The core difference between realism and liberalism in International Relations (IR) is their view of world politics:

The core difference between realism and liberalism in International Relations (IR) is their view
of world politics: realism sees it as a perpetual struggle for power in a chaotic world, while
liberalism believes in the potential for peace and cooperation through institutions, democracy,
and economic ties.
The table below summarizes the fundamental differences between these two dominant theories:

1. IR Class review
The core difference between realism and liberalism in International Relations (IR) is their view
of world politics: realism sees it as a perpetual struggle for power in a chaotic world, while
liberalism believes in the potential for peace and cooperation through institutions, democracy,
and economic ties.
The table below summarizes the fundamental differences between these two dominant theories:

Aspect Realism Liberalism
Core View of World
Politics
Inherently conflictual, struggle for power and
security
Potentially cooperative, can achieve
peace and mutual gain
Primary Actors States (state-centric) States, International Organizations
(IOs), Non-State Actors (NGOs,
corporations)
Key Goal of States Survival and security through self-help |
Prosperity and well-being through cooperation

View of Anarchy Defining feature leading to security
competition and self-help
Can be mitigated through international
institutions, laws, and norms
Nature of Gains Relative gains (one state's gain is another's
loss)
Absolute gains (all states can benefit
together)
Main Instruments of
Power
Military force and coercion Diplomacy, economic leverage, and
international law

Realism: The World as It Is
Realists view the international system as anarchic, meaning there is no central authority above
states.
This leads to a self-help system where states must ultimately rely on themselves for survival.
Key concepts include:
Security Dilemma: Actions a state takes to become more secure (e.g., increasing its military)
can make other states feel less secure, leading them to respond in kind, creating a cycle of
tension.
Balance of Power: States form alliances or build up their capabilities to prevent any single state
from becoming dominant. A modern example is the formation of the QUAD (Quadrilateral
Security Dialogue) in response to China's rise.
National Interest: The primary driver of state behavior is the pursuit of national interest, defined
in terms of power, often placed above ethical considerations.

2. Liberalism: The World as It Could Be
Liberalism does not ignore anarchy but argues its effects can be softened. It emphasizes that
states have a capacity for cooperation. Key concepts include:
Complex Interdependence: A concept by Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye describing a world
where states are connected through multiple channels (not just diplomacy), and military force is
a less useful tool.
Democratic Peace Theory: The idea that liberal democracies do not go to war with each other.
This is a cornerstone of liberal thought, though its validity is debated.
Institutionalist Theory: International institutions (like the UN, WTO, EU) facilitate cooperation
by reducing uncertainty, providing information, and establishing rules.

How to Analyze Current Events with These Theories
You can use these theories as lenses to interpret world events:
Through a Realist Lens: The Russia-Ukraine War is a classic example. Realists like John
Mearsheimer argue NATO's eastward expansion threatened Russia's security, provoking a
predictable response to re-establish a sphere of influence. They would see this as a power
struggle in an anarchic system where international institutions like the UN have limited power to
stop a great power.

Through a Liberal Lens: The existence and function of the European Union (EU) is a key
example of liberalism. Despite a history of war, European states have built a peaceful community
based on shared rules, economic integration, and supranational institutions, making conflict
virtually unthinkable among member states.

I hope this helps clarify the rules of realism and liberalism in International Relations. Are you
interested in how other theories, like Constructivism, offer a different perspective?