Realism and Peaceful Change

Abstract

Abstract What do structural and neoclassical realist theories say about the prospect for peaceful change in international relations? Although liberal and constructivist scholars often lambast realist approaches for downplaying the prospect for peaceful change, a close read of realist theory suggests some greater room for optimism. Particularly if states are separated by large distances or bodies of water, have robust military (especially nuclear) arsenals, attain regional hegemony, or have particularly propitious domestic systems, states may be able to adjudicate disputes peacefully with rivals and—at least in theory—reduce the intensity of international competition. For sure, anarchy, relative gains concerns, and the tendency for states to balance threats reduce the likelihood that states can transcend competition writ large. Nevertheless, the conventional wisdom has it wrong: realism in its structural and neoclassical forms does not inherently militate against peaceful change.