Woodrow Wilson Realism Analysis

In my view, Woodrow Wilson was not a realist. Some of his actions could be grounded in some minute aspects of realism, but in analysing the core foundations of realism, Wilson was not a realist. Wilson was predominantly a strong idealist and his idealistic views on a global order influenced his actions. To be persuaded by my claim, it will be critical to understand what realism is, and how realists view global governance. This will provide the foundation to assess Wilson’s actions towards achieving global order, which essentially embodied who he was as a leader and an individual, were not characteristic of a realist.
Doyle (1997) explains that realism is rooted in the foundation of Complex Realism . Complex realists describe world politics as a “state of war”, based on these: first, the international scene is made up of multiple powers with no government; secondly, the main actors are independent, and thirdly, without a holistic governing authority, global values, …show more content…
In his 1998 journal article, Link discusses the “higher realism” of Wilson. He argues that Wilson can be considered as a supreme realist. He explained that Wilson went through life and its circumstances without illusions. In addition, the situations, both national and international, with which Wilson had to cope, was higher realism. Higher because it he was more perceptive, more in accordance with reality, and more probable of getting the approval of societies in the long run. Examples that Link provide to support this claim include: first, Wilson acted realistically in how he conducted his foreign relations – example being Wilson classically using armed force in Mexico and the Caribbean in attaining diplomatic goals. Secondly, Wilson was “never the victim of that greatest twentieth-century delusion, that it is necessary to win wars even at the risk of losing everything for which wars are fought”