John Mearsheimer's "Structural Realism" Is

¶ … John Mearsheimer's "Structural Realism" is to provide an account of the balance of power between and within states, which realists believe dominates global politics (Mearsheimer 72). The author chiefly examines this issue while discerning varying points-of-view of realism; he focuses on offensive and defensive realism, the structured realists (Mearsheimer 73). Each of these perspectives provides different answers to why states desire power, how much of it they would like, and various causes of war.

Although there is no consensus between these two viewpoints, both agree that the pursuit of power and the defense of one's state prompts these power struggles (Mearsheimer 74). Mearsheimer's chapter concludes with the fact that the balance of hegemony in the world is tenuous, prompting concerns for security which inevitably impact the balance of power (Mearsheimer 86), and occasionally are responsible for wars.

In the final pages he issues a case study of the rise of China through various structural realism viewpoints which emphasize many of the author's points, such as the fact that China will exert its powers in ways that are detrimental to other nation states which may or may not be peaceful (Mearsheimer 85). In choosing to widely champion the viewpoint of classical realists in this work of literature, the author makes a few choice (if not outright disparaging) remarks regarding the circumscriptions of neorealism.

He denotes the fact that since the Cold War, and especially after 9/11) there has been a marked reduction in the number of purveyors of this branch of thought (Mearsheimer 86). Additionally, Mearsheimer contends that neorealism is unscientific. He discusses the fact that the dearth of neorealist thought is one of the factors for the current resurgence of classical realism. Some of these assumptions the author makes about neorealism are directly contrasted with notions that are fundamental to the balance of power.

The author believes that neorealists attribute a change in the balance of power to a transformation in the amount of poles in the international system, as opposed to the ensuing throes of modernization that classical realists regard it as. Aside from distinguishing between classical realists and neorealists, Mearsheimer also distinguishes between other types of realism. He discusses several extensions of structural realism and realists who champion different viewpoints.

For instance, the author claims that offensive realists utilize the structure of their states in order to encourage conflict internationally (between states) in order to maximize the amount of power, and the resulting hegemony they can obtain (Mearsheimer 72). Defensive realists largely take the opposite approach, and implement structural regulations and accommodations to circumscribe the amount of power a state obtains, presenting a severe limitation to any international ambitions (Mearsheimer 72). Most contemporary realists, however, choose to focus on individual interests of the state.

This notion is in opposition to the stance of classical realists on this issue, which prefer to use the pursuit of justice as one to reinforce notions of community as the principle means by which the state is governed. Mearsheimer's theory directly correlates to the historic and the contemporary relationship between the United States and Russia. When the former of these countries was known as the Soviet Union, it attempted.