Рус Eng During last 365 days Approved articles: 2071,   Articles in work: 302 Declined articles: 784 
Library

Back to contents

Security Issues
Reference:

Critics of the Concept of Striving for Security in the Structural Realism
Rozhkov Aleksandr Alekseevich

post-graduate student of the Department of the Philosophy of Politics and Law at Moscow State University

19234, Russia, Moskva oblast', g. Moscow, ul. Leninskie Gory, 27, k.4, aud. G-325, G-327

rozhkov1922@mail.ru

Abstract.

The subject of the research is the problem of striving for security in the structural realism as well as critics of the realistic thesis about the relevant use of the term 'security' in the theory of international relations. The concept of striving for security plays an important role in the corpus of political realism. The most authoritarian researchers of political realism assume that the safety need defines the interaction between states on the international stage. At the same time, according to the author of the article absolutization of this term creates significant contradictions in the core of the theory itself. The main conclusions of the research is that therei s a contradiction in the methodological approach offered by structural realism. Based on the author, the concept of striving for security should be completed with analysis of intra-state factors as well as definition of international interests. 

Keywords: international arena, political realism, international relationships, national interests, domestic factors, structural realism, security, contradictions, country needs, state

DOI:

10.25136/2409-7543.2018.6.28195

Article was received:

29-11-2018


Review date:

30-11-2018


Publish date:

03-01-2019


This article written in Russian. You can find full text of article in Russian here .

References
1.
Konyshev V. N. Amerikanskii neorealizm o prirode voiny: evolyutsiya politicheskoi teorii. — SPb.: Nauka, 2004. — 372 s.
2.
Buzan B. Peace, Power, and Security: Contending Concepts in the Study of International Relations // Journal of Peace Research. Vol. 21, No. 2, Special Issue on Alternative Defense (Jun., 1984), pp. 109-125
3.
Gilpin, R. War and Change in World Politics. C.: Cambridge University Press, 1981. 272 p.
4.
Herz J. H. Political Realism and Political Idealism. C.: University of Chicago Press, 1951. 275 p.
5.
Ikenberry J. Institutions, strategic restraint, and the persistence of American postwar order// International security. Winter 1998/99. Vol. 23. №3.
6.
Keohane R. Neorealism and its critics. NY.: Columbia University Press, 1986.
7.
Mearsheimer J. The tragedy of great power politics. NY.: W.W. Norton & Company, 2001. 160 p.
8.
Morgenthau H.J. Politics Among Nations. The Struggle for Power and Peace. NY.: Alfred A. Knoff, 1955. 515 p.
9.
Schweller R. L., Priess D. A Tale of Two Realisms: Expanding the Institutions Debate-Mershon International Studies Review – 1997. 1-32 pp.
10.
Walt S. M. The Origins of Alliance. NY.: Cornell University Press, 1987. 334 p.
11.
Waltz K. N. Theory of international Politics. B.: University of California, 1979. 251 p.
12.
Waltz K. N. Man, the State, and War. NY.: Columbia University press, 1959. 263 p.