Man, the State, and War

1. The Causes of War Reside Within Three Images: Man, the State, and the International System.

The empirical approach, though necessary, is not sufficient. The correlation of events means nothing, or at least should not be taken to mean anything, apart from the analysis that accompanies it.

Three Levels of Analysis. Kenneth Waltz proposes a framework for understanding the causes of war by categorizing theories into three distinct "images": the individual (human nature), the state (internal structure), and the international system (anarchy). These images provide different lenses through which to examine the complex phenomenon of war, each offering unique insights and limitations. Understanding these levels is crucial for developing effective strategies for peace.

Moving Beyond Simplistic Explanations. Waltz argues that relying solely on empirical observations without theoretical analysis is insufficient. Simply correlating events without understanding the underlying causes can lead to misleading conclusions. A comprehensive understanding of war requires integrating insights from all three images.

Thinking Critically About War and Peace. By organizing diverse theories into these three categories, Waltz provides a framework for critically evaluating competing arguments about the origins of war. This framework encourages a more nuanced and comprehensive approach to understanding the complex interplay of factors that contribute to conflict.

2. First Image: Human Nature as the Root of Conflict.

Our miseries are ineluctably the product of our natures.

The Individual as the Source. The first image attributes war to the inherent nature of human beings, emphasizing factors such as selfishness, aggression, and irrationality. This perspective suggests that war is a consequence of individual flaws and that lasting peace can only be achieved through the moral or psychological improvement of humanity.

Pessimists vs. Optimists. Within the first image, there are both pessimists and optimists. Pessimists, like St. Augustine and Spinoza, believe that human nature is fundamentally flawed and that war is an inevitable consequence. Optimists, on the other hand, believe that human nature can be improved through education, moral reform, or psychological adjustment, leading to a more peaceful world.

Limitations of the First Image. While acknowledging the role of human behavior, Waltz critiques the first image for its oversimplification and its inability to explain variations in conflict. He argues that human nature, being a constant, cannot account for the ebb and flow of war and peace.

3. Second Image: The State's Internal Structure as a Driver of War.

If bad states make wars, good states would live at peace with one another.

The State as the Key Factor. The second image shifts the focus from individual behavior to the internal characteristics of states, arguing that the structure and nature of governments influence their propensity for war. This perspective suggests that certain types of states, such as democracies or capitalist states, are more or less prone to conflict.

Democratic Peace Theory. A prominent example of the second image is the democratic peace theory, which posits that democracies are less likely to wage war against each other. This theory suggests that promoting democracy globally can contribute to a more peaceful world.

Limitations of the Second Image. Waltz critiques the second image for its overemphasis on internal factors and its neglect of the international system. He argues that even "good" states may be compelled to compete for power and security in an anarchic international environment.

4. Third Image: International Anarchy as the Permissive Cause of War.

Explaining international outcomes requires one to examine the situations of states, as well as their individual characteristics.

The Systemic Level. The third image emphasizes the structure of the international system, particularly the absence of a central authority (anarchy), as the primary cause of war. In an anarchic system, states must rely on self-help for their security, leading to a constant competition for power and a perpetual risk of conflict.

Security Dilemma. The security dilemma, a key concept in the third image, describes the situation in which states' efforts to enhance their own security can inadvertently threaten other states, leading to a spiral of arms races and escalating tensions. This dynamic makes war possible and even likely, regardless of the intentions of individual states.

Balancing Behavior. The third image also highlights the tendency of states to balance against rising powers, forming alliances to prevent any single state from dominating the international system. This balancing behavior is a key mechanism for maintaining stability in an anarchic world.

5. The Behavioral Sciences Offer Limited Solutions to War.

The political methods of coercion, exhortation, and discussion assume that the role of politics is to solve conflicts when they have happened. The ideal of a politics of prevention is to obviate conflict by the definite reduction of the tension level of society by effective methods.

Applying Science to Society. The behavioral sciences, with their focus on understanding human behavior and social dynamics, have been proposed as a means of preventing war. This approach seeks to identify and address the underlying causes of conflict, such as ignorance, prejudice, and aggression.

Unrealistic Expectations. Waltz critiques the behavioral sciences for their often unrealistic expectations and their tendency to oversimplify the complex problem of war. He argues that many proposed solutions, such as promoting international understanding or improving individual adjustment, are insufficient to overcome the structural constraints of the international system.

Ignoring the Political Context. A key limitation of the behavioral science approach is its neglect of the political context in which states operate. Waltz argues that effective solutions must take into account the anarchic nature of the international system and the resulting competition for power and security.

6. Liberalism's Promise and Perils: Internal Reform and International Peace.

However conceived in an image of the world, foreign policy is a phase of domestic policy, an inescapable phase.

The Liberal Vision. Liberalism, with its emphasis on individual freedom, democracy, and free markets, has long been associated with the pursuit of international peace. Liberals believe that promoting these values within states can create a more peaceful and cooperative world order.

Non-Intervention vs. Intervention. Within liberalism, there are two main approaches to foreign policy: non-intervention and intervention. Non-interventionist liberals advocate for peaceful coexistence and respect for state sovereignty, while interventionist liberals believe that promoting democracy and human rights abroad is necessary for achieving lasting peace.

The Hubris of Liberalism. Waltz warns against the potential dangers of interventionist liberalism, arguing that attempts to impose democracy on other states can lead to unintended consequences and even war. He emphasizes the importance of respecting the diversity of political systems and avoiding the temptation to impose one's own values on others.

7. Socialism's Divergent Paths: From International Solidarity to National Interests.

As soon as one of our industries fails to find a market for its products a war is necessary to open new outlets…. In Third-Zealand we have killed two-thirds of the inhabitants in order to compel the remainder to buy our umbrellas and braces.

The Socialist Critique of Capitalism. Socialism, with its emphasis on economic equality and social justice, has traditionally viewed capitalism as a major cause of war. Socialists argue that the pursuit of profit and the competition for resources inherent in capitalism lead to imperialism, colonialism, and ultimately, war.

The Failure of International Solidarity. The outbreak of World War I exposed the limitations of socialist internationalism, as socialist parties in various countries rallied to the support of their respective governments. This demonstrated the power of national identity and the difficulty of overcoming national interests in times of crisis.

Lenin's Response: Vanguard Party. Lenin responded to the failure of international solidarity by advocating for a vanguard party to lead the proletariat. He believed that a disciplined and centralized party was necessary to overcome the influence of capitalist ideology and guide the working class towards revolution.

8. Balancing Power: A Necessary Response to International Anarchy.

For what can be done against force without force?

The Logic of Balancing. In an anarchic international system, states must constantly be aware of the distribution of power and the potential threats posed by other states. To ensure their survival, states tend to balance against rising powers, forming alliances to prevent any single state from dominating the system.

Realpolitik and the Balance of Power. Realpolitik, a school of thought that emphasizes the pursuit of national interests through pragmatic means, often advocates for balance-of-power policies. Realists argue that maintaining a balance of power is essential for preserving stability and preventing war.

The Limits of Balancing. While balancing behavior can help to maintain stability, it is not a foolproof solution. The security dilemma, misperceptions, and the difficulty of accurately assessing power can all undermine the effectiveness of balancing.

9. Integrating the Images: A Comprehensive Understanding of War and Peace.

Human nature is so complex that it justifies almost every assumption and prejudice with which either a scientific investigation or an ordinary human contact is initiated.

The Interplay of Causes. Waltz emphasizes that war is a complex phenomenon with multiple causes operating at different levels. A comprehensive understanding of war requires integrating insights from all three images: human nature, the state, and the international system.

Beyond Single-Cause Explanations. Relying solely on one image can lead to incomplete and misleading conclusions. For example, attributing war solely to human aggression ignores the structural factors that make conflict more likely.

A Framework for Analysis. By providing a framework for organizing and evaluating different theories, Waltz's three images offer a valuable tool for understanding the complex dynamics of international politics and for developing more effective strategies for peace.

Last updated: March 17, 2025