The Constant Relevance of (Military Power)

Military power was the ultima ratio of the past and will continue to be so into the future. The decisions of other states to respect one’s national interests – and especially its core interests – are very much the result of their calculations of what one can or cannot do if those interests are not respected. The United States, for example, will never bow down to Libya’s expansionist agenda in the Gaddafi era. However, when it comes to China’s expansionism in China seas, does the United States dare not to respect China’s core interests?

“THE strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must,” as the mantra goes. Its wisdom was profound in times of Sparta and Athens and it still is today in the times of the United States and China. The mantra drives how soon-to-be superpower, like China, acts as well as how the ruling superpower, like the United States, act – that despite all of its liberal ideology and rhetoric, as Mearsheimer notes, its behavior is a realist one.

Realist often concludes pessimistic and grim analysis. Nevertheless, that is the truth about our world – though an uncomfortable one. You are welcome to dislike it, but it won’t be a prudent decision to ignore it – especially if you are an IRs scholar.  Written by: Zidny Ilman. Zidny Ilman is the Coordinator of Indonesia Berbicara's Study Center (Pusat Kajian).