Realpolitik

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: March 6, 2025