The meaning and role of power has been conceptualised among realist and liberalist theorists

in international politics. Realism is a political theory based on attaining and maintaining

power, focusing on anarchy and the balance of power, because states exist in a self-help
system where they seek autonomy and compete with other states to establish security
(Morgenthau 1967). However, realism is more complex than a simple reduction to a cynical
international system with a destructive presence of power. This review aims to recuperate
Hans Morgenthau’s classical philosophy of realism that provides a dualistic conceptualisation
of power, consisting of an empirical and normative approach. Allowing for the illustration of
the centrality of power in politics without diminishing power to chaos, rather a power tied
with moral considerations. Contrarily, liberalism does not view the world as anarchist, but
believes in the foundation of peace through democratic relations and interdependence
between states (Starr 2008); formulating liberty as a species of power. John Locke’s
philosophy on power demonstrates power defined as liberal rights, allowing for the
empowerment of citizens and consequently, the state as well liberal institutions. Therefore,
this literature review argues that the philosophy of classical realism provides a more
insightful concept of power in man’s natural state and in international politics. Nonetheless,
classical liberalism description of liberal power is just as useful as it is reflected in present-
day international cooperation and institutions.

Classical liberalists conceptualise power as liberty

Classical liberalism claims to embody a philosophy of morality, where ‘power’ is found in

liberty, specifically liberal individualism. John Locke (1988) states that an individual has the
liberty to claim their own property through themselves and their own labour. This private
property becomes a tool of prosperity production as natural lands become cultivated fields by
man’s labour productivity, allowing for the growth of civilisation (Locke 1988, 2.27). The
liberty, individuals possess, is a species of power: the power of civilians to freely act upon
their rights to make choices on what is fairly and lawfully theirs. Thus, ‘power’ here, is
understood as the extent in which an individual possesses the means necessary to achieve a
desired goal (Smith 2013, p137). However, this power is not expressed in a violent and
aggressive form like in realism. Locke (1988 2.95; 2.99) claimed that power derived from the
individual, as it was them who gave consent to institutions and government, and it is states
that must function in agreement with the will of the civilians. Locke’s principle of liberalism
favoured a limited government, supported by the natural liberty of its citizens, to defend the
“life, liberty and estates” against oppression (Locke 1988, 2.13). This ensures that power
remains equal to everyone, that power is not reduced to a dictatorial government, where the
rights of citizens are repressed (Locke 1988, 2.22). The structure of society and thus, the
international system under classical liberalism suggests the perspective that citizens have
fundamental liberties where individuals are as free and equal as the other (Locke 1988, 2.4).
Therefore, it can be deduced that classical liberalism expresses a state of nature, society and
international system, where actors can live with non-egoistic mentalities and establish long-
term peace through shared and equal liberal power.

Classical liberalism perceives the role of liberal power as a tool to constrain arbitrary power,
to establish laws for legitimate power; increasing individual and state liberty (Locke 1988,
2.170; 2.171). Liberal constitutions provide a plan for the exercise of legitimate powers under
laws and a conceptual framework for politics (Starr 2008). In liberal societies, the rule of law
is the principle of the system, demanding that laws be general and applied to all individuals
involved (Locke 1988, 2.3). This ensures that individuals are not undermined to arbitrary
power but also at greater liberty to live freely according to societal laws. Adam Smith
claimed that the economic liberal system of free trade and liberal political principles of
‘equality and justice’ allows individuals, who do not violate the laws of justice, to live free to
pursue their interest (Smith 1981, 2: 671, 687). The concept of liberal laws restraining
arbitrary power and increasing liberty power is applied to the international system, where
classical liberalism encourages for cooperation, interdependence and peaceful relations
between states. Smith’s economic liberal notion of free trade and the open market, applied on
the international scene, has demonstrated an increase of political peaceful relations between
states and the growth of international economic institutions, which allowed for the reduction
of war between states (Reiter 2017). Thus, in contrast to Hobbesian classical realism where
power is arbitrary due to their anarchic environment, classical liberalism argues instead, that
anarchy can be controlled and overseen with liberal power through political and economic
reform, cooperation and laws.

Power defined by classical realists Morgenthau: morality as well as domination

Morgenthau’s (1967) renown expression that ‘all politic is power politics’ risks diminishing
politics to a struggle for power. Consequently, critics have claimed this philosophy to be the
core of realism, that ‘might makes right’, as asserted by Joseph Nye (Steele and Heinze
2018). However, Morgenthau elaborates on this claim and makes a distinction between
political power and military power; political power includes affiliation of duty and respecting
the conjoint relationship of control (Morgenthau 1967, p26). On the other hand, when a
violent situation arises, it implies the abandonment of political power and inclination of
military power (Morgenthau 1967, p26). Realism articulates the concept of interest expressed
in terms of power. Political actors behave in this mind-set, preoccupied and motivated by
their interests and ideological preferences.

Morgenthau’s (1967) classical realist inquiry focused on power, specifically man’s desire for
power, expressed in his notion animus domanidi, which he believed to be the core of politics.
In contrast to classical liberalism, Morgenthau considered human nature as inherently self-
serving and egoistic. He extracted the three motives in individual’s struggle for power, one
being “to dominate” (Morgenthau 1967, p31). This desire for power (animus dominandi) is
not concerned with the individual’s survival as it has already been secured but rather, his
desire for domination, claiming that the individual’s will to power has no limits (Morgenthau,
1967, p. 25). This depiction of international politics is confirmed by the Hobbesian state of
nature, where individuals have a right to all resources in the world, resulting a “war of all
against all” (Hobbes 1960). Mearsheimer (2001) builds on this notion, claiming that war
occurs when a superpower attempts to dominate to become the sole hegemony in the system.
Thus, for Morgenthau, power embodies man’s control over men (Morgenthau 1967, p26;
1946, p.195).

Classical realism has been criticised to illustrate the role of power as an aggressive instrument
in international politics, used by states upon other states, to dominate. Nonetheless, central to
Morgenthau's theory of power contains ethical considerations and thus, cannot be reduced to
a Hobbesian tradition of self-preservation through domination, for which Morgenthau has
become unfairly criticised. Morgenthau aims to tackle man’s limitless lust for power, which
would only be satisfied when he has dominated all and ‘transforms like God’ (Morgenthau
1947, p.165), by developing moral and ethical elements in managing power. He appeals for
tolerance, stability, and self-control to tame man’s destructive capabilities (Morgenthau 1947,
chapter 5). This was Morgenthau’s most attractive philosophy of his model of classical
realism. What he evaluated as a researcher he condemned as a moralist as his conclusions
revealed the inevitable evil in the struggle for power. Realists argue that the international
system is unsympathetic because it lacks government; state hostility and lack of trust are by
compulsion, not choice (Hobbes 1960). Morgenthau criticised liberals for their idealism,
believing that it is more earnest to state how things are than how things ought to be (Frei
2001, p122). He advised for the solution to the power balance rivalry between America and
the Soviet Union, during the Cold War, was through a dual tactic of military power and
détente (Morgenthau 1947). This is because, in a realist world where the evil of power is
unavoidable, the political strategy of détente is necessary as it must reconcile itself to the
everlasting presence of evil in politics (Morgenthau 1947, p.172). Thus, statesmen must
accept and seek to counterbalance this evil (Morgenthau 1947, p.185). Although realism does
not have a concrete meaning for the concept of power. Morgenthau (1967, p47) emphasises
on the role of environment in shaping political actors’ interests and influencing political
action, claiming that power must be adjusted to changing situations. He is aware of man’s
ever-present desire to control, whether achieved through political power or domination in a
world of conflicting interests (Morgenthau 1946, p201), that universal moral values cannot be
achieved, but to an extent approximated. Morgenthau’s normative element in his theory of
power aimed to control the ‘evil’ power drives, to conserve society in which the weak will
not be undermined by the arbitrary powerful (Morgenthau 1967, p22)

Furthermore, although classical liberalism theories have proven to be effective in explaining

the international dynamics in the post-Cold War era – the increase of liberal democratic states
and international institutions – the reduction of violent conflicts between states, it is also
limited to democratic states. Mearsheimer (2011) stated that realist theories are still relevant
in understanding the international system in the present day. The priority of security and
power balance remains even with the fall of the Soviet Union, the United States currently
maintains military presence in Europe and in Northeast Asia. He explains this as the US
international security strategy recognising the possible rivalries that could arise among the
major powers in these regions if American military presence were removed. This is a
reminder that the maintenance of the power balance remains central to the state security,
achieved through military power (Mearsheimer 2011).

Classical liberalism conceptualises power as the labour carried out by man to achieve his
desired goal. This is not similar to classical realism, where the desired goal is domination,
rather the cultivation for civilisation and prosperity such as the ownership of property as
described by John Locke. Power was found within the civilians and thus, their consent to
establish a government that would represent liberal principles and uphold the rights of
civilians according to the rule of law, limiting the presence of arbitrary power. Locke
favoured a limited government as this would ensure that power continued to remain with the
people, avoiding the centrality of power in a government which may possibly become an
oppressive entity. Classical liberalism argues that the anarchy state of nature in classical
realism can be directed and controlled with liberal power and liberal institutions. Whereas,
Hans Morgenthau approach to overcoming anarchy was through the acceptance of the
presence of evil in power and seeking to counterbalance it. Power to classical realism,
conceptualised by Morgenthau, is man’s lust for power and his desire to gain control over
men. The period of the Cold War is reflective of this philosophy, in which Morgenthau
approached the Soviet Union, as an arbiter power, aiming to spread its influence in the global
system. He advised the United States to dismantle Soviet Union, to prevent this arbiter power
to undermine the weak, with a combination of soft and hard power. Moreover, classical
realism provides the two roles of power: man’s desire of power which turns his interests into
domination, and secondly, the normative power that constrains arbiter power. The
international system in the post-Cold War era demonstrates the rise of democratic and liberal
institutions which maintained peaceful cooperation and independence between states in all
regions of the world. Nonetheless, the fear of the possibility of war arising remains, as
powerful states continue to rely on military power to maintain their security and the power
balance in the international system. Additionally, as Morgenthau rightly stated, power is at
the heart of politics.
 References

Brennan, Jason, and John Tomasi. 2012. “Classical Liberalism”. The Oxford Handbook Of
Political Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Dan, Reiter. 2017. “Is Democracy a Cause of Peace?”. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of
Politics.
http://oxfordre.com/politics/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore-
9780190228637-e-287.

Frei, Christoph. 2001. Hans J. Morgenthau. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press.

Hobbes, Thomas. 1960. Leviathan. Oxford: Blackwell.

Jervis, Robert. 1994. "Hans Morgenthau, Realism, and the Scientific Study of International
Politics." Social Research 61, no. 4: 853-76. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40971063.

Locke, John, and Peter Laslett. 1988. Two treatises of government. Cambridge [England]:
Cambridge University Press.

Mearsheimer, J.J. 2001. The Tragedy Of Great Power Politics. New York: Norton &
Company.
Morgenthau, Hans J. 1947. Scientific Man Vs. Power Politics. London: Latimer House
Limited.

Morgenthau, Hans J. 1967. Politics Among Nations: The Struggle For Power And Peace. 4th
ed. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

Smith, Adam. 1981. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nation.
Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.
Smith, George H. 2013. “The System of Liberty.” In The System of Liberty: Themes in the
History of Classical Liberalism, iii-iii. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Starr, Paul. 2008. “Liberalism and the Discipline of Power”. Freedom’s Power: The True
Force of Liberalism. Basic Books.

Steele, Brent J, and Eric Heinze. 2018. Routledge Handbook Of Ethics And International
Relations. Chapter 12. New York: Routledge.