Compare and Contrast Liberal and Realist Views of International Law Essay

Compare and Contrast Liberal and Realist Views of supranational Law - Essay utilisationThis view led to creation of outside(a) law which provides a framework that guide international relationship. International relations theories address various concerns of countries. This paper intends to compare and contrast realist and liberalist views of international law. Political realists wall in favor of their nation in terms of its security, social reconstructions, and moral concern while political liberalists argue in favor of international cooperation (Claude & Weston, 2006122). Security concern is a factor that affects national amuses and international interests. It is probable that political stability of a nation depends on the security measures in place. An instant of insecurity trace political gains and economic endeavors of a country. However, debate on security drags both realists and liberalists into explaining their views to international laws. Realists believe that a state has to strive to achieve state security through all possible convey (Claude & Weston, 2006126). For instance, during the 9/11 bombing realists gave their response to international terrorism by arguing that the state should refocus on probable sources of its insecurity and that the state should handle non-state actors who are violent as proxies for national interest (Portmann, 201070). In this view, high state organs believed that non-state sponsors had a role in creating the infamous attack. In response to the attack, the realists centre their security actions to states they perceived as rogues i.e. nations that supported the actions of the insurgent groups (Portmann, 201069). Realists felt the threat posed by these countries and discrete to wage war on terrorism in these countries. This justified the move made by joined States to wage war on Iraq and Afghanistan. Liberalist contrasts the realist view of international law by favoring the interest of non-state actors (DAspremont, 2 0116). It is evident that liberals empower non-state players with agency and autonomy. For instance, liberals believe that distri barelyion of power does not only remain at state level, but also embeds it to entities such as NGO and international institutions (DAspremont, 201112). Liberals have taken a centre story role in advocating for independent groups as forces that need recognition in the international politics. At the international scene, liberals argue that power is a multidimensional tool in which emphasis should be on well-off power in addition to economic and host power. This argument makes the liberalist support international activities in contrasts to the interests of the realists. The utilize of soft power intends to eliminate conflicts, which drag international politics. For instance, the adoption of dialogue as a means of seeking a lasting solution to conflicts is a manifestation of using soft power in brokering interest of various countries. In the internationa l politics, recognition of political realism is a concept of interest vested in terms of power (Neack, 200377). The motive behind each state behavior is power, which is either multitude power or potential power (assets). The means used by states to seek power parti-color because some states are weak while others are strong. However, power change from time to time. For instance, French military power dominated continent Europe in the early 1800s, but shifted in 1814 following the bruise of French military (Neack, 200378). Largely, realist perspective looks at state as