The Key Maxim: The State as the Leading Actor in Global Relations
The key maxim is that the state is the leading actor in global relations. However, the state also requires the contributions of other actors, which can be agents of the country. Therefore, the states have a wide range of agents that serve on its behalf in different global scenes without inevitably disclosing whether they are agents or principal. Various theories such as realism and liberalism tend to explain the role of states as the principal actors in world politics (Lawton, Rosenau & Verdun, 2018).
Realism: A Description of the Human Condition
Realism can be described as a description of the human condition irrespective of what others viewed as cynical kind of that view (Burley, 2017). Realists’ expectations on international politics suggest that the global arena is revolutionary in nature due to deficiency of a coordinated authority system that occurs in nation-states. In addition, they hold an opinion that the center of social reality is the cluster with the focus that the persons are merely creating blocks of that social clusters unlike the prominence positioned on the persons by the liberals (Goldthau & Sitter, 2015). Additionally, realism thinks the power of supremacy is security and the primary foundation of all enthusiasm.
Liberalism: Nationalistic Universalism
On the other hand, liberalism proposes that nationalistic universalism offers an opportunity for a nation to enforce its standards and valuation of actions upon other states. Essentially, this is contrary to the realism, which views the state-nation as the final point of reference in terms of political actions and loyalties (Teson, 2018). Nevertheless, realists view this as a problematic exploration. The opinion is due to the nature of human who is continually in a state of mistrust and fear. Therefore, if harmony is to occur in anarchy, an individual should be entirely rational, and he/she should have the capacity to assume that all people are too. The concept held by the realists suggest that there cannot be accord or harmony in the global arena as individual nations tend to prioritize their national interest instead of general interests for all (Doyle, 2018).
The Role of Individual Nations in Pursuing Their Interests
Meanwhile, for a nation to realize its interest, it depends intensely on her form, capabilities, and means such as cooperation to advance that interest. Therefore, individual countries appear to pay close attention to the interests that benefit them first without considering the needs of other members in a group (Gilpin, 2016). In addition, individual nations lack confidence that other people in the group will maintain the original agreement.
Sovereignty and Universalism
On the other hand, a nation is considered a sovereign entity. The critical impression of sovereignty indicates the principle foundation of authority is the community or society. Importantly, liberalism implies that nations in global arena require providing their sovereign status for some type of universalism because there is no supra authority in global political platform influencing the sovereignty of a particular states-nation (Cohn, 2016). For this reason, the liberalism holds the view that a nation may surrender part of its sovereignty to a more powerful institution in the global market.
The Realist Perspective on Sovereignty
Nevertheless, the realist proposes that no ethical principle validates the state-nation conceding some level of sovereignty to a higher body in the global scale because such is unattainable (Baylis, Smith & Owens, (Eds.) 2017). The core bulk of the laws of comprehensive legislations hold its presence to the power of the individual countries. Therefore, individual nations should try to strengthen their capabilities based on the status of other countries (Teson, 2018). The realists argue that the constant conflicting circumstance in the global arena is due to the never-ending pursuit of “human lust for power” instead of the interpretation of conceding of sovereignty.
The Significance of Cooperation in Global Relations
According to cooperation principles, both liberalism and realism have a similar view on the significance and importance of cooperation among states-nation in global relations. Nonetheless, they differ on how such collaboration can remain sustainable. The realists claim that it is challenging to attain or maintain cooperation and such efforts are reliant on state powers. Furthermore, mistrust and dishonesty usually characterize the international politics (Lawton, Rosenau & Verdun, 2018). It is a maxim that the majority of the institutions created to mitigate in the concerns of global relations are fragile and primarily controlled by countries that are more influential in global politics.
The Role of Interdependence
In the case of the United Nations, five countries have veto powers in the Security Council. Therefore, the resolutions of the UN are mostly overruled by such powerful nations. In addition, sanctions introduced by the body become unsuccessful since several parties in the council are unable to agree on what is thought to be an interest of member state (Doyle, 2018). Therefore, no member could advance in his ambition for power without paying soliciting support from other co-members. In this regard, harmony needs whole distinctiveness of interest, especially in global politics. However, in such arena, common interests are limited.
Interdependence and its Challenges
Liberalisms argue that in order to attain stable political relations in the global scene, the interdependence of states-nation should be promoted. Fundamentally, interdependence influences the world politics and traits of states (Baylis, Smith & Owens, (Eds.) 2017). Nevertheless, the actions of the government of the state-nation equally affect the arrangements of interdependence. The key stream of interdependence as viewed by the realist is that it does not merely imply that states-nation engaged have some kind of mutual benefits. The failure of this structure of interdependence is that countries engaged could acquire more than others based on their strategic position on a particular circumstance or issues. The fundamental aspect of interdependence is to assist tighten the impact of cooperation, but in many situations, in areas where there are no similar benefits, states-nation will continuously select to act on what they think will be in their interest (Lawton, Rosenau & Verdun, 2018). Moreover, the realists believe that military instead of non-military engagement will occupy the leading position in this area and highlight non-military interaction amongst nation-states due to politico-military consequences.
Conclusion
The global political order mainly influences the actions of the nation-state. Realists argue that a nation’s powers should be strengthened as opposed to ceding sovereignty to an international institution. Therefore, they tend to encourage the individual state to pay close attention to its interests before those of other nations (Baylis, Smith & Owens, (Eds.) 2017). On the contrary, liberalism advocates for the need to concede some part of their sovereignty to global institutions to meet shared interests or goals.
References
Baylis, J., Smith, S., " Owens, P. (Eds.). (2017). The globalization of world politics: an introduction to international relations. Oxford University Press.
Burley, A. M. S. (2017). International law and international relations theory: a dual agenda. In The Nature of International Law (pp. 11-46). Routledge.
Cohn, T. H. (2016). Global political economy: Theory and practice. Routledge.
Doyle, M. W. (2018). New thinking in international relations theory. Routledge.
Gilpin, R. (2016). The political economy of international relations. Princeton University Press.
Goldthau, A., " Sitter, N. (2015). A liberal actor in a realist world: The European Union regulatory state and the global political economy of energy. OUP Oxford.
Lawton, T. C., Rosenau, J. N., " Verdun, A. C. (2018). Introduction: Looking beyond the confines. In Strange Power: Shaping the parameters of international relations and international political economy (pp. 25-40). Routledge.
Teson, F. (2018). A philosophy of international law. Routledge.
