaliststance.[23]

In 1975,Chan Heng Cheedescribed Singapore as a depoliticised "administrative state", where ideology and politics had triumphantly been replaced by "rational and scientific modes of public administration". It is suggested that by doggedly describing itself as pragmatic, the Singaporean state is actually disguising its ideological work and political nature through an assertion of the absence of ideology and politics.[24]Chua Beng Huatargued in 1995 that the rhetoric of pragmatism in Singapore is ideological and hegemonic in nature, adopted and disseminated in the public sphere by thePeople's Action Partygovernment and institutionalised throughout the state in all its administrative, planning, and policy-making functions.[25]

Many world leaders affirmed Lee's political knowledge as being pragmatist and "insightful".[26][27]FormerPresident of the United States,Barack Obama,stated that he "personally appreciated [Lee's] wisdom." FormerPrime Minister of Japan,Shinzo Abe,who had also championed for Asian values, stated that Lee was "one of the greatest leaders of modern times that Asia has ever produced" and a "great Asian leader who laid the foundation for the prosperity of Singapore today."[28]FormerPrime Minister of Australia,Tony Abbott,mentioned that Lee was a "giant of our region" and that "thanks to his vision and determination, Singapore is one of the world's most successful countries."[29]Henry Kissingerdescribed Lee as one of the "world's most successful pragmatists".[30]Today, his ideologies and views are now taught at theLee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy,an autonomous postgraduate school of theNational University of Singapore[citation needed].

United Kingdom

edit

E. H. Carrwas a liberal realist and left-wing British historian and international relations theorist who argued for realistic international over utopian policies. Carr described realism as the acceptance that what exists is right; he thus argued that in politics, realism meant that there is no moral dimension and that what is successful is right and what is unsuccessful is wrong. Carr was convinced that theBolshevikswere destined to win theRussian Civil Warand, under the grounds ofRealpolitik,approved ofBritish Prime MinisterDavid Lloyd George's opposition toWar SecretaryWinston Churchill's support for military aid to the anti-BolshevikWhite movement.[31]In Carr's opinion, Churchill's support of the anti-Bolsheviks was folly, as Russia was likely to be a great power once more under the leadership of the Bolsheviks.

United States

edit
Zbigniew Brzezinski

AmericanRealpolitikbegan in the 1960s with the influence of Polish-AmericanZbigniew Brzezinski,laterNational Security AdvisortoJimmy Carter.Contrary toMcCarthy-era hostility andJohn Foster Dulles's talk of the military "liberation" of theEastern Bloc,Brzezinski proposed "peaceful engagement" with theSoviet Unionwhile he advised PresidentsJohn F. KennedyandLyndon B. Johnson.Brzezinski, uninterested in promoting anti-Soviet propaganda for the benefit of the United States, felt the country would be more successful through frequent interactions with regimes and people under communist rule. Brzezinski knew the tough economic realities of those living in the Eastern Bloc, particularly the permanent shortage of goods, and that their attachment to the Soviet Union was born of historic necessity, rather than common ideology. Brzezinski suggested enticing these countries economically and through educational and cultural exchanges, which would appeal to intellectuals, followed by favouritism for regimes showing signs of liberalisation or less reliance on Moscow. Through that approach, Brzezinski "offered a realistic, evolutionary alternative to empty political rhetoric."[32]

Henry Kissinger has been credited with formally introducing the policy ofRealpolitikto theWhite HouseasSecretary of StatetoRichard Nixon.[33]In that context, the policy meant dealing with other powerful nations in a practical manner, rather than on the basis of political doctrine or ethics such as Nixon's diplomacy with thePeople's Republic of Chinadespite U.S. opposition tocommunismand the previous doctrine ofcontainment.Another example is Kissinger's use ofshuttle diplomacyafter theYom Kippur Warin 1973, when he persuaded the Israelis to withdraw partially from theSinaiin deference to the political realities created by the oil crisis.

Kissinger himself said that he had never used the termRealpolitikand stated that it is used by both liberal and realist foreign policy thinkers to label, criticise, and facilitate a choosing of sides.[34]Kissinger had looked at what he implemented while he served as Secretary of State and National Security Advisor not in the confines of makingRealpolitika standard policy, but within the terms of being a statesman. That political mindset can be seen in Kissinger's bookA World Restoredand was pointed out by historianJohn Bewin his bookRealpolitik.Kissinger went on to say that the role of the statesman is "the ability to recognize the real relationship of forces and to make this knowledge serve his ends."[35][36]

In that context, one can see howRealpolitikprinciples can influence U.S. policy but not as standard policy. The reach and influence ofRealpolitikis found instead in pragmatic and flexible policy that changes to the needs of the situation. That type of policymaking could be seen as recently as in the administration of Barack Obama. Bew made note of that direction in theObama administration,when Obama's chief of staff,Rahm Emanuel,remarked in an article inThe New York Timesthat everyone wanted to break it down into contrasts of idealist and realist, but "if you had to put him in a category, he's probably more realpolitik, likeBush 41[...] You’ve got to be cold-blooded about the self-interests of your nation. "[37]

Realpolitikis distinct from ideological politics in that it is not dictated by a fixed set of rules but instead tends to be goal-oriented, limited only by practical exigencies. SinceRealpolitikis ordered toward the most practical means of securing national interests, it can often entail compromising on ideological principles. For example, during theCold War,the United States often supported authoritarian regimes that were human rights violators to secure theoretically the greater national interest of regional stability.[38][39][40][41]After the end of the Cold War, this practice continued.[42][43][44][45]

Most recently, former AmbassadorDennis Rossadvocated that approach to foreign policy in his 2007 bookStatecraft: And How to Restore America's Standing in the World.For the purposes of contrast and speaking inideal types,politicalideologueswould tend to favor principle over other considerations. Such individuals or groups can reject compromises that they see as the abandonment of their ideals and so may sacrifice political gain, in favor of adhering to principles that they believe to be constitutive of long-term goals.

Pakistan

edit
Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq

Relations between Pakistan and the U.S. were strained during the 1970s due toPakistan's nuclear program[13]and the controversial execution of PresidentZulfikar Ali Bhutto.[46]

In the context of theIranian Revolution,PresidentJimmy Carterdesired to improve relations with Pakistan. GeneralMuhammad Zia-ul-Haqcame into power in 1977 aftermartial lawwas imposed in the country due to political turmoil.[28]Zia recognised the immediate strategic interests that Pakistan may obtain by aligning with the U.S. amidst theSoviet–Afghan War.[17]

Pakistan due to its strategic geopolitical location made it a subject of grave interest to the U.S., which supported Pakistan with financial and military assistance includingGeneral Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falconand financial aid during the Soviet–Afghan War.[23]

Zia initially declined the 400 millionUSDaid offered by the U.S. (under the Carter administration) dismissing it as "peanuts". However, whenRonald Reaganentered office and sought to increment the funding forOperation Cycloneand aid for Pakistan, the U.S. and Pakistan agreed on a 3.2 billion USD military and economic aid package.[6][22]

Under Zia's leadership, Pakistan played a pivotal role in training theAfghan mujahidin,in conjunction with Operation Cyclone to oppose the Soviet-backed government in Afghanistan.[25]

While Pakistan was aligned with the United States, it did maintain diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union during the Afghan war which was primarily based upon pragmatic diplomacy rather than genuine partnership.

One of the majorRealpolitikdecision of Zia's presidency was his role in the nuclear program of Pakistan. Amidst international pressure, he ignored threats of sanctions[26]and prioritised the national interest over non-proliferation international norms. The development of nuclear weapons was seen as crucial fordeterrenceagainst Pakistan's historical rival,India,which had successfully conducted nuclear tests in 1974.[27]

See also

edit

Notes

edit
  1. ^Known as theimperial examination(simplified Chinese:Khoa cử;traditional Chinese:Khoa cử) in China.
  2. ^Civilization and Realpolitik,by Prasenjit Duara, India International Centre Quarterly, Vol. 36, No. 3/4, INDIACHINA Neighbours Strangers (WINTER 2009 SPRING 2010), pp. 20-33.
  3. ^Not to be confused with any Duke of theSong dynastyof a later period.

References

edit
  1. ^Ikenberry, G. John (2017-04-14)."Realpolitik: A History".Foreign Affairs.Vol. 96, no. 3.ISSN0015-7120.Retrieved2024-11-21.
  2. ^"realpolitik | Etymology of realpolitik by etymonline".etymonline.Retrieved2024-11-21.
  3. ^Bew, J. (2016). Realpolitik: A History. pg. 8.
  4. ^"Realpolitik | Power, Pragmatism, Realism | Britannica".britannica.2024-10-12.Retrieved2024-11-21.
  5. ^Humphreys, Adam R. C. (2014). Gibbons, Michael T; Ellis, Elisabeth; Coole, Diana; Ferguson, Kennan (eds.).Realpolitik.John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. pp.3151–3152.doi:10.1002/9781118474396.ISBN9781118474396.
  6. ^ab"Hans-Dietrich Genscher: A Life of Longing for Stability".handelsblatt.Retrieved2022-02-02.
  7. ^Haslam, Jonathan (2002).No Virtue Like Necessity: Realist Thought in International Relations since Machiavelli.London: Yale University Press. p. 168.ISBN978-0-300-09150-2.
  8. ^von Rochau, Ludwig (1859).Grundsätze der Realpolitik angewendet auf die staatlichen Zustände Deutschlands.
  9. ^Bew, John (2014).Real Realpolitik: A History.Washington, D.C.: The Library of Congress.
  10. ^Strauss, Leo; Cropsey, Joseph (2012-06-15). History of Political Philosophy. University of Chicago Press. ISBN 9780226924717.
  11. ^Wealth and Power. Orville Schell
  12. ^abCreel, Herrlee G. (March 1974). "Shen Pu-Hai: A Secular Philosopher of Administration".Journal of Chinese Philosophy.1(2):119–136.doi:10.1111/j.1540-6253.1974.tb00644.x.
  13. ^abVan der Sprenkel
  14. ^abOrigins of Statecraft in China
  15. ^"Legalism and the Legalists of Ancient China".sjsu.edu.
  16. ^Morton 1995, p. 26
  17. ^abPflanze, Otto (1958)."Bismarck's" Realpolitik "".The Review of Politics.20(4):492–514.doi:10.1017/S0034670500034185.ISSN0034-6705.JSTOR1404857.S2CID144663704.
  18. ^Allison, Graham (2015-03-30)."Lee Kuan Yew's Troubling Legacy for Americans".The Atlantic.Archivedfrom the original on 2020-11-17.Retrieved2020-11-14.
  19. ^"Lee Kuan Yew's hard truths".openDemocracy.Archivedfrom the original on 2020-11-15.Retrieved2020-11-14.
  20. ^Todd, Eric Myers (2011). Chatterjee, Deen K (ed.)."Asian Values Debate".Encyclopedia of Global Justice.doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-9160-5.ISBN978-1-4020-9159-9.Archivedfrom the original on 2 January 2021.Retrieved30 December2020.
  21. ^abSuryadinata, Leo (2012).Southeast Asian Personalities of Chinese Descent, Vol. 1: A Biographical Dictionary.Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. p. 525.ISBN978-981-4414-14-2.Archivedfrom the original on 11 May 2016.Retrieved28 July2015.
  22. ^abRoger Kerr (9 December 1999)."Optimism for the New Millennium".Rotary Club of Wellington North. Archived fromthe originalon 7 March 2006.Retrieved10 May2006.
  23. ^abLee, Kuan Yew (15 September 2012).The Singapore Story: Memoirs of Lee Kuan Yew.Marshall Cavendish International Asia Pte Ltd.ISBN9789814561761.
  24. ^Tan, Kenneth Paul (February 2012). "The Ideology of Pragmatism: Neo-liberal Globalisation and Political Authoritarianism in Singapore".Journal of Contemporary Asia.42(1):67–92.doi:10.1080/00472336.2012.634644.S2CID56236985.
  25. ^abChua, Beng-Huat (1995).Communitarian ideology and democracy in Singapore(Repr. 1996. ed.). London [u.a.]: Routledge.ISBN9780415120548.
  26. ^abBrennan, Elliot (23 March 2015)."Lee Kuan Yew: Singapore's great pragmatist".ABC News.Retrieved24 February2022.
  27. ^abCecilia, Tortajada; K. Biswas, Asit (27 March 2015)."Lee Kuan Yew: A Tribute to a Visionary Pragmatist".thediplomat.Retrieved24 February2022.
  28. ^ab"Tributes from around the world pour in for Mr Lee Kuan Yew".TODAYonline.Archivedfrom the original on 15 November 2020.Retrieved14 November2020.
  29. ^Abott, Tony (23 March 2015)."Lee Kuan Yew - Message from PM Tony Abbott".singapore.embassy.gov.au.Government of Australia.Archivedfrom the original on 17 June 2016.Retrieved30 December2020.Here in Australia and beyond, leaders sought and learned from his wise counsel.
  30. ^Henry A. Kissinger(23 March 2015)."Kissinger: The world will miss Lee Kuan Yew".Washington Post.Retrieved24 February2022.
  31. ^Davies, Robert William "Edward Hallett Carr, 1892–1982" pages 473–511 fromProceedings of the British Academy,Volume 69, 1983 page 477.
  32. ^Gati, Charles (2013).Zbig: The Strategy and Statecraft of Zbigniew Brzezinski.JHU Press. pp.23–24.ISBN9781421409771.Retrieved1 June2017.
  33. ^Byrnes, Sholto."Time to Rethink Realpolitik".New Statesman.Retrieved25 June2011.
  34. ^Kissinger, Henry (June 2012). "The Limits of Universalism".New Criterion.
  35. ^Kissinger, Henry (1999).A World Restored: Metternich, Castlereagh and the Problems of Peace, 1812–1822.London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson. pp.312–322.
  36. ^Bew, John (2015).Realpolitik: A History.New York: Oxford University Press. p. 258.
  37. ^Bew, John (2015).Realpolitik: A History.New York: Oxford University Press. pp.4–5.
  38. ^DeConde, Alexander; et al., eds. (2001)."Dictatorships".Encyclopedia of American Foreign Policy, Volume 1.Simon & Schuster. p.499.ISBN9780684806570.
  39. ^Adams, Francis (2003).Deepening democracy: global governance and political reform in Latin America.Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 31.ISBN9780275979713.
  40. ^McMahon, Robert J. (1999).The limits of empire: the United States and Southeast Asia since World War II.Columbia University Press. p. 205.ISBN9780231108805.
  41. ^Grandin & Joseph, Greg & Gilbert (2010).A Century of Revolution.Durham, NC: Duke University Press. pp.397–414.
  42. ^Chick, Kristen (14 May 2012)."US resumes arms sales to Bahrain. Activists feel abandoned".The Christian Science Monitor.Retrieved13 August2014.
  43. ^Josh Rogin (2014-06-14)."America's Allies Are Funding ISIS".The Daily Beast.Retrieved2014-08-10.
  44. ^"US support for human rights abroad: The case of Saudi Arabia".CSMonitor. 2014-01-28.Retrieved2014-08-10.
  45. ^"5 dictators the U.S. still supports".The Week.2011-02-03.Retrieved2014-08-10.
  46. ^Niesewand, Peter (2016-04-05)."Pakistan's Zulfikar Ali Bhutto executed - archive".The Guardian.ISSN0261-3077.Retrieved2023-09-14.

Works cited

edit
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Realpolitik&oldid=1275127299"