In this article, on the one hand, we examine the concept of threat and its evolution in the theory of Hobbes and Walt, and on the other hand, we discuss the key concept of security against threats. Hobbes finds the State of nature to be detrimental to security, with fear, and in constant threat, and sees the solution in establishing a power that eliminates the threat posed by anarchy.On the other hand, in the face of the threat, Stephen Walt emphasizes the importance of the balance of threat instead of the balanceof power.The purpose of this articleis an attempt to achieve an alternative security, a security with an emphasis on rational approachthat goes beyond the desire for survival (Hobbes).The question is: can the prevailing logic against the threat in thestructure of realism be applied to today's political situation?It seems that the structure of neorealism has a better solution to this situation.It is assumed that,in describing Hobbes's security, there was an approach to repelling disorder and evil(otherness), but in today's relations between governments and for international security, no other elimination is entirely possible; and so there has to be an approach to calculating the cost of profit.The management of the world system must be based on theinterests and understanding of the existing conditions.So today, the nation-state alone is not important, but different perceptions of the threat and attention to structural condition and other actors in the international environment are important.The goal is to turn threats into opportunities.Therefore, we are witnessing a change and transformation of the concept of threat from classical (structural) realism in Hobbesian approach, to the reality of the position of neoclassical (defensive) realism in the concept of Stephen Walt .Threats in the traditional conception are the eliminating concept and in the new conception are the unifying concept