International relations is a discipline dominated by the debate between the realist and idealist paradigms. This book provides the most comprehensive critical review of the realist tradition to date. It looks closely at the terms 'realism' and 'idealism' and in doing so uncovers a broad range of interesting questions. Why, for example, do political realists see anarchy as being incompatible with international society? Why is idealism associated with unfounded hopes about the future? What about the past and the present? Realism explains inter-state behaviour in terms of the fundamental difference between 'domestic' and 'international' forms of government. The realist paradigm, as conventionally understood, conjures up the grim view that beyond the borders of sovereign presence, politics is not about potential moral progress, but survival. This book argues, contrary to conventional wisdom, that political realism is not a meaningless term. Martin Griffiths attempts to re-evaluate the terms 'realism' and 'idealism' through a detailed critical examination of the 'grand theorists' traditionally associated with realism, Hans Morgenthau and Kenneth Waltz. He concludes that they could more properly be categorized as idealists. Morgenthau's work, he argues, suffers from the shortcomings of 'nostalgic idealism' and Waltz's from those of 'complacent idealism'. In contrast, Hedley Bull's analysis of international society is based on a more realistic understanding of world politics. Martin Griffiths' book provides a compelling basis for conceiving international politics as a 'rule-governed' arena among states. It will be read with interest by scholars and advanced students of international relations.