Skip to main content
ScotlandModern StudiesSyllabus dot point

How do theories of international relations explain how states behave, and how do realism and liberalism differ?

Theories of international relations: realism, liberalism and idealism, and other perspectives, and how each explains state behaviour, conflict, cooperation and the role of international institutions.

How theories of international relations work in SQA Advanced Higher Modern Studies. Covers realism, liberalism and idealism and other perspectives, and how each explains state behaviour, conflict and cooperation, the balance of power, and the role of international institutions.

Generated by Claude Opus 4.813 min answer

Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed

Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page

Jump to a section
  1. What this key area is asking
  2. Realism
  3. Liberalism and idealism
  4. Other perspectives
  5. Setting the theories against each other
  6. Worked example
  7. Try this

What this key area is asking

Section 3 of the question paper, International issues and research methods, examines the theory of how states behave. The central examinable debate is between realism and liberalism (idealism), with other perspectives in support: rival accounts of whether the international system is defined by conflict or cooperation, and what drives state behaviour. At Advanced Higher you must explain each theory, argue between them with evidence, and reach a judgement, the basis of the 20-mark essay.

Realism

Realism is supported by evidence of enduring great-power rivalry, arms competition and the priority states give to security. Its weakness, liberals argue, is that it underplays the dense web of cooperation, trade, institutions and law, that visibly shapes the modern system, and treats the state as a unitary actor when domestic politics and non-state actors also matter.

Liberalism and idealism

Liberalism is supported by evidence of deepening cooperation, the spread of trade, the expansion of international organisations, and joint action on issues such as climate. Its challenge is that anarchy has not disappeared: institutions often reflect the power of dominant states, and great-power competition and war persist, which is the realist rejoinder.

Other perspectives

Beyond the realist-liberal axis, other perspectives enrich the debate. Constructivism argues that the system is shaped by ideas, norms and identity as much as by material power, so interests are not fixed but socially constructed. Critical and structural approaches highlight the role of global inequality and economic power between rich and poor states. These perspectives are examinable as ways to complicate and deepen the realist-liberal argument, not as a separate syllabus.

Setting the theories against each other

The examinable skill is argument between theories, because each reads the same events differently. A new trade bloc is, for liberals, cooperation taming anarchy; for realists, a vehicle of dominant-state interest; for constructivists, an expression of shared identity. A strong essay holds one theory as its spine, tests it against the others with evidence, and reaches a judgement, typically that realism explains security competition while liberalism explains the modern system's cooperation, with the balance varying by arena.

Worked example

Try this

Q1. What does realism mean by describing the international system as anarchic? [2 marks]

  • Cue. There is no authority above the state to enforce order, so states must rely on their own power for security.

Q2. Give one force that, according to liberalism, makes cooperation between states more likely. [2 marks]

  • Cue. Any one of: interdependence through trade, international institutions (UN, EU, WTO), international law, or shared norms.

Exam-style practice questions

Practice questions written in the style of SQA exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.

SQA AH (international essay)20 marksTo what extent does realism best explain the behaviour of states in the international system?
Show worked answer →

A strong essay sets realism against liberalism and other perspectives, uses evidence, and argues a judgement rather than describing each theory.

Set out realism: states are the key actors in an anarchic system with no overarching authority, they pursue national interest and security, and power, especially military power, is decisive, so conflict is ever-present and cooperation fragile. Then test it against liberalism, which stresses cooperation, interdependence, international institutions, law and trade as forces that temper anarchy, and against other views such as constructivism, which stresses ideas and identity. Use evidence such as great-power rivalry and arms competition (for realism) versus the growth of the UN, EU and global trade (for liberalism). The judgement should weigh which better explains state behaviour, perhaps concluding that realism captures security competition while liberalism better explains the dense cooperation of the modern system. Marks come from sustained argument and balanced use of theory.

SQA AH (international essay)20 marksCritically examine the view that international cooperation, not conflict, now defines the international system.
Show worked answer →

The marks reward analysis of liberalism against realism and a substantiated judgement.

Explain the liberal case: interdependence through trade, the growth of international institutions (the UN, EU, WTO), international law and shared norms create incentives to cooperate and raise the cost of conflict, so cooperation increasingly defines the system. Set this against realism: anarchy persists, states still pursue self-interest and security, institutions reflect the power of dominant states, and great-power rivalry and conflict endure. Use evidence such as cooperation on trade and climate versus ongoing wars and strategic competition. A good answer concludes by judging how far cooperation has displaced conflict, perhaps that cooperation has deepened in some arenas while security competition persists in others, sustaining one line throughout.

Related dot points

Sources & how we know this