W ith its armies of frozen zombies, knights in armor and dragons, we might think that Westeros is a far cry from planet Earth in the 21st Century. But the dynamics of power struggle that drive much of the imaginary plot of “Game of Thrones” are grounded in very real dynamics of international relations that we can observe in our own world. In Westeros, we can see events unfolding that reflect conceptions of international relations theory that have been debated for centuries.
For instance, the realist school of thought in international relations sees states as locked in a permanent struggle for power and security. Realists see states in a constant competition, a zero-sum game in which a gain for one state almost always represents a loss for a rival. For realists, there are no permanent rules of international order and no permanent alliances — states do what they can to enhance their power regardless of the international environment .
Sound familiar? It should, because this is how Tywin Lannister sees the world. Tywin is the epitome of a cold, calculating realist. He shrewdly surveys his environment and decides what to do with the sole objective of keeping his family on the Iron Throne and safeguarding their power. Tywin, like all realists, does not set much importance by rules or norms. When a rule — like the laws of dynastic succession — suits him, he uses it. When a rule — like the ancient prohibition against killing wedding guests — gets in his way, he ignores it.
But we do not have to look to Westeros to find leaders acting as realists. Vladimir Putin’s recent annexation of Crimea was a textbook realist power play — he ignored international norms in order to enhance Russia’s power, calculating that the gains to be had would outweigh the possible backlash. Tywin Lannister would have been proud.
Generally, characters in “Game of Thrones” who try to break the realist paradigm do not fare so well. Ned Stark believed in rules and morality, and he didn’t even make it through the first season.
We do see room for morality, though, in the actions of Daenerys Targaryen, who has augmented her power by building a loyal army from the slaves that she freed. Daenerys might be trying to make herself into what international relations scholar G.J. Ikenberry would call a “liberal leviathan.” Ikenberry argues that the U.S. is a liberal leviathan, as it has augmented its own power by enforcing a liberal world order that makes the world a better place while also serving U.S. interests. If Daenerys can build on her moral successes to reclaim the Iron Throne, she could yet prove that it does not take a realist to win the Game of Thrones .
While we might never have to face a White Walker or fight with a sword, the world of Westeros is not as different from ours as we might think. People might have only been watching “Game of Thrones” on HBO for four years, but we have been watching a Game of Thrones play out in real life for all of history.
