Advantages And Disadvantages Of International Law

The defining characteristic of the state is the ability to wield power. The use of power, both inside and outside of one’s border, directly speaks to the sovereignty of the nation. If a nation is incapable of disciplining or punishing its citizens it will invariably become a failed state. Moreover if a country isn’t recognized as powerful in the global political arena, that country stands a very good chance of being dominated by a nation who has the capacity to enforce its own will. The use, or at least the perception, of power is so fundamental in nationhood that those who wield the most power can easily dictate world events.

World order are the activities and relationship between the world states, and other significant non-state global actors, that occur within a legal, political and economic frame work. The need for world order has arisen due to the past historical conflicts, colonialism, greater interdependence between nations, and the increased impact of the activities of nation states upon other nation states. Legal measures such as the UN, as well as non-legal measures such as the media and Non-governmental organisations, show a mixed effectiveness in response to resolving conflict and working towards world order.

The international system is anarchic. It is very important to notice that anarchy, according to Mearsheimer, does not mean chaos or disorder, but absence of centralized authority, that stands above states and protects

Analyzing this source, we should fully embrace the perspective it is portrayed because internationalism allows people to work in less developed countries around the globe offering security, economic stability and many other factors with the rest of the world thus making nations more interconnected with one another. The source states that combining global corporations with a strong effort, we can hope to solve many complex issues that threaten a nation-states safety as well as the well-being of all people. International cooperation To address global issues, would require a need of a strong majority of nation-states that are willing to protect civilians, bring economic stability and as well benefiting the countries both ways. This source is showing that though Conflicts and issues, they can be resolved more effectively with the help of nation-states; to accomplish this we would require nation-states to expand the scope of their interests to include the well being of all people. The source is adapting the ideology of internationalism allows us to help less developed countries with crucial issues as well has benefited by having the country providing aid grow and prosper. A factor that plays a role in international cooperations is foreign policy, foreign policy is best defined as a set of political goals that seek to show how a particular country will interact with other countries of the world. These foreign policies are mainly designed to help protect a country's national

At a glance, one may assume that individuals do not play a significant role in international law. International law may seem too broad to encompass individuals in any society. This is because that international law has no jurisdiction. It applies regardless of the local jurisdiction sometimes even overriding local legislation. Courts may use international law to pass judgement on tricky cases. However, individuals play a significant role in international law. International law focuses mainly on the individual. It ensures that individuals get justice mostly in situations when the national

In studying International Relations, I have realized that, the nature of International politics can be likened to anarchy. This is because in International relations there seems to be no supreme or overriding authority which establishes and maintains rules or laws in international affairs. All States appear to behave in their own interests.

International politics is a way for sovereign states to interact with one another in some by using either treaties or informal and recognized in practice only. There are many difficulties that come with international politics though some have different goals

In the international arena, there is no hierarchical rule to keep states in line or behaved; meaning that the international system is constantly in anarchy, aka the state of nature. This lack of rule enforcement puts states in a constant state of war, in a constant state where they need to stay on guard and in a tactical advantage otherwise the safety and well being of their state will be in jeopardy. In this scenario, the state’s number one priority is to protect itself and act in its self interest when need be, despite if it would typically be deemed immoral. (Donnelly 20)

Rome Statute is a treaty that was signed in 1998 by 122 country members to create the first permanent International Criminal Court(intlaw 221).

enrollment that was just 51 in 1945 has ascended to 155. This demonstrates that there is almost a triple augmentation in the number of States. Every one of the States are anxious to affirm their enthusiasm for international relations. Along these lines, worldwide relations of today are truly international in character since every one of the States demand taking an interest actively. Hence, the extension and nature of international politics has totally changed. It has turned out to be profoundly perplexing and entangled.

The concept of internationalism is the idea of getting the best for your nation or nation state, even it being harm to another group.Because of this mindset many nations were able to achieve their national Interest goal for their country and further increase their strength . Although that may be the case on one side, but on the other side the ideology of internationalism can cause pain suffering and problems for other groups. This topics of internationalism have been intensely debated over the years with both sides coming to a stalemate in who side is right or not.The question that is asked is should nation and nation states have an obligation to do whatever is obligatory to reap the benefits of internationalism. Undeniably internationalism can lead to economic benefits for a country even so, the answer to this question is simply no. The bases abaft this answer are because of the perilous repercussions it can have on a nation. The weapon that is knowing as internationalism is one that will always end up harming and ravaging another nation, whether it’s through eradicating their way of life, culture or people and country internationalism will always cause harm.

Basically, Ratner discusses how we have two challenges: how to make universal rules legitimate amongst a community of diverse nations and how to make these rules effective in the absence of a governing authority. He then goes on to explain how there are four fundamental shifts in these kinds of issues. New Forms, New Players: Rules of international law used to reside in treaties or customary law, but as new domains from the environment to the internet become appropriate for international regulation, states become unwilling to embrace strict rules. Soft law enables states to adjust to the regulation of new areas without fearing punishment upon failure to comply. New participants are making demands

In the article, author John J. Mearsheimer highlights that a state’s main objective in their actions were meant to survive and take any measure to ensure their safety. The state will focus on surviving and will plan around that objective. However, the safest possible position is to be the hegemon of their region. States aim to achieve this whilst still maintaining a secured surviving status. A state that has potential and holds a respected status may be safe now but is still exposed to downfall corresponds to the idea that states will search for opportunities to gain power over rivals. The author supports the notion of creating alliances and absolute power. In reality, states are not seeking equilibrium, rather they seek hegemony. With a regional hegemony

IGOs are voluntary associations of sovereign states established to pursue many objectives for which states want to cooperate through sort of formal structure and to which states are unable to realize by themselves (Miller, 1994). There are hundreds of IGOs in today's world which are significant in their respective fields. They are created by treaties and negotiations which mainly reflect preferences of stronger states. Especially stronger states create IGOs because they need them to protect their interests. By and large, decisions made by IGOs are the product of negotiations among the governmental representatives assigned to them. In general, it is not idealism, but the need of states which tend them to cooperate with other states in the context of IGOs. Therefore, they are part of the Westphalia state system in which IGOs are instruments of nation-states (Miller, 1994: 67). Regarding to the function and the purpose of IGOs, the influence of state as an actor in international relation still remains strong but in a different way, IGOs replace the original ideas of individual states but to identify states which have the same normative behavior and same ambitions to form a cooperate with each other so as to achieve the same goal. Even said so, powerful states are less constrained by the principle of IGOs than those who are relatively weak (Ataman, 2000: 152-167). This suggests that state is the key element in

Natural Law is a deontological moral theory (with several elements of teleological concepts) that determines the morality of an action based on the primary precepts, whilst also reflecting on human nature and rationally working out what leads us to happiness. One of the perceived strengths of Natural Law is the idea that is shares common human nature across the world. This means that we can uphold a moral standard that everyone must follow, rather than finding ourselves stuck with moral relativism or subjectivism. This is a benefit as if morality was subjective then any individual, such as Hitler would be able to justify his actions due to his interpretation of morality being subjective. Similarly, if morality is relative to a particular social culture, then what we think of being morally correct could simply just be a social construct, and we shouldn’t enforce this social construct onto others who follow their own moral law (an example of this is the Western Laws enforced in the Pitcairn trials). Because of a shared human moral code, Natural Law is one of the few moral codes that could state plainly and clearly that murder is wrong, without considering the time, place or scene. This argument, though having its merits, is a victim to what is known as the “is-ought” fallacy. This fallacy was introduced by David Hume and he said, “If something is a particular way by ‘nature’, it does not logically follow to conform. Therefore, even if we have a natural inclination to act in a