Key Takeaways
1. Realpolitik: A Method, Not a Moral Compass
Ultimately, the Realpolitik is an enemy of all kinds of self-delusion.
Beyond Morality. Realpolitik, at its core, is not a set of values or a moral code, but a method of analyzing political situations. It emphasizes understanding the existing power dynamics and material conditions, rather than imposing abstract ideals. This approach doesn't inherently endorse immoral actions, but it acknowledges that political success often requires navigating morally ambiguous terrain.
Analytical Tool. Realpolitik provides a framework for assessing the various forces at play within a state and in the international arena. This involves identifying the key actors, their interests, and their capabilities. It also requires understanding the historical context and the prevailing social, economic, and ideological currents.
Pragmatism over Dogma. The goal of Realpolitik is to achieve concrete ends, even if it means compromising on certain principles or settling for partial results. It prioritizes practical solutions over rigid adherence to ideology, recognizing that politics is often the art of the possible.
2. The Birth of Realpolitik: A Response to Failed Idealism
A work that had been begun with aimless enthusiasm and carried out with an over-estimation of one’s own capabilities ended in dishonour and injury.
The Revolutions of 1848. Realpolitik emerged in the aftermath of the failed revolutions of 1848 in Europe. These revolutions, driven by liberal ideals, ultimately failed to achieve their goals, leading to disillusionment and a reassessment of the role of idealism in politics.
Rochau's Disillusionment. August Ludwig von Rochau, the originator of Realpolitik, was a liberal activist who participated in the failed 1848 revolutions. His experience led him to believe that idealism alone was insufficient for achieving political change. He argued that liberals needed to develop a more realistic understanding of power and the material basis of politics.
A Call to Action. Realpolitik was not simply a rejection of idealism, but a call for a more effective approach to achieving liberal goals. Rochau urged his fellow liberals to "get real" about the nature of politics and to develop strategies that were grounded in an understanding of the existing power dynamics.
3. Rochau's Core Tenets: Power, Balance, and the Spirit of the Age
Sovereignty is a term of power and he who treats it as a legal term will always arrive at unsustainable results.
Power as the Foundation. Rochau argued that power, not abstract rights or legal principles, is the determining factor in politics. Successful statecraft depends on understanding the distribution of power within a state and in the international arena.
Internal Equilibrium. The most effective form of government is one that incorporates the most powerful social forces within the state, harnesses their energies, and achieves a balance among them. This requires understanding the historical circumstances and the conditions of modernity.
The Importance of Ideas. Ideas matter in politics, but their importance is to be judged by their political force rather than their purity or coherence. The Zeitgeist (the "spirit of the age") is a crucial factor in determining the trajectory of a nation's politics.
4. Bismarck and the Perversion of Realpolitik
The great questions of our time will not be decided by speeches and majority decisions—that was the mistake of 1848–9—but by Blood and Iron.
Bismarck's Shadow. Otto von Bismarck, the Prussian chancellor who united Germany in 1871, became closely associated with Realpolitik, even though he never used the term himself. His emphasis on power and his willingness to use force to achieve his goals led many to see him as the ultimate practitioner of Realpolitik.
The Distortion of Rochau's Vision. However, Bismarck's approach differed significantly from Rochau's original concept. Bismarck prioritized national unity above all else, even at the expense of liberal principles. This led to a perversion of Realpolitik, in which it became associated with authoritarianism and militarism.
A Fatal Compromise? The association of Realpolitik with Bismarck raised questions about the compatibility of liberalism and nationalism. Some argued that German liberals had made a fatal compromise by prioritizing national unity over their liberal values, paving the way for the rise of authoritarianism.
5. Anglo-American Distrust: Realpolitik as a Foreign Threat
“We Germans,” a Berlin professor recently assured me, “write fat volumes about Realpolitik but understand it no better than babies in a nursery.”
A Germanic Bogeyman. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, Realpolitik became a term of suspicion and distrust in the Anglo-American world. It was seen as a uniquely German approach to foreign policy, characterized by cynicism, ruthlessness, and a disregard for moral principles.
The Anglo-German Rivalry. The rise of Germany as a major power and its challenge to British hegemony fueled Anglo-American distrust of Realpolitik. It was seen as a tool of German imperialism and a threat to the existing international order.
Anti-Realpolitik. The negative perception of Realpolitik led to the development of an "anti-realpolitik" tradition in the Anglo-American world. This tradition emphasized the importance of moral principles, international law, and multilateral cooperation in foreign policy.
6. American Realpolitik: A Geopolitical Awakening
You Americans understand it far too well to talk about it.
A Different Breed. While Realpolitik was viewed with suspicion in some quarters, others in the United States saw it as a necessary corrective to what they perceived as the naiveté and idealism of American foreign policy. This led to the emergence of an American version of Realpolitik, which emphasized the importance of power, national interest, and strategic calculation.
Geopolitics and American Power. American Realpolitik was closely linked to the rise of geopolitics, which emphasized the importance of geography and strategic location in international relations. Thinkers like Alfred Thayer Mahan and Nicholas Spykman argued that the United States needed to assert its power in key regions of the world to protect its interests.
Lippmann's Call to Action. Walter Lippmann, a prominent journalist and foreign policy analyst, was a key figure in articulating the American version of Realpolitik. He argued that the United States needed to abandon its isolationist tendencies and embrace a more active role in shaping the international order.
7. The Cold War and the Moralization of American Power
Such a course could only be considered ‘right’ or ‘good’ policy for a paltry government and a decrepit state.
The Shadow of the Soviet Union. The Cold War provided the context for the further development of American Realpolitik. The rivalry with the Soviet Union led to a greater emphasis on military strength, strategic alliances, and the containment of communism.
The Ethical Dilemma. However, the Cold War also raised ethical dilemmas for American policymakers. The need to counter Soviet influence often led to alliances with authoritarian regimes and interventions in countries with questionable human rights records.
Niebuhr's Christian Realism. Reinhold Niebuhr, a prominent theologian and public intellectual, attempted to reconcile the demands of power with the need for moral principles. He argued that the United States had a responsibility to use its power to promote justice and freedom, but also recognized the limits of human perfectibility and the inevitability of moral compromise.
8. The Enduring Tension: Realism vs. Idealism in Foreign Policy
Such a course could only be considered ‘right’ or ‘good’ policy for a paltry government and a decrepit state.
A Recurring Debate. The tension between realism and idealism has been a recurring theme in American foreign policy debates. Realists emphasize the importance of power, national interest, and strategic calculation, while idealists emphasize moral principles, international law, and multilateral cooperation.
The Limits of Both. Both realism and idealism have their limitations. Realism can lead to cynicism, amorality, and a disregard for human rights. Idealism can lead to naiveté, utopianism, and a failure to understand the realities of power.
The Need for Balance. The most effective foreign policy requires a balance between realism and idealism. It must be grounded in an understanding of power and national interest, but also guided by moral principles and a commitment to international cooperation.
9. Rediscovering Real Realpolitik: A Call to Prudence and Understanding
The Realpolitik does not move in a foggy future, but in the present’s field of vision, it does not consider its task to consist in the realization of ideals, but in the attainment of concrete ends, and it knows, with reservations, to content itself with partial results, if their complete attainment is not achievable for the time being.
Beyond Dichotomies. The key to navigating the complexities of foreign policy is to move beyond simplistic dichotomies and to embrace a more nuanced and textured understanding of the world. This requires a willingness to engage with different perspectives, to challenge one's own assumptions, and to recognize the limits of human knowledge.
A Return to Rochau. Ludwig von Rochau's original concept of Realpolitik offers a valuable framework for analyzing political situations and developing effective strategies. His emphasis on understanding power, balancing competing forces, and adapting to changing circumstances remains relevant today.
A Higher Realism. By rediscovering real Realpolitik, we can move toward a higher form of realism that is both grounded in an understanding of power and guided by a commitment to liberal and enlightened goals.
Last updated:
FAQ
What is Realpolitik: A History by John Bew about?
- Comprehensive history of Realpolitik: The book traces the origins, evolution, and impact of Realpolitik from its 19th-century German roots to its influence on Anglo-American foreign policy up to the 21st century.
- Exploration of key figures and events: It examines the roles of influential statesmen like Bismarck, Kissinger, and others, as well as pivotal moments such as the Cold War and post-Cold War interventions.
- Analysis of political ideas: John Bew explores how Realpolitik has been interpreted, misused, and revived across different eras, emphasizing the interplay between power, ideas, and historical context.
- Tension between idealism and realism: The book highlights the ongoing struggle between Realpolitik and anti-Realpolitik traditions, especially in British and American foreign policy.
Why should I read Realpolitik: A History by John Bew?
- Clarifies misconceptions: The book dispels common misunderstandings about Realpolitik, showing its complexity beyond cynical power politics and highlighting its ethical dimensions as originally conceived.
- Bridges history and current affairs: It connects 19th-century political thought with modern foreign policy debates, offering readers a historical lens to understand contemporary international relations.
- Insight into Anglo-American policy: Bew reveals the hidden dynamics and ideological struggles within US and UK foreign policy, including the oscillation between idealism and realism.
- Practical analytical framework: The book provides a method of political analysis that integrates power, social, economic, and ideological factors, making it valuable for students, policymakers, and anyone interested in global affairs.
What are the key takeaways from Realpolitik: A History by John Bew?
- Realpolitik is not fixed: The concept is historically contingent, evolving from a nuanced, pragmatic approach to politics into various forms, sometimes distorted as cynical power politics.
- Balance of ideals and reality: Successful diplomacy requires navigating the tension between idealism and pragmatism, integrating moral considerations with practical politics.
- Language shapes policy: The way Realpolitik is discussed and justified influences how policies are perceived and their legitimacy in global affairs.
- Return to nuanced analysis: Bew advocates for a revival of Ludwig von Rochau’s original, synthetic method, which considers power, socioeconomic conditions, and cultural-ideological contexts together.
How does John Bew define Realpolitik in Realpolitik: A History?
- Pragmatic statecraft: Realpolitik is described as a form of diplomacy focused on practical and material interests, rather than moral or ideological considerations.
- Historical and intellectual roots: Bew traces the concept back to Ludwig von Rochau’s 1853 Foundations of Realpolitik, emphasizing its original balance between ideals and practical necessity.
- Not inherently amoral: The original Realpolitik was not a rejection of ideals but a realistic appraisal of political forces, warning against utopianism and naïve idealism.
- Dynamic and context-dependent: Realpolitik is presented as a flexible, historically grounded approach, not a rigid doctrine.
What are the origins and foundations of Realpolitik according to John Bew?
- Coined by Ludwig von Rochau: The term was first articulated in Rochau’s 1853 work, emphasizing a pragmatic, empirical approach to politics.
- Three-level analysis: Rochau’s method involves examining who holds power, the socioeconomic structures, and the prevailing cultural and ideological environment.
- Focus on equilibrium: Realpolitik seeks to achieve balance among social, economic, and ideological forces within the state.
- Not cynical or dogmatic: Rochau’s Realpolitik was about realistic analysis, not the abandonment of ideals or morality.
How did Realpolitik evolve and become distorted after its origins, as described in Realpolitik: A History?
- Shift to nationalism and militarism: After Rochau’s death, figures like Treitschke transformed Realpolitik into a doctrine emphasizing power, nationalism, and militarism.
- Conflation with raison d’état: Friedrich Meinecke and others fused Realpolitik with Staatsräson, influencing 20th-century realist thought but also distorting Rochau’s original ideas.
- From liberalism to chauvinism: The original pragmatic and liberal elements were overshadowed by more aggressive, exclusionary interpretations, contributing to international tensions and Germany’s “special path.”
- Loss of nuance: The concept became associated with ruthless power politics, losing its original balance between ideals and reality.
How does Realpolitik: A History explain the tension between Realpolitik and anti-Realpolitik in Anglo-American foreign policy?
- Anti-Realpolitik as default: Anglo-American foreign policy has often favored idealism, morality, and universal values over explicit Realpolitik.
- Ethical egoism and hypocrisy: This tradition sometimes masks power politics under the guise of moral purpose, providing a “convenient form of ethical egoism.”
- Cycles and pendulum swings: US and UK policy oscillate between pragmatic Realpolitik and idealistic approaches, with each swing generating new controversies.
- Hidden realism in idealism: Bew argues that anti-Realpolitik contains a “hidden” or “higher” realism, blending moral purpose with practical politics.
What role did Otto von Bismarck and German unification play in the development of Realpolitik, according to John Bew?
- Bismarck’s association: Although Bismarck never used the term, he became closely linked to Realpolitik due to his pragmatic and forceful approach to unifying Germany.
- Liberal compromise: Liberals like Rochau justified supporting Bismarck’s authoritarian methods for the sake of national unification, invoking Realpolitik.
- Debates and criticism: The book explores how this compromise sparked controversy, with critics accusing Realpolitik of sacrificing liberal ideals for power.
- Legacy and reinterpretation: Bismarck’s legacy remains central to debates about the meaning and limits of Realpolitik in statecraft.
How did Realpolitik influence Anglo-American foreign policy, especially during the 20th century?
- Negative connotations in Britain: Realpolitik was often seen as a symptom of “the German problem,” associated with militarism and ruthlessness.
- American adaptation: US thinkers like Walter Lippmann and later Henry Kissinger adapted Realpolitik to American contexts, blending it with ideals of internationalism and leadership.
- Impact on policy debates: Realpolitik shaped discussions about empire, morality, and the balance between isolationism and interventionism in both Britain and the US.
- Cold War and beyond: The concept influenced strategies like containment, détente, and debates over humanitarian intervention and ethical foreign policy.
What is John Bew’s advice for political analysis in Realpolitik: A History?
- Return to Rochau’s method: Bew urges a revival of Rochau’s synthetic approach, considering power, socioeconomic conditions, and cultural-ideological contexts together.
- Reject simplistic labels: He warns against caricatures and dogmatic uses of Realpolitik or anti-Realpolitik, advocating for nuanced, historically informed analysis.
- Embrace intellectual ecumenism: Bew encourages drawing on diverse analytical tools from history, sociology, and philosophy to understand complex political situations.
- Balance realism and idealism: He stresses integrating moral considerations with pragmatic politics, recognizing both the limits of power and the importance of ideals.
How does Realpolitik: A History explain the relationship between power, ideas, and society in political analysis?
- Interconnected forces: Power is not just military or political authority but reflects the balance of social, economic, and cultural forces within a state.
- Ideas as political forces: Ideas, especially those with social and economic weight, shape political possibilities and public opinion, influencing state behavior.
- Dynamic and contextual: Political analysis must identify where power, ideas, and socioeconomic conditions converge or conflict, as these determine the room for political action.
- Avoiding reductionism: Bew cautions against ignoring irrational or arcane ideas and social realities, as they are integral to understanding political dynamics and change.
What are the best quotes from Realpolitik: A History by John Bew and what do they mean?
- On Realpolitik’s nature: “Realpolitik was not a theology or a science of statecraft. It did not follow rules. Above all, it did ‘not entail the renunciation of individual judgment and it requires least of all an uncritical kind of submission.’” This highlights Realpolitik as a flexible, judgment-based approach.
- On Anglo-American worldview: Kissinger described Britain’s gift to America as “a convenient form of ethical egoism which held that ‘what was good for Britain was best for the rest.’” This reveals the moral framing behind pragmatic power politics.
- On idealism and realism: Kissinger argued that “when policy becomes excessively moralistic it may turn quixotic or dangerous,” and that policymakers “must strike a balance between what is desirable and what is possible.” This underscores the need for pragmatic balance in foreign policy.
- On foreign policy cycles: “Our foreign policy debates follow cycles, in which policymakers declare themselves more idealistic, or more realistic, depending on which way the political pendulum swings.” This reflects the recurring tensions and shifts in international strategy.
Review Summary
Realpolitik: A History explores the concept of realpolitik from its origins to modern usage. Reviewers praise Bew's thorough examination of the term's evolution and its impact on international relations. The book traces realpolitik's development from 19th century Germany through its application in American foreign policy. While some found the content dense and academic, most readers appreciated the insightful analysis of power politics, idealism, and pragmatism in diplomacy. The book challenges common misconceptions about realpolitik and advocates for a nuanced approach to foreign policy.
Download PDF
Download EPUB
.epub digital book format is ideal for reading ebooks on phones, tablets, and e-readers.
