International Relations Theory of War 39
the conclusions of the international relations theory of war concerning the
effects of anarchy.
Status Quo, Revisionism, and Aspiration for PowerThe strength and parsimony of realism stem primarily from its tradi-
tional view that countries have fixed preferences.^22 This view releases
realism from the reductionist temptation of seeking the reasons for the
behavior of countries in domestic processes; the traditional temptation of
expecting ideas to influence the material structure of global politics; the
utopian temptation of believing that each given group of countries has
natural, harmonious interests; and the legal temptation of believing that
countries can overcome power politics by leaving the handling of disputes
to shared laws and institutions.^23 However, while most contemporary
realists agree with the assumption that the preferences of countries are
predetermined, they dispute the question of whether the inherent aspira-
tion of countries is to status quo or revisionism.
The terms status quo powers and revisionist powers are vague and not theo-
retically developed. According to Hans Morgenthau, the status quo policy
is intended to preserve the distribution of power as it existed at a certain
moment in history.^24 According to Organski’s and Kugler’s power transi-
tion theory, status quo countries take part in planning the “rules of play”
and aim to benefit from them. In contrast, revisionist countries express
general dissatisfaction with their status in the system and aim to rewrite
the rules by which the relations among nations are managed.^25 Schweller
argues that status quo powers seek self-preservation, protection of the val-
ues that they already advocate, and preserving their resources. They aim
to maximize their security and not their power. For them, potential gains
from uncertain expansion are offset by the costs of war. They may aim to
disseminate and widen the influence of their values in the international
scene but will not exercise military means to achieve that goal. Therefore,
their interest in developing military power varies with the level of the
threat to their values. Revisionist powers, in contrast, seek to expand their
resources. They estimate what they covet more than appreciating what
they possess. They will wield military force to change the status quo and
expand the influence of their values in the international scene. For them,
the gains from uncertain expansion exceed the costs of war.^26
The preferences of countries, or their degree of tendency to revision-
ism or status quo, are represented in theoretical research using two main
groups. The first attributes the degree of revisionism that countries aspire
to at the state level based on three main aspects. Revisionism only—accord-
ing to traditional realism all countries are revisionist. According to it, coun-
tries have an ongoing aspiration to achieve greater power and expand, and
every country will expand until opposing pressure stops its progress.^27