The Brutal Truth?

Mearsheimer’s “offensive realism” is hard to distinguish from Brzezinski’s strategy in “The Grand Chessboard” or Hobbes’ war of all against all. What’s the difference between a regional hegemon that will not allow other regional hegemons to exist and a world hegemon? If the US has to prevent regional hegemons anywhere else in the world, then it has to keep meddling and destabilizing countries in the neighborhood of these would-be hegemons to keep them from becoming hegemons. What is a “hegemon”? Isn’t it just the most powerful country in a region? When the US leaves the Persian Gulf, won’t Iran be the new regional hegemon?

Mearsheimer is so brutally realistic that he does not seem to understand that by far the best security is to have good relations with one’s neighbors, both in one’s own region and in the rest of the world. But I guess that’s not “realistic”.