Survival is the fundamental goal of state, achieve by security or maximation of power
Offense realism, and defensive realism, self-help is the fundamental constraint of how to
achieve security. If you play this principle, fear rather then satisfaction is the common fait
of countries around the world. Liberal ideals were first articulated: liberalism is the
attempt to mitigate conflicts, to tame power, to transform international politics.
Arbitrary intrusion into the sphere of individual liberty
The form of a liberal state is rather diverse, capitalism to social democracy, from
constitution monarchy to republics, from presidential regimes to parliamentary
ones. Despite the variety of organizations, liberalism in the world is about self-
restraint moderation, compromise and peace. Immediately you can see that the
principles of liberalism when projected in the international arena, seem to be in
opposition, of the nature of international politics.
It’s impossible to achieve something like liberal internationality. We are in the
presence of two contrary logics. Liberalism= weak individual protected against
the damiety. At the domestic level, the anarchy is excluded, yet between states,
anarchy is the rule. Liberalism= state is the solution, in international affairs= state
is the major problem.
Liberal state in world politics are sometimes perceived as
weak states. They don’t have the same capacity and strength to propose interest
on others. During the cold war, soviet union was far more powerful then the
liberal ones, after 911, the debate emerged by the weakness of open democracy to
terrorist attacks. An open western democracy allowed a small group like al quada,
by using means developed by western systems. Not only in US, but other places,
some liberties were cut, to protect western democracies from terrorism. The
debate was raging, over individual liberty, and the requirement of international
affairs. How to accommodate individual liberties, with the threat of terrorism.
Ex. In the U.K freedom of speech, after the terrorist attack in London, the right
was taint. Different countries disagree on the very existence of the very content of
The conception of democracy as we understand it, it restrained to very few
countries, when we try to impose a modern society, most of the time we fail. The
human right issues that we take for granted
is not shared by everyone in the
planet. (the issue of women rights in Islamic society) cannon said restraining from
the use of force, it would eventually transform communism into a liberal state.
The very existence of a liberal power (U.S), was enough to convince a
communism leader that the system would not work. Not by intervention, or arms
race, but by just sticking to liberal principle.
Iranian election= perfect example of a non-liberal state, a dictator against it’s own