Neo-Realism and Liberalism: Comparing These Two Different Frameworks Used in International Relations

In order for countries to consistently overcome international obstacles, it is necessary to establish a framework of ideal political standards. The two frameworks that are constantly being discussed in international relations are theories of neo-realism and liberalism, and the two theories are about how politicians should manage the state and how to treat others I have my own view. Neo-realism is at a structural level and emphasizes that the balance of anarchism and power is a major element for maintaining the level of international affairs.

In most areas of international relations, the two main ideas dominated the theoretical space. Realism and liberalism, especially its descendants, neo-realism and neoliberal theory have been the mainstream theory used to explain international phenomena since the mid-1980s, in which "new" is more scientific (Positive) Their way (Lami 2011: 116). The position of the new positivist theorizes the relationship between the causal variable (the third analysis image of Waltz) in the international system and the influence on the national behavior as the major player in the international system.

Prior to the collapse of the Soviet Union, arguments between neo - realism and neo - liberalism dominated the field of international relations; materialism was the cornerstone of mainstream international theory. For new realists, the main determinant of national behavior is the distribution of military forces between countries, so anarchist and relative power distribution will promote much of what happens in world politics. (Copeland 2000: 187). Neo-liberalists also think that national interests are fundamentally an important benefit, even though the importance of international systems is regarded as an intervention variable. (Rues-Smit 2001: 224). Therefore, social analysis in social analysis of international relations studies has been left behind.

Neoliberalism. New realism. Two concepts that led to academic discussion on international relations. After the collapse of World War II, the main concern of the day was to try to understand how to avoid such conflict in the future. This leads to mutual dependence of the research countries and whether countries can cooperate if cooperated. We believe that cooperation is an essential element in promoting peace and stability as neoliberalism creates complex interdependence and leads to war. This stability also reduces military expenditure. This will help promote economic development as seen in both Japan and the United States. However, as Gryko was explained by prisoners' dilemma in 1988, cooperation is not necessarily viable.