Some scholars have argued that realism is not very useful for understanding the modern security environment; others posit that many of the “new” threats are simply “new permutations of old threats,” and realism continues to hold explanatory power for understanding them. With whom do you agree? Explain.

Some scholars have argued that realism is not very useful for understanding the modern security environment; others posit that many of the “new” threats are simply “new permutations of old threats,” and realism continues to hold explanatory power for understanding them. With whom do you agree? Explain.

Realism and Traditional Security Studies

• Schlag, Gabi, Junk, Julian, and Daase, Christopher, eds. Transformations of Security Studies: Dialogues, Diversity and Discipline. London: Routledge, 2015. Chapters 1 & 6 (pages 35-48 and 111-121).
• Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service, Issuing Body. The North Korean Nuclear Challenge: Military Options and Issues for Congress. 2017. Pages 1-25.