▁S ny der ▁reject s ▁M ear she imer ' s ▁view ▁of ▁the ▁security ▁d ile m ma ▁as ▁" a ▁syn opt ic ▁statement ▁of ▁off ensive ▁real ism ". ▁He ▁arg ues ▁that ▁off ensive ▁ne ore al ism ' s ▁pos iting ▁of ▁all ▁states ▁as ▁revision ists ▁removes ▁the ▁central ▁proposition — unc ertain ty ▁about ▁other ▁states ' ▁intent ions — on ▁which ▁the ▁whole ▁concept ▁of ▁security ▁d ile m ma ▁is ▁ground ed . ▁Ag gress ive ▁great ▁powers ' ▁measures ▁to ▁maxim ize ▁their ▁security ▁threaten ▁others ▁which ▁leads ▁to ▁an ▁actual ▁just ified ▁security ▁competition ▁between ▁states ▁rather ▁than ▁an ▁unnecessary ▁one ▁based ▁on ▁hypoth et ical ▁thre ats . ▁To ft ▁indicates ▁fla ws ▁rel ating ▁to ▁off ensive ▁ne ore al ism ' s ▁level ▁of ▁analysis . ▁According ▁to ▁him , ▁the ▁inclusion ▁of ▁the ▁non - struct ural ▁ge ography ▁variable ▁to ▁explain ▁great ▁power ▁behavior ▁sh ifts ▁the ▁theory ' s ▁foc al ▁point ▁of ▁analysis ▁from ▁system - wide ▁dynamics ▁to ▁regional ▁ones . ▁Consider ing ▁the ▁theory ' s ▁regional ▁security ▁anal ys es , ▁he ▁further ▁arg ues ▁that ▁off ensive ▁ne ore al ism ▁fails ▁to ▁clearly ▁define ▁what ▁constit utes ▁a ▁region ▁with ▁" ent ities ▁like ▁Europe ▁or ▁North - E ast ▁Asia ▁( t aken ) ▁for ▁granted ", ▁leaving ▁room ▁for ▁scholar ly ▁disapp ro val . ▁ ▁Christopher ▁L ay ne ▁further ▁highlight s ▁problems ▁associated ▁with ▁the ▁ge