Keeping Peace in the Future

This in a realist approach is unacceptable. The liberalists find this a very poor argument. They find that with a possible expansion of NATO and increasing power of the organization that the third-world countries can be left out. They think with the Expansion of the Security Council, that global peace can be maintained in a more unified, universal manner. Also they believe that the General Assembly could increase in power and take a more serious role in international disputes and conflict resolving. They believe that any conflict in the world should be controlled before it can ever escalate in to a bigger one. With this structure of the UN, it would also be much harder to strive for national interest.

To start of with the realists believe that a greater military body would create a balanced and therefor peaceful world. To achieve this the realists see possibilities of enlarging the power of NATO and other military, governmental organizations. By increasing this power it would call on a more responsible Secretary-General, and there as giving the United Nations as an inter-governmental body more strength, and possibly giving the world a better way of solutions. Liberalists tend to think more in the format of the United Nations. If the UN would increase power, it would be vital that the United Nations would therefor create a separate body, a more secure military body that not only can be used for peace-keeping missions, but for offensive, defensive, humanitarian and finally collective security methods. In fact they see this as a very big threat seeing that countries would be less cooperate.