Abstract
This article focuses on the relationship between means and ends in international politics, which is one of the core issues that has been reflected upon in international relations. Political realism, usually regarded as the dominant paradigm in international relations, provides a very specific understanding of this relationship: power and survival are considered as the unique, given and fixed ends of political action on the international scene. Consequently, a theory of international relations only concentrates on how states can make the most efficient use of the varied means the states dispose of in order to achieve these ends. However, this article argues that this dominant conception of international politics is surprisingly narrow. By focusing on other prominent thinkers traditionally labelled as 'realists', like Clausewitz and Aron, the article stresses the complexity of the relationship of means and ends and the place of power within a realist theory of international relations. © 2004 Taylor & Francis Ltd.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 428-453 |
| Number of pages | 25 |
| Journal | Journal of Strategic Studies |
| Volume | 27 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Sept 2004 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 7 Affordable and Clean Energy
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Realistic realism? American political realism, Clausewitz and Raymond Aron on the problem of means and ends in international politics'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver