condition of anarchy.’^18 In Theory of International Politics, Waltz says ‘Nationally as
internationally, contact generates conflict and at times issues in violence.’^19
Further, explicating his arguments, Waltz appeals to earlier authorities who
themselves held strong and particular views of human nature. ‘From Machiavelli
through Meinecke and Morgenthau the elements of the [Realpolitik] approach and
the reasoning remain constant.’^20 Note, below, how Waltz leaps from assumptions
about human nature (the ‘rulers’ interests’ as defined by these theorists) to the nature
of the state:
The elements of Realpolitik, exhaustively listed, are these: The ruler’s, and later
the state’s interest provides the spring of action; the necessities of policy arise
from the unregulated competition of states; calculation based on these
necessities can discover the policies that will best serve a state’s interests;
success is the ultimate test of policy, and success is defined as preserving and
strengthening the state.^21Neorealism thus substitutes the realist emphasis on a drive for power, with the
assumption that ‘states seek to ensure their survival’.^22 Yet, when Waltz says, ‘success
is defined as preserving and strengthening the state’, he is implying an evolutionary
theory of world politics: ‘the international arena is a competitive one in which the
less skillful must expect to pay the price of their ineptitude’. This is an evolutionary
biology analogy in the sense that those states that fail to act appropriately do not
survive.^23 The states that survive, and which ought to survive the ‘unregulated
competition’ among states, are those most fit – most able to compete in the realm
of power:
A self-help system is one in which those who do not help themselves, or who
do so less effectively than others, will fail to prosper, will lay themselves open
to dangers, will suffer. Fear of such unwanted consequences stimulates states
to behave in ways that tend toward the creation of balances of power. Notice
that the theory requires no assumptions of rationality or of constancy of will
on the part of all the actors. The theory says simply that if some do relatively
well, others will emulate them or fall by the wayside.^24In addition, although Waltz explicitly argues in Theory of International Politics that his
theories do not depend on the assumption of rationality – ‘Notice that the theory
requires no assumptions of rationality or of constancy of will on the part of all the
actors’ – Waltz also argues that, ‘Actors become “sensitive to costs” ... which for
convenience can be called an assumption of rationality.’^25 In his well-known 1981
Adelphi Paperon the spread of nuclear weapons, Waltz also presumes rationality:
‘Where nuclear weapons threaten to make the costs of wars immense, who will dare
to start them? Nuclear weapons make it possible to approach the deterrent ideal.’^26
It should be noted, as an important aside, that though liberals and realists differ
in important respects, they agree on the essentials in their understanding of human
Rethinking ‘man’ 161