How does realism primarily differ from liberalism in international relations?

Realism primarily emphasizes power and security as the core aspects of international relations, viewing the world largely through the lens of states acting in their own self-interest to navigate a competitive international system. Realists contend that the anarchic nature of the international system compels states to prioritize their survival and security, often leading to power struggles. This perspective highlights the importance of military capabilities and strategic resources in maintaining state sovereignty and achieving national interests.

In contrast, liberalism introduces a more optimistic view that emphasizes cooperation, interdependence, and the potential for progress through international institutions, democracy, and economic ties. While realism is largely concerned with the prevailing hierarchies of power and the inevitability of conflict, liberalism focuses on how collective action and mutual benefits can lead to a more peaceful international order.

This differentiation in emphasis—where realism places power and security at the forefront—marks a foundational distinction between the two theories in international relations.