Energy Conversion Energy Transfer Assignment

Energy Conversion Energy Transfer Assignment The technical specification for a transformer may be found by examining its name plate. All transformers on the distribution and transmission network have a name plate. This plate has useful information about the transformer, e.g. how it is cooled, its KVA rating, the year it was mad and its LV HV arrangement. The information is stamped or etched on so it is permanent. [1] Image 1 SSE GMT Dorset KVA This is the transformers apparent power rating. Volts This is the Primary and Secondary voltages values of the transformer Amperes This is the Max current rating for the transformer Phases The amount of phases on the HV and LV sides Diagram DWG No Transformer schematic reference number Makers Serial No This is the serial number from the transformers manufacture Polyphase KVA Type of cooling The way the transformer is cooled Frequency Number of cycles per second in an alternating current Impedance A ratio of the transformers normal full load current to the current available under short circuit conditions Vector group ref indicates the windings configurations and the difference in phase angle between them Core and windings This is the weight of the core and windings Weight of oil This is the oil weight Total weight this is the combined weight of the oil, core and windings Oil This is the amount of oil in the transformer Year of manufacture This is the year the transformer was made Owners No This is where the owner of the transformer can label there asset With electrical machines it is very often the temperature rise permitted in the windings and insulation that determines the output, this applies particularly to transformers. Transformers are identified according to the cooling medium employed and its circulation method. The designated letters are assigned. Medium/Method Symbol Cooling Medium Mineral Oil Gas Water Air Synthetic Insulating Liquid O G W A L Circulation Method Natural Forced Forced Directed N F D The identification code used consists of 4 letters giving details of the cooling medium and circulation method for both primary and secondary cooling system. 1st letter Method 2nd letter Circulation 3rd letter Medium 4th letter Circulation Cooling medium in contact with winding Cooling medium in contact with external cooling system 2. The following items are associated with power transformers. Conservator tank The oil conservator is a single protecting device made of sheet steel, resistant or not to vacuum. It is cylindrical and has two fixing brackets. Usually, it is placed on a structure fixed on the transformer, above the cover level. In each side of the conservator there is one hole allowing its eventual washing during the exploitation. This hole is closed by means of a plate, which can hold (depending on the needs) an oil level magnetic indicator. The conservator has several holes to which are connected the corresponding piping. Each one of these piping has its specific activity (connection to the air breather, to the transformer cover, sampling, etc.). If the transformer is equipped with on-load tap changer, the conservator is divided by a septum. The larger compartment feeds the tank of the transformer and the smaller one feeds the on-load tap changer-breaking chamber. [3] Buchholz relay Every type of fault which occurs in oil filed transformer gives rise to the generation of gas which may be slow in the case of minor faults or violent in the case of major faults. The Buchholz relay is inserted in the pipe connection between the transformer tank and conservator. The Buchholz relay comprises of a cast iron housing which contains 2 elements. A mercury float switch which detects a fall in oil level and a combined deflector plate and float switch mounted so that it will detect any rapid movement of oil from the transformer to the conservator. The slow production of gas due to a minor fault causes a stream of bubbles to pass into the Buchholz chamber, resulting in a slow displacement of the oil and lowering the upper float which when sufficient will generate a Buchholz Alarm. A serious fault will produce an explosive generation of gas which rapidly displaces the oil and causes a surge to pass along the pipe towards the conservator and in doing so displaces the deflection plate, operating the lower switch which produces a Buchholz Trip which causes the transformer circuit breaker to trip. A leakage of oil from the transformer tank causes a gradual fall in the level of oil which when sufficient will be seen by the Buchholz Alarm float switch. The relay is also fitted with a petcock which can be used to take oil samples for analysis of the fault. Image 3, SSE S/S Paisley Road, Southbourne, Buchholz relay Neutral Earthing Resistor (NER) Neutral earthing resistors are a type of protection device, protecting equipment when there is a fault on the network. They work by restricting the amount of voltage and current that flows through the neutral point of the transformer its connected to, to a level that is safe preventing any damage. Neutral earthing resistors are generally connected between ground and neutral of the transformer. [2] Image 4, SSE S/S Paisley Road, Southbourne, NRE Image 5, NER Diagram [2] 3. Circulating currents can sometimes occur in a power transformer, explain why this happens and whether it is a good thing for power transmission and distribution networks. Â  [4] References [2] https://www.captech.com.au/solution/neutral-earthing-resistor/ [3] Table from SSE Document Library Ref: TG-PS-445 33kV transformers [4] http://www.gozuk.com/blog/circulating-current-in-parallel-transformers-585733.html

Political Risk in Malaysia

†¢ The fact that Prime Minister Mahathir has seen fit to take a two month vacation is the strongest evidence in a long time that his position within UMNO remains unchallenged. The political succession issue also seems clearer now that Mahathir has permitted his deputy to assume the title of Acting Prime Minister. Such a privilege was not given to trusted lieutenant Ghafar Baba in 1989, when the prime minister was recovering from a coronary bypass operation. Anwar's performance will be watched closely in the coming weeks. Another test of the extent to which Mahathir is at ease with Anwar will be the degree to which the prime minister gives Anwar free reign to deal with any public controversies which arise while he is on leave. †¢ The by-election victory of the opposition Democratic Action Party in Perak in mid-May surprised many observers. However, it would be an exaggeration to suggest that the result portends a significant shift of ethnic Chinese support away from the government in the nation as a whole. Local issues were paramount in the campaign, and voters knew that they could support the opposition without threatening the National Front's two-thirds majority in parliament. †¢ The differing approaches taken by Malay politicians (who have been calling for a tough stand against Singapore) and the Chinese business community (which has been urging moderation) has not yet led to any appreciable rise in ethnic tension. However, the situation could change quite significantly should Malay leaders suggest that the nation's ethnic Chinese were siding with Singapore. Tension between Singapore and Malaysia has remained remarkably persistent, over the last few weeks, egged on by the semi-official press in both countries. An informal boycott of Malaysia by Singapore travel agencies during the school holiday season has been followed by a variety of tit for tat moves in Malaysia aimed at reducing Malaysian exports through Singapore and cracking down on Singaporean professionals working illeg ally on social visit passes. While politicians on both sides of the causeway have been more careful in their public statements, it is difficult to believe that the critical tenor of the reporting by the mass media of both countries does not have at least the tacit support of the two governments. Even so, things are unlikely to be allowed to get out of hand. †¢ Relations with the US, however, are improving. Once a staunch opponent of an American security presence in Asia, Kuala Lumpur now appears quite willing to cooperate with the US military in the region, with a number of US warships making high-profile calls at Malaysian ports in recent months. The policy shift appears to be related to efforts by Prime Minister Mahathir to woo US companies to invest in his pet project, the Multi-Media Super-Corridor (MSC). By providing facilities to US forces, Kuala Lumpur hopes to send a reassuring signal to the American companies it hopes to attract to the MSC. pic] Near-Term Outlook Steady as she goes Given a choice, Mahathir would probably very much like to concern himself with foreign policy issues in the coming months. However, it is very likely that domestic issues will continue to push their way to the top of the political agenda, forcing the prime minister to intervene belatedly to settle various issues which emerge while he is overseas. To the extent that the prime minister will want to sh ow any serious interest in domestic affairs, his attention will probably be focused on corruption. Mahathir appears to have concluded that graft — and Malaysia's growing reputation for it — is becoming an increasingly serious obstacle to his efforts to win the country the international respect and admiration he believes it deserves as a result of its economic achievements. Meanwhile, Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim's grip on the finance portfolio is under threat, with rumors circulating in Kuala Lumpur that the prime minister is none too pleased with the way he has handled several matters in the last few months. A series of missteps by Anwar has certainly left many in the private sector wondering whether the deputy prime minister is really the most suitable man for the job. There is little doubt that Dr. Mahathir remains in firm control of the country. So much so that uncertainties regarding policy issues only seem to emerge when he is not around. With the UMNO partly polls out of the way and national elections not due for some time, Dr. Mahathir can be expected to spend an increasing amount of his time pursuing his long-held interest in foreign affairs in locations such as Tokyo, Beijing and Seoul while putting domestic matters on hold. This year, Kuala Lumpur plays host to two important ASEAN meetings, and the prime minister will want to make the most of them. The first (in July) is the ASEAN ministerial meeting and its accompanying ASEAN Regional Forum with the grouping's dialogue partners. The second (in December) is the ASEAN informal summit. In the run-up to both, Dr. Mahathir can be expected to make his views known on a variety of internationally controversial issues. Apart from a few more speeches about perceived Western arrogance, the prime minister will be pushing for the acceptance of Myanmar as a full member of ASEAN. There will also be more talk about the formation of a de facto EAEC, with Kuala Lumpur inviting participation from countries such as China, Japan and South Korea. With the prime minister traveling overseas quite a lot, it is possible to argue that the prospect of short-term government policy paralysis this year is greater than is generally realized. On several occasions now, the government has revealed a lack of decisiveness when faced with a controversial issue while the prime minister was out of the country. A case in point is Anwar's foot-dragging early last year over the implementation of the rotation system for the position of Sabah Chief minister. Yet another was the unfavorable High Court decision last June which forced a temporary halt to work on the Bakun Dam in Sarawak. In both cases, flagging political resolve only revived when Mahathir returned to take charge of events. The more recent furor over the uncomplimentary remarks of Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew regarding the crime situation in the southern Malaysian state of Johore are yet another example of the same thing. Although the matter appeared to have been resolved before Mahathir left for Tokyo, ministers emerged from a subsequent Cabinet meeting chaired by Anwar to make off-the-record comments to the press to the effect that Malaysia had decided to â€Å"freeze† its relations with Singapore in the wake of remarks by Singaporean leaders that implied that Malaysia had overreacted. The resulting media reports shocked the business community in both countries, since such reports inevitably conjured up visions of the 1965 split and suggested that a wide range of business and political ties would be disrupted. Yet another possible source of uncertainty in the coming months relates to the extent to which corporate rivalries will continue to reflect an ongoing political rift between Dr. Mahathir and Anwar. Reports that Renong has come up with a proposal to build a high-speed train line between Kuala Lumpur and Singapore — an idea which clashes directly with similar plans by DRB-Hicom — certainly suggests that they will. In the popular mind, Renong is associated with UMNO Treasurer Daim Zainuddin (a close Mahathir confidant), while DRB-Hicom is seen as being more closely linked with individuals associated with Anwar. The reality, however, is probably a little more complicated, with the late Tan Sri Yahaya of DRB-Hicom (who died suddenly in early March) arguably at least as close to Mahathir as he was to Anwar. Either way, the two companies have such powerful connections that the battle between them will almost certainly involve political as well as purely economic criteria. Local pundits may not have got it exactly right in the case of Renong and DRB-Hicom, but there is little doubt that policy differences between the prime minister and his deputy do have some impact on the corporate scene. A case in point is the recent refusal of the finance ministry to provide financial guarantees to Ekran, the company responsible for the construction of the massive Bakun Dam. Anwar has never really embraced the project, and it is not hard to conclude from this decision that the finance minister is determined to make things as difficult for Ekran as possible, despite the fact that the Bakun Dam is one of Mahathir's pet projects. Of more relevance to the business community in general, however, is Anwar's performance as minister of finance. With the economy doing well, it may be argued that the fact that he lacks a solid background in economics is of little consequence. All that is really required is an intelligent personality capable of taking advice from experts in both the ministry and the central bank. At this level, Anwar seems to measure up. However, a closer look suggests that he is also capable of making errors of judgment which could create quite serious problems in the future if they are made at a time when the economy is less resilient. Take the problem we mentioned earlier about the Cabinet decision regarding Singapore. Anwar could have ended the confusion over the freezing-of-relations reports as soon as they arose, but he chose not to do so. Instead, he issued a press statement which, while stopping short of announcing a trade and investment boycott, appeared to support widespread rumors that such a decision had actually been taken. In this way it may be argued that he allowed the alarm to spread though the business communities of both countries. As a result, the value of both the ringgit and Singapore dollar dropped overnight. Perhaps Anwar was trying to send a political message to Singapore. If so, it is worth noting that although Mahathir has had some high-profile tiffs with Western nations in the past, even he has never before sent such a blunt message to a neighboring country. Yet another apparent lapse in judgment concerns the way the central bank (technically under the control of Anwar's finance ministry) handled an announcement at the end of March about new guidelines aimed at reducing lending to the property sector. A vaguely worded statement to the effect that the authorities had imposed a new 20% limit on bank loans to the sector sent the stock market reeling, with property and finance stocks in particular taking a beating. The new policy also redefined lending for share purchases in order to curb what monetary authorities said was excessive share speculation. Left to draw their own interpretations, some banks stopped giving out such loans altogether while checking whether they had exceeded the new limits. Anwar did little at first to clarify the situation, merely informing the press that he was satisfied with the CB move. It was not until several days later when the monetary authorities released details of the new guidelines (which contained exemptions that significantly watered down the effect of the new curbs) that the market stabilized. Not surprisingly, the incident has pleased nobody, with a number of economists privately accusing the authorities of backing down on an important measure designed to reduce the exposure of the banks to the property market. For Mahathir, the timing could not have been worse. The prime minister is particularly anxious to ensure that the listing of the Bakun Hydro-electric Corporation in June comes off well. With foreign investors shying away from the project, the company is now relying on the domestic market to absorb a massive M$3 billion in new shares. This will not be easy to do on a falling stockmarket, and Mahathir will now probably want to make sure that he is still in the country in the run-up to the IPO so that he can settle any last minute hitches. Meanwhile, with a Cabinet reshuffle on the cards in the coming months, the Deputy Prime Minister's political opponents can be expected to once again press for Anwar's removal in favor of Trade and Industry Minister Rafidah Aziz. Since the beginning of the year, Mahathir has lost two senior figures who played an important role in promoting projects in which he is especially interested. The uncertainties created as a result of the sudden death of businessman Tan Sri Yahaya show the sort of thing that can happen as a result of current Malaysian development strategies which place heavy reliance on individual entrepreneurs to run major companies in strategic industries. Of particular concern now is the fate of Malaysia's national car project which Tan Sri Yahaya headed. The resignation of Selangor Chief Minister Tan Sri Tun Mustapha in mid-April as a result of corruption allegations is another case in point. The loss of Tun Muhamad was not a serious political blow to the prime minister, since the latter was not considered a key Mahathir loyalist. However, it has raised questions about the extent to which his successor will be willing to push the Multimedia Super Corridor project and support the development of Putra Jaya, the new administrative capital. The Sultan of Selangor does not appear to be especially interested in cooperating with Mahathir in selecting a replacement, and has instead made disparaging remarks about transfers of land ownership during Tun Muhamad's tenure. The loss of key individuals in other economic sectors could also upset the apple cart. The huge M$15-billion Bakun Dam project in Sarawak, for example, is very closely associated with Tan Sri Ting Pek Khiing. The fact that he suffered a mild stroke last year cannot be regarded as good news for the hundreds of subcontractors — both local and foreign — which are expecting him to push the project through to completion. None of these problems, either by themselves or in combination, are likely to trip up a seasoned politician such as Mahathir, but they are going to be distractions from the foreign policy agenda the prime minister would rather follow. Two other developments are worth monitoring. The first concerns the degree to which the current anti-corruption drive can really be expected to take off, while the second concerns the (not entirely unrelated) political revival of UMNO Youth. The current anti-graft campaign really got going in the run-up to the UMNO party elections late last year when Mahathir ordered a blanket ban on campaigning in order to keep candidates from showering money and favors on delegates. Then, at the convention itself, he launched an emotional attack on graft, saying that it would destroy the party. The result has been that several corruption-tainted candidates competing in the party elections lost heavily. Since then, proposals have been tabled in parliament designed to increase the effectiveness of the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA), the Selangor Chief Minister has been forced to resign, and no less than eight other senior officials have been placed under investigation. On this issue, Mahathir appears to have Anwar solidly behind him, although the latter has sometimes operated as something of a loose cannon, embarking on investigations that could ultimately implicate staunch Mahathir supporters such Works Minister Samy Vellu, for example. The latter development also points to a serious problem facing a national leadership wishing to pursue the matter further: how to launch a determined attack on graft without undercutting one's own political support. For this reason alone, it is a fairly safe bet that the current campaign will not be a comprehensive one. More likely, a few carefully chosen cases will be vigorously pursued in the hope that this will have a demonstration effect on other greedy individuals. Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, the newly elected leader of UMNO Youth, has not been wasting much time getting the once-influential organization back into the headlines. Although generally regarded as an Anwar man, Mr. Hamidi has an independent streak which could yet embarrass the deputy prime minister and see the youth organization setting off on a course quite different from that of the national leadership in the coming months. The violent way in which a conference on East Timor was broken up by Malay youths last year certainly put Anwar in the difficult position of having to distance the government from the actions of his political ally. Since then, Mr. Hamidi has taken on far less politically troublesome (for Anwar! ) issues such as the Australian racism debate, Singapore-Malaysia relations and Malay social problems. However, the ability of UMNO Youth to act independently in the future should not be underestimated. It would not be surprising, for example, if the organization turns out to be the prod that keeps the current anti-corruption drive alive much longer than many local politicians would like.

Battle of Austerlitz in the Napoleonic Wars

The Battle of Austerlitz was fought December 2, 1805, and was the deciding engagement of the War of the Third Coalition (1805) during the Napoleonic Wars (1803 to 1815). Having crushed an Austrian army at Ulm earlier that fall, Napoleon drove east and captured Vienna. Eager for battle, he pursued the Austrians northeast from their capital. Reinforced by the Russians, the Austrians gave battle near Austerlitz in early December. The resulting battle is often considered Napoleons finest victory and saw the combined Austro-Russian army driven from the field. In the wake of the battle, the Austrian Empire signed the Treaty of Pressburg and left the conflict. Armies Commanders France Napoleon65,000 to 75,000 men Russia Austria Tsar Alexander IEmperor Francis II73,000 to 85,000 men A New War Though fighting in Europe had ended with the Treaty of Amiens in March 1802, many of the signatories remained unhappy with its terms. Increasing tensions saw Britain declare war on France on May 18, 1803. This saw Napoleon revive plans for a cross-channel invasion and he began concentrating forces around Boulogne. Following the French execution of  Louis Antoine, Duke of Enghien, in March 1804, many of the powers in Europe became increasingly concerned over French intentions. Later that year, Sweden signed an agreement with Britain opening the door to what would become the Third Coalition. Mounting a relentless diplomatic campaign, Prime Minister William Pitt concluded an alliance with Russia in early 1805. This came about despite British concern over Russias growing influence in the Baltic. A few months later, Britain and Russia were joined by Austria, which having been twice defeated by the French in recent years, sought to exact revenge. Napoleon Responds With threats emerging from Russia and Austria, Napoleon abandoned his ambitions to invade Britain during the summer of 1805  and turned to deal with these new adversaries. Moving with speed and efficiency, 200,000 French troops departed their camps near Boulogne and began crossing the Rhine along a 160-mile front on September 25. Responding to the threat, Austrian General Karl Mack concentrated his army at the fortress of Ulm in Bavaria. Conducting a brilliant campaign of maneuver, Napoleon swung north and descended on the Austrian rear. After winning a series of battles, Napoleon captured Mack and 23,000 men at Ulm on October 20. Though the victory was dampened by Vice Admiral Lord Horatio Nelsons triumph at Trafalgar the next day, the Ulm Campaign effectively opened the way to Vienna which fell to French forces in November. To the northeast, a Russian field army under General Mikhail Illarionovich Golenischev-Kutusov had gathered and absorbed many of the remaining Austrian units. Moving towards the enemy, Napoleon sought to bring them to battle before his lines of communication were severed or Prussia entered the conflict. Allied Plans On December 1, the Russian and Austrian leadership met to decide their next move. While Tsar Alexander I wished to attack the French, Austrian Emperor Francis II and Kutuzov preferred to take a more defensive approach. Under pressure from their senior commanders, it was finally decided that an attack would be made against the French right (southern) flank which would open a path to Vienna. Moving forward, they adopted a plan devised by Austrian Chief of Staff Franz von Weyrother which called for four columns to assault the French right. The Allied plan played directly into Napoleons hands. Anticipating that they would strike at his right, he thinned it to make it more alluring. Believing that this assault would weaken the Allied center, he planned on a massive counterattack in this area to shatter their lines, while Marshal Louis-Nicolas Davouts III Corps came up from Vienna to support the right. Positioning Marshal Jean Lanness V Corps near Santon Hill at the northern end of the line, Napoleon placed General Claude Legrands men at the southern end, with Marshal Jean-de-Dieu Soults IV Corps in the center. Fighting Begins Around 8:00 AM on December 2, the first Allied columns began hitting the French right near the village of Telnitz. Taking the village, they threw the French back across Goldbach Stream. Regrouping, the French effort was reinvigorated by the arrival of Davouts corps. Moving to the attack, they recaptured Telnitz but were driven out by Allied cavalry. Further Allied attacks from the village were halted by French artillery. Slightly to the north, the next Allied column hit Sokolnitz and was repulsed by its defenders. Bringing in artillery, General Count Louis de Langà ©ron commenced a bombardment and his men succeeded in taking the village, while a third column assaulted the towns castle. Storming forward, the French managed to retake to the village but soon lost it again. Fighting around Sokolnitz continued to rage throughout the day. One Sharp Blow Around 8:45 AM, believing that the Allied center had been sufficiently weakened, Napoleon summoned Soult to discuss an attack on the enemy lines atop Pratzen Heights. Stating that One sharp blow and the war is over, he ordered the assault to move forward at 9:00 AM. Advancing through the morning fog, General Louis de Saint-Hilaires division attacked up the heights. Reinforced with elements from their second and fourth columns, the Allies met the French assault and mounted a fierce defense.  This initial French effort was thrown back after bitter fighting. Charging again, Saint-Hilaires men finally succeeded in capturing the heights at bayonet point. Fighting in the Center To their north, General Dominique Vandammes advanced his division against Starà © Vinohrady (Old Vineyards). Employing a variety of infantry tactics, the division shattered the defenders and claimed the area. Moving his command post to St. Anthonys Chapel on the Pratzen Heights, Napoleon ordered Marshal Jean-Baptiste Bernadottes I Corps into the battle on Vandammes left. As the battle raged, the Allies decided to strike Vandammes position with the Russian Imperial Guards cavalry. Storming forward, they had some success before Napoleon committed his own Heavy Guards cavalry to the fray. As the horsemen battled, General Jean-Baptiste Drouets division deployed on the flank of the fighting. In addition to providing refuge for the French cavalry, fire from his men and the Guards horse artillery forced the Russians to retreat from the area. In the North At the northern end of the battlefield, fighting began as Prince Liechtenstein led Allied cavalry against General Franà §ois Kellermanns light cavalry. Under heavy pressure, Kellermann fell back behind General  Marie-Franà §ois Auguste de Caffarellis division of Lannes corps which blocked the Austrian advance. After the arrival of two additional mounted divisions allowed the French to finish off the cavalry, Lannes moved forward against Prince Pyotr Bagrations Russian infantry. After engaging in a hard fight, Lannes forced the Russians to retreat from the battlefield. Completing the Triumph To complete the victory, Napoleon turned south where fighting was still raging around Telnitz and Sokolnitz. In an effort to drive the enemy from the field, he directed Saint-Hilaires division and part of Davouts corps to launch a two-pronged attack on Sokolnitz. Enveloping the Allied position, the assault crushed the defenders and forced them to retreat. As their lines began to collapse all along the front, Allied troops started to flee the field. In an attempt to slow the French pursuit General Michael von Kienmayer directed some of his cavalry to form a rearguard.  Mounting a desperate defense, they helped cover the Allied withdrawal. Aftermath One of Napoleons greatest victories, Austerlitz effectively ended the War of the Third Coalition. Two days later, with their territory overrun and their armies destroyed, Austria made peace through the Treaty of Pressburg. In addition to territorial concessions, the Austrians were required to pay a war indemnity of 40 million francs. The remains of the Russian army withdrew east, while Napoleons forces went into camp in southern Germany. Having taken much of Germany, Napoleon abolished the Holy Roman Empire and established the Confederation of the Rhine as a buffer state between France and Prussia. French losses at Austerlitz numbered 1,305 killed, 6,940 wounded, and 573 captured. Allied casualties were massive and included 15,000 killed and wounded, as well as 12,000 captured.

The Main Differences Between ‘Classical Realism’ And ‘Neo-Realism’ - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 8 Words: 2388 Downloads: 2 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Politics Essay Type Compare and contrast essay Level High school Did you like this example? What are the main differences between ‘classical realism’ and ‘neo-realism’? Introduction Realism has become a foremost theory within international relations over six decades. Its contemporary construction is attributed to Hans Morgenthau and his work in the late 1940s. Morgenthau utilised previous works from scholars and strategists, which include, Ancient Greek scholar Thucydides, Machiavelli, Hobbes and his notions of the anarchic state, and the 1939 work of E.H Carr. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "The Main Differences Between ‘Classical Realism’ And ‘Neo-Realism’" essay for you Create order Realism became the primary theory as the discipline of International Relations blossomed, forming political hypothesis based on its philosophies, such as Real Politik. As International Relations expanded as a discipline with Realism at its centre the theory become reformed. Kenneth Waltz succeeded in becoming the father of Neo-Realism in the same way Morgenthau had done with Realism thirty years prior. This resulted in a schism in the Realist theory between classic Realism and structural (neo) Realism. The purpose of this essay is to investigate this split and to distinguish the major differences of the two Realist strands. These theories are vast volumes of work that have been considered by the brightest minds of discipline for several decades, the salient features of the two theories discussed in this text will offer just a glimpse into their philosophies. Investigation to compare the differences of the two shall be split into two parts, firstly examining the theoretical b ase and highlighting the noticeable distinctions. The second part will conceptualise these points in a practical sense, attaching them to historical events predominantly from the twentieth century. Theoretical Morgenthau’s key principles of Realism consider states as individuals, a unified actor. One state represents itself, and these states are primary in international relations. Internal politics and contradictions are irrelevant as states pursue interests defined by power. Power, is a further key proponent of Morgenthaus paradigm, he believed it central to human nature and therefore state actors. Morgenthau considered human nature as corrupt, dictated by selfishness and ego, resulting in a dangerous world constructed by egotistical greedy actors. Thus Realism possesses at its core a very pessimistic outlook of constant threat and danger, logically therefore Realism submits as one of its fundamental considerations that state actors are driven by survival and the need for greater dominance and power to create a favourable balance of power and decreasing the actors potential to diminish. (Gellman, 1988). Realists consider these attitudes to consume national interest, trumpin g any other concern. Self-help becomes a necessity. Reliance or trust of other actors is foolish as Machiavelli describes â€Å"today’s friend is tomorrow’s enemy† (Morgenthau, 1948). Realisms success and prominence in international relations naturally exposed it to a series of critiques. Authors and scholars disagreed with its ideological theory and often advocated alternative theories. These included a Liberalist outlook that promotes the importance of democracy and free trade, while Marxists believe international affairs could be understood as a class struggle between capital and labour. Other theories derided the lack of morality, collectivism and simplicity in Realism. Despite it retaining several of the basic features of classical Realism, including the notions that states are primary unitary actors and power is dominant. Neo-Realism provided criticism of the classic paradigm. Structural Realism directed attention to the structural characteristic s of an international system of states rather than to its components (Evans and Newham, 1998). Kenneth Waltz detaches from Morgenthau’s classic Realism suggesting it to be too ‘reductionist’. He argues that international politics can be thought of as a system with a precisely defined structure, Realism in his view, is unable to conceptualise the international system in this way due to its varying limitation, essentially due to its behavioural methodology. (Waltz, 1979) Neo-Realism considers the traditional strand as being incapable of explaining behaviour at a level above a nation state. Waltz is described as offering defensive version of Realism, while John Mearsheimer promotes an offensive consideration of Realism, suggesting Waltz’s analysis fails to chart the aggression that exists in international relations, however they are often considered as one through neo or structural Realism. (Mearsheimer, 2013) The idea, that international politics ca n be understood as a system, with an exact construct and separate structure, is both the starting point for international theory and point of departure from the traditional Realism. The fundamental concern for Neo-Realists is why do states exhibit similar foreign policy behaviour regardless of their opposing political systems and contrasting ideologies. The Cold War brought two opposing superpowers that although were socially and politically opposite behaved in a similar manner and werent separate in their pursuit of military power and influence. Realism in Waltz’s view was severely limited, as where other classic disciplines of international relations. Neo-Realism is designed as re-examination, a second tier explanation that fills in the gaps classic theories neglected. For example, traditional Realists remain adamant that actors are individuals in international affairs, referencing the Hobbesian notion that two entities are unable to enjoy the same thing equally and a re consequently destined to become enemies. Whilst, Neo-Realists consider that relative and absolute gains are important and they may be attained by collusion through international institutions. (Waltz, 1979) Practical The salient theoretical differences exhibited in the first section will be strengthened in this second section by applying the theory to practical situations in order to enhance the understanding and the degree of separation. As one has discussed, traditional Realists consider that the foundation of international affairs is war, perpetrated by states. A Realist doctrine is exhibited by the actions and musings of Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger, during their time together during Nixons presidency and with Kissingers influence on Nixon’s successor, Gerald Ford. While in the theatre of the Cold War, they attempted to maximise American power in order to safeguard American security against fellow actors. Incursions in Vietnam and Korea were designed at a basic level to keep their ideology as the primary superpower and increase American dominance. Nixon’s presidency was associated also with his administrations dialogue with China, and their keenness to exploit the S ino-Soviet split in order to tip the balance of power in America’s favour, all illustrating a class Realist mentality of international relations, that it is constructed entirely between state interactions and a grasp for power. (Nye, 2007) Another example that depicts this mentality is Thucydides work concerning The Peloponnesian War, an often-utilised example used by traditional Realists; Thucydides in his works expresses an unrelenting Athenian desire to pursue self-interest, and achieved this through the use of force and hard power. He famously wrote, â€Å"The strong do what they have the power to do and the weak accept what they have to accept† (Thucydides, 1972, p402). Thucydides sentiments illustrate the Realist notion of human nature being motivated primarily by power, and it is similar to subsequent wars throughout human history. Colin Gray a modern scholar concurs with the Realist outlook suggesting an inherent human characteristic that still drives states in the same way it did in 400 B.C (Gray,2009). Neo-Realists tend to distance themselves from this notion of a corruptible human nature. They blame the starting of the Second World War, not on innate human corruptibility, but on the failure to achieve a recognised international system. They disagree with Realist logic that the primary reason for the Second World War was Hitler’s lust to institute his power and influence across Europe. In their estimations the disorder provided by the Treaty of Versailles was principal in throwing the world back into war. Its adoption on the behest of French, British and American states provided the opportunity and the catalyst for the Nazi Party to flourish. Resentment in Germany of the allied powers, coupled with a weak nation unable to recover because of this ‘dictate’ rendered the German economy and military perpetually weak, all contributing to Hitler’s ability to snatch power and consequently produce t he elements to start a world war. The world was failed in Neo-Realist estimations by a lack of substantial system (Jervis, 1994). The response classic Realists provide to Neo-Realists is that their re-worked form of the theory is simply presented in a way that is more structural and scientific but with the core maintaining the original doctrines offered by traditional Realism. Although Neo-Realists do not deny that their ideology is extremely similarIt is an improvement on the original theory offering a more structured and formulated paradigm., but Realists argue those alterations, which include these structural formations is what inhibits the new theory. Richard Ashley is one author that concurs with these sentiments stating traditional Realism, provides an advanced concept of analysis (Ashley, 1984). For example, even if the Treaty of Versailles did create bleak conditions on Germany that incited the Nazi’s upsurge, the fundamental lust for power Hitler exhibited in the extreme was still predominant for starting World War Two regardless of structural factors. This analysis echoes Colin Gray’s opinions regarding the characteristics exhibited from the Peloponnesian War still being relevant in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, and illustrates Realism relevance. A further crucial difference between the two strands is the role of political belief or governance. Classic Realism has always established this consideration. Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, Hirohito all had what was classed as un-democratic governances. Stalin, with a similar totalitarian system had initially signed a pact with Hitler, it was only the latter’s covetousness for supremacy that scuppered that particular alliance, illustrating the pessimistic nature of traditional Realism, not being able to trust other actors. Conversely, Neo-Realists, led by Waltz concluded that there is no â€Å"differentiation of function between different units, i.e. all states perform roughly the same role† (Halliday, 1994). Neo-Realism came at a time where the system had altered from what classic Realism was founded upon, a pre-war world of several great powers. The Cold War heralded a bi-polar system, dominant on nuclear weapons rendering the differing ideologies and political regimes irrelevant, it was the system that prevailed. Furthermore, America propped up highly undemocratic regimes throughout the Cold War in Asia, South America and the Middle East. Suggesting classic Realist arguments of governance systems is incomplete (Merhasimer, 2013). Traditional Realism witnessed a degree of a resurgence post-9/11, the event itself and the subsequent fallout was deemed textbook of classic Realism. Actors had to employ self-help and act unilaterally to stop attacks and an assault on the states survival. 9/11 produced a real illustration to the strength non-state actors can have on the international relations. Although Neo-Realism maintains the classic theory consideration of state primacy, it does reference non-state actors as relevant in the international system. Additional actors however must adapt to the actions of states Waltz suggests, â€Å"When the crunch comes, states remake the rules by which other actors operate.† (Waltz, 1979, p94) Furthermore, America’s democratic crusade dubbed ‘the war on terror’ was viewed as traditional Realism in action, inferring Morgenthau’s consideration of autocracy vs. democracy. However, Neo Realists will reference American support for very non-democratic states, such as its unwavering support for Saudi Arabia as the system still triumphing over the state and its form of governance. The actions of the US tie in with Mearsheimers offensive Realist outlook to seek hegemony, great powers recognize that the best way to ensure their security is to achieve hegemony now, thus eliminating any possibility of a challenge by another great power. Only a misguided state would pass up an opportunity to be the hegemon in the system because it thought it already had sufficient power to survive. (Merhasimer, 2001) Conclusion In conclusion whilst both strands of Realism remain constant in key areas such as the anarchic state, unitary actors and the importance of Power. Neo-Realism presents a shift away from the traditional theories offering a tangible alternative to the corruptible human nature consideration being the root of the cause conflict, as exemplified aptly by the debate on the outbreak of World War Two. However, the crucial point of departure that Neo-Realism provides is the importance given to the international system over the state, claiming that traditional Realism is inhibited by its methodology, failing to explain behaviour of an entity above the nation state. Neo-Realism allows for co-operation among states at a higher level than Realism permits, this provides an opportunity to succeed in achieving absolute and relative gains. The concept flourished during the Cold War, rejecting Morgenthaus system of governance analysis, suggesting that states behave the same regardless whether it s democratic or not. Neo-Realists still maintain this is relevant. Classic Realists disagree using the events of this century to prove that its methodology was always correct. In Sum, the two differ fundamentally on approach, Neo-Realism seeks to offer a systematic and scientific approach that they believe is lacking in traditional Realism; according to its proponents it complements the original theory by correcting its fallacies, building on classic Realism emphasis on self-interest, power and the state, challenging the human nature concept and behaviour above state level. Bibliography Ashley, R K, 1984. ‘The Poverty of Neo-Realism’. International Organisation , 38/02, pp. 255-286. Donnelly, J 2000 Realism and International Relations. 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Evans, G and Newham R, 1998. The Penguin Dictionary of International Relations. 1st ed. London: Penguin Fox, W, 1985. ‘E H Carr and Political Realism: Vision and Revision’, Review of International Studies 11/1 , pp.1-16. Gellman, P , 1988. ‘Hans J. Morgenthau and the Legacy of Political Realism’. Review of International Studies, 14/04, pp.247-266. Gray, C. S, 2009. ‘The 21st Century security environment and the future of war’. Parameters, XXXVIII (4). pp. 14-26. Halliday, F, 1994. Rethinking International Relations. 1st ed. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan Harrison, E. 2002, Waltz, Kant and Systemic Approaches to International Relations, Review of International Studies 28(1), 2002. Jervis, R, 1994. ‘Hans Morge nthau, Realism and the Study of International Politics’, Social Research 61(Winter)_, pp. 853-876 . Mearsheimer, J J, 2013. Structural Realism, in Rex Warner eds., M. Finlay Translates. International Relations Theories: Discipline and Diversity, 3rd Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 77-93. Mearsheimer, J J, 2001. The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. 1st ed. New York: W.W. Norton Company Morgenthau , H J, 1948. Politics Among Nations. 1st ed. New York: Knopf. Nye, J, 2007. Understanding International Conflicts: An Introduction to Theory and History in political science. 6th ed. Pearson Longman: New York. Thucydides, 1972. History of the Peloponnesian War M.I Finley eds, Translated by Rex Warner Penguin: London. Waltz, K, 2001, Man, the State and War: A Theoretical Analysis. 2nd Revised edition. New York: Colombia University Pres. Waltz, K. 2000, ‘Structural Realism after the Cold War’, International Security, 25(1). Waltz, K, 1979. Theory of International Politics . 1st ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.