Realism: a strategic approach to energy security
Petr Ocelík
ESS427 / MEB427 / MEBn4001
26th September 2019
Outline
• The concept of security
• Realism in International Relations
• Realism: agency and structure
• Realism and energy: issues
The concept of security
• What is security?
• Whose security we are talking about?
• What counts as a security issue?
• How can security be achieved?
Williams 2008: 5
The concept of security
• What is security?
• organizing principle (survival, subsistence, emancipation, etc.)
• Whose security we are talking about?
• referent object (state, individual, social class, etc.)
• What counts as a security issue?
• threat (military, social, environmental, etc.)
• How can security be achieved?
• measures (military, economic liberalization, social reform, etc.) Williams 2008: 5
Related concepts
• Referent object: an entity which is to be secured.
• Security actor: relates to referent object in order to secure or
threaten the referent object.
• Threat: a source of existing or potential damage or destruction of
referent object.
• Impact: given by extent of a threat and importance of a referent
object.
• Risk: a likelihood that a particular threat is realized.
Impact-risk matrix
Realism in IR
• International system (IS) is anarchically organized
• The IS is structured by distribution of material capabilities
• The IS consists of national states, self-help units, that seek survival
• Conflict is an inherent feature of IS
• There is a clear distinction between international and domestic level
Neoclassical geopolitics (NG)
• NG shares number of Realist assumptions
• State-centrism
• Emphasizes power distribution and military forces
• Conflict as an inherent feature of international system
• NG emphasizes and focus on geographical factors
• Geographical space shapes opportunities and constraints of actors’
behavior
• Energy arena: security of transport routes, chokepoints, control of
production areas, and pipeline policies
Agency
• Agency: concept of a social actor
• Actor: an entity that is able to make decisions
• Realism rejects optimistic liberal view of agency.
• Two variants:
• Classical Realism: agency connected to ambivalent human nature
• Neorealism: agency based on rational actor model where actors optimize
their security
Agency: national capabilities
• Most important feature: power capability
• Seen in material terms
• Composite Index of National Capabilities
• 6 indicators:
• Total population
• Urban population
• Steel and iron production
• TPES
• Military expenditures
• Number of military forces
Structure
• Structure: a context that enables and constraints actions of actors
• Constant: anarchy, functional undifferentiation
• Variable: distribution of power capabilities
• Based on the distribution different configurations of IS are
recognized:
• Unipolar
• Bipolar
• Tripolar
• Multipolar
• Diffused
Goldstein & Pevehouse 2012: 47
Goldstein & Pevehouse 2012: 45
Structure: balance of power
• Balance of power mechanism mediates structural effects
• Two conditions of balancing (Waltz 1979: 121):
• International system must be anarchical
• System must consists of units that seek survival
• It is distinguished between internal and external balancing:
• Internal balancing: e.g. military build-up
• External balancing: e.g. alliance formation
Structure: security dilemma
• The inherent uncertainty of anarchical system and self-help nature of
states lead to security dilemma
• Since security is seen as a zero-sum game → security gain of one
state brings security loss of another
• Result: escalating spiral of armament (an arms race)
• Introduced by John Herz (1950)
Structure: security dilemma
“Wherever ... anarchic society has existed ... there has arisen what may
be called the ‘security dilemma’ of men, or groups, or their leaders.
Groups or individuals living in such a constellation must be, and usually
are, concerned about their security from being attacked, subjected,
dominated, or annihilated by other groups and individuals. Striving to
attain security from such attack, they are driven to acquire more and
more power in order to escape the impact of the power of others. This,
in turn, renders the others more insecure and compels them to prepare
for the worst. Since none can ever feel entirely secure in such world of
competing units, power competition ensues, and the vicious circle of
security and power accumulation is on.” (Herz 1950: 157)
Goldstein & Pevehouse 2012: 60
Structure: security dilemma
• The inherent uncertainty of anarchical system and self-help nature of
states lead to security dilemma
• Since security is seen as a zero-sum game → security gain of one
state brings security loss of another
• Result: escalating spiral of armament (an arms race)
• Introduced by John Herz (1950)
• Solutions:
• Balancing
• Bandwagoning
• Hegemony
• (Collective security)
Structure: (energy) security dilemma
• Two approaches to energy security dilemma
• (1) States have to choose between market effectivity and control over
the energy markets
• (2) “Diversification race”: diversification of importer/exporter
increases vulnerability of importer/exporter
Conflict over resources
• National resources are dominant sources of power (Klare 2008).
• Energy resources are integral part of the national states’ power
capabilities.
• Strategic nature of energy resources is given by:
• Limited amount and availability of these resources.
• Relative scarcity of its substitutes.
• In combination with anarchical nature of IR → pushes states towards
competition over resources.
Self-sufficiency
• State is able to satisfy its whole consumption from domestic
resources
• Self-sufficiency vs. autarky (or independence)
• Latter assumes independence of external influences
• Self-sufficiency often not a realistic option
Economic nationalism
• Approach that evaluates economic policies based on their
contribution to state power
• Economic mercantilism: accumulation of scarce resources
• Strategic trade: state support of strategically important companies
Realist tradition
Referent object National state
Security actor National state
Threat Military conflict
Values Territorial integrity
Political sovereignty
Measures Military build-up
Balancing
• Hans Morgenthau: “National security must be defined as integrity of
the national territory and its institutions.” (1960: 563) ... “The survival
of a political unit, such as a nation, and its identity.” (1952a: 973)
• Walter Lippmann: “A nation is secure to the extent to which it is not
in danger of having to sacrifice core values, if it wishes to avoid war,
and is able, if challenged, to maintain them by victory in such a war.”
(1943: 51)
• Arnold Wolfers: “Security, in an objective sense, measures the
absence of threats to acquired values, in a subjective sense, the
absence of fear that such values will be attacked.” (1962: 149)
• Stephen Walt: security studies are “the study of the threat use and
control of military force.” (Lynn-Jones 1991)
• Kenneth Waltz: “In anarchy, security is highest end. Only if survival is
assured can states safely seek such other goals ... The first concern of
states is not to maximize power but to maintain their positions in the
system.” (1979: 126)
• International security: competition for power among states,
understood in terms of military capabilities.
Energy security: strategic approach
“War, war never changes.”
• State-centrism: state as a key actor.
• The main goal is survival.
• State interactions governed by balance of power mechanism.
• Energy commodities are considered as a source of power.
• Energy comm. might be causes and means of conflict.
• Limited amount of energy comm.: zero sum game.
• Emphasis on relative gains.
→ Militarization of energy issues (logic of war, Ciuta 2010)