What distinguishes pacifism from realism in military ethics?

Pacifism is fundamentally characterized by a commitment to moral principles that prioritize peace and the prevention of violence, viewing the act of war as inherently wrong, regardless of circumstances. This contrasts sharply with realism, which prioritizes pragmatic interests and the pursuit of power over ethical considerations. Realism is often concerned with the realities of international relations, where strategic advantage, security, and national interest can justify military actions, even when those actions achieve moral dilemmas.

By focusing on moral principles, pacifism rejects the notion that violent conflict can be justified by its outcomes, while realism accepts that moral compromises may be necessary in the quest for security or power. This distinction highlights the core philosophical and ethical divide between the two perspectives, emphasizing the tension between altruistic moral stances and the harsh realities of political and military necessity.

While the other choices may reflect certain aspects related to pacifism and realism, they do not fundamentally capture what sets the two apart in terms of their underlying ethical frameworks and motivations.