Classical Realism Vs Neorealism Analysis

Introduction
The purpose of this essay is to analyze in depths and details two major theories of international relations - Classical realism and Neorealism. There are many shared values and core concepts in both of the theories. Nevertheless, being similar in many aspects, a range of notable differences distincts ideologies. The definitions, brief explanations and core values of each of the ideology are going to be provided at the beginning of the essay. Secondly, ideologies will be compared and contrasted in order to illustrate the differences and similarities between them. Finally, it will be ultimately concluded that a difference between both ideologies is a not a significant one as central values in both of them are identical.

Realism
The essence of a classical realists approach to
Rather than focusing on individual state’s power, the theory tends to focus on the distribution of that power in the system. This distribution of power is a result of a constant disposition of the system to war. However, as a conflict between interests of states always exists, they tend to go on war only in certain conditions of the polarity of the system. Kenneth Waltz defined three types of polarity in the world: unipolar, bipolar and multipolar (Keohane, 1986). A position of a certain state in the system determines its behaviour and functions, with which it is obliged with in the international system.

Although neorealism has improved the classical theory, it does have its weaknesses. According to Robert W Cox, neorealism does not sufficiently take account of human ideas and practices, and its search for general laws prevents the theory from accounting for change (Keohane, 1986: 19). There is too much focus on the ideas on how the world is structured, rather than focus on the ideas which might contribute to the understanding of international relations in more generous