Abstract
In this article the research question is asked how that which René Girard, in his last book, Achever Clausewitz (Battling to the end), describes as mimetic rivalry in the form of interstate escalation to the extremes, can be used in comparison with the offensive realism of John Mearsheimer to analyse contemporary geopolitical rivalry between the USA and Russia, and between the USA and China. Girard and Mearsheimer’s respective theoretical frameworks, that is, mimetic theory and offensive realism respectively, are used for this; while use is also made of Emmanuel Todd’s analysis of the disintegration of the Christian culture of certain Western countries, and how this can be related to Girard’s concept of the sacrificial crisis. The method that will be followed is that of a hermeneutical close reading in order to determine the overlaps between the two theoretical paradigms with reference to the research question, and then to apply it to the mimetic rivalry between, respectively, the USA and Russia and the USA and China – especially with reference to Russia and the Ukrainian war.
Besides the introduction the article is divided into four parts. In the first part a brief definition and overview of the idealist paradigm as embodied by the US-led West from the end of World War II to the re-election of Trump at the end of 2024 is given. The historical roots of the idealist paradigm are briefly considered, while its steady rise after World War II and its eventual apex after the end of the Cold War are also briefly discussed. Mention is also made of the relevance of Todd’s analysis of the disintegration of Christian culture to help explain the collapse of the idealist paradigm, as well as of Mearsheimer’s important point that at the end of the Cold War the USA saw itself as a model to be emulated – something which, of course, overlaps with the emphasis that Girard’s mimetic theory places on exactly such models.
In the second part Mearsheimer’s theory of offensive realism and his concept of rivalry are discussed. First, the three traditional characteristics of the classical realist paradigm to which Mearsheimer also subscribes are discussed – that states, and especially great powers, are seen as the main actors of international politics; that the behaviour of great powers is shaped by their external environment rather than their internal characteristics; and that realists believe that states’ thinking is dominated by calculations of power and rivalry for power. Further to this it is explained that the reason Mearsheimer’s theory is called “offensive realism” is that states are always looking for ways to gain power at the expense of their rivals (which dovetails with what Girard calls “mimetic rivalry”). Further light on this mimetic rivalry is shed by Mearsheimer’s invocation of the so-called security dilemma, which is, in turn, echoed by Girard’s concept of the escalation to extremes that he originally sourced from Carl Von Clausewitz. Close attention is also paid to Mearsheimer’s concept of buck-passing, which is applied later in the article to the Ukrainian war.
In the third part the work of Girard as a realist and how Mearsheimer’s conceptual work links up with that of Girard are considered. After explaining why Girard, following Von Clausewitz, may be considered a realist, Girard’s expansion of his concept of double mediation and its application to geopolitical mimetic rivalry is considered, with France and Germany the case to which Girard applies this conceptual expansion. It is also argued that this dovetails with what Mearsheimer calls a “dyad of two rivalrous great powers”. Next Girard’s notions of dedifferentiation and the ensuing sacrificial crisis are also invoked with reference to contemporary geopolitics. This part of the article is closed with a brief discussion of why both Girard and Mearsheimer can be seen as apocalyptic thinkers of contemporary geopolitics.
In the last part, two important and highly consequential cases of current geopolitical mimetic rivalry are considered – that of Russia and the West since the election of Vladimir Putin in 1999 until the election of Donald Trump for a second term in November 2024, and that of China and the US during the same period and beyond. This part starts off with a brief discussion of Emmanuel Todd’s analysis of the disintegration of the Christian culture of certain Western countries. This is done in order to argue that this is a case of what Girard refers to as dedifferentiation and an ensuing sacrificial crisis in contemporary geopolitics. This is relevant because it is argued that as a result of the Western sacrificial crisis, and as an example of Mearsheimer’s buck-passing, Ukraine has been turned into the West’s sacrificial lamb and Russia into its scapegoat. In the first subsection of this part a historical overview of mimetic rivalry between Russia and the West since the days of Peter the Great right up until the present is given. It is shown how in the last 10 to 20 years this rivalry has escalated to the extremes and finally erupted in the form of the Ukrainian war. In the second subsection of this part an overview of growing mimetic rivalry between the USA and China since the early 1980s is given. It is stressed that both Girard and Mearsheimer predicted this rivalry. Brief attention is also paid in this section to the possible personal mimetic rivalry between Trump and Putin, as well as between Trump and Xi Jinping of China.
In conclusion it is argued that in this article the following five findings are made. First, the work of Mearsheimer, Girard and Todd helps to explain the decline of the idealist paradigm and the return of the realist paradigm in contemporary geopolitics – especially against the background of Donald Trump’s second term as president and his rather blatant exercising of realism. Secondly, Mearsheimer’s and Girard’s respective concepts of interstate rivalry complement each other. Thirdly, and in the extension of the latter, the realist tradition and Mearsheimer’s concept of the security dilemma is closely related to Girard’s concept of the escalation to extremes. Fourthly, the American-led Western approach to Ukraine is an example of Mearsheimer’s buck-passing, so that Ukraine – in the language of Girard – is made the sacrificial lamb of the West and Russia its scapegoat. Fifthly, it is speculated that the tension between the USA and Russia, as well as that between the USA and China, will continue to rise – in this Girard’s concept of chauvinism and Mearsheimer’s concept of hypernationalism will be a determining factor.
Keywords: buck-passing; China; geopolitics; René Girard; idealism paradigm; Xi Jinping; John Mearsheimer; mimetic rivalry; mimetic theory; offensive realism; Vladimir Putin; realism paradigm; Russia; Emmanuel Todd; Donald Trump; Ukraine; USA
- This article’s featured image was created byAlexandru-Cătălin Stoica and obtained from Pexels.