differences in impact of IGOs and significance of states

Structure of essay?

• P1 - extent to which they see states as dominant actors in global politics

• P2 - how much power they believe IGOs have to shape order and behaviour

• P3 - how much influence they believe political leaders have in deciding behaviour of states

P1 - extent to which they see states as the dominant actors in global politics

• One key difference is the extent to which they see states as the dominant actors in global politics.

• A central idea of realism is the belief that states are the primary and most important actors in global politics.

  • Realists argue that states alone possess sovereignty; the ultimate authority over their territory and domestic affairs. This sovereignty enables states to act independently in the anarchic international system, where no overarching authority exists.

  • Crucially, realists also argue that due to the anarchy. nature of the international system, the only way to guarantee safety is with themself, which leads to states maximising their military power.

    • Realists would argue that this explains why states such as India and Pakistan developed nuclear weapons in the second half 20th century.

• Liberals, by contrast, don’t view the state as the sole important actors in global politics. Instead, they believe that states are one of many actors that shape global affairs, including IGOs, NGOs, and MNCs.

  • These non-state actors play a crucial role in mediating the relationships between states, particularly in the 21st century globalised world, where states are more interconnected.

    • For example, MNCs hold significant power due to their economic importance and the fact they can operate across a number of states.

    • This can result in them successfully pressuring states to pursue friendly relations with other states, which is in their economic interest. For example, the economic importance of Apple and Microsoft reportedly played an important role in deciding to exempt smart phones and computers from his tariffs on China in April 2025.

P2 - how much power they believe IGOs have to shape global order

• Another important difference between realists and liberals is how much power they believe IGOs have to shape the international order and behaviour of states.

• Due to the anarchic international system where states cannot rely on other actors for their security, realised argue that IGOs have no real power to enforce rules or maintain order.

  • They argue that states only comply with international laws and norms when it aligns with their national interest. When these rules no longer align with a states goal, they will abandon them without hesitation.

    • Realists argue that international law isn’t really law, as IGOs such as the UN and WTO lack enforcement mechanisms.

    • This can be seen in the US’ withdrawal from the Paris Agreement under President Trump, as it wasnt in their interest since they are a major oil and gas producer.

• Liberalism, by contrast, argue that IGOs do have significant power to influence the behaviour of states and enforce their rulings.

  • They argue that states comply with their rules as they share moral principles and recognise the long-term benefits of cooperation. States are reluctant to break the rules and risk losing out on these benefits.

    • The European Union, for example, has created significant economic cooperation across 27 member states and is effective in enforcing its own laws to mange the relationship between states, including through its own court, the ECJ.

P3 - how much influence they believe political leaders have in deciding behaviour of states

• A final difference between realists and liberals is on the significance of states in relation to how much influence they believe political leaders have in deciding the behaviour of states.

• Liberals view how states behave is driven by their view of human nature. This is strongly influenced by classical liberals, such as John Locke, who see humans as rational and capable of working together to achieve common goals.

  • Liberals therefore believe that states will rationally work together, by way of IGOs, when it is in their mutual benefit. This is particularly the case when states share mora principles and values, which they would argue that Western states do in their commitment to human rights.

  • This shows how liberals believe that the instincts of political leaders play a key role in how states behave - as these individuals are rational, the behaviour of states will be too.

• This contrasts with the views of realists, who believe that the behaviour of all states is driven by the fact that they operate in a system of international anarchy, where the only body that can guarantee a states safety is themselves.

  • This leads to all states seeking to maximise their own power, as this is the only way for states to protect themselves.

  • This thinking is influenced by conservative Thomas Hobbes’ belief that humans will all inevitably be selfish and competitive in a system of anarchy as it is the only way to ensure their survival.