Study Case of Paris Climate Agreement (2015)
The discourse whether International law affects state behavior or not at all is often meet to the debated answers. Some scholars in neorealist lens arguing that state, as primary and rational actor in international relations, will behave based on its interest as it is believed that international law has little or no independent impact on the behavior of states. This view is supported by Joseph Grieco who assumed that international cooperation only will exist when it meets the interest of the affected states . However the critic comes from other scholar such Andrew Guzman who argued on questioning that if interest is the only reason that drives state to behave, why would the state devote the great deal of time, energy, and money in spending to create international law? Moreover he argued that when state is claimed to be violating the rule of law, state supposed to have no reason to proclaim their innocence in which in the …show more content…
Through this lens, the writer suggest that it would be easy to understand how state would be affected by the international law. The writer also has explained about the phenomena of prisoner’s dilemma that faces the international affairs most of the time which is the key factor why state would behave to comply with international law in some extent and not comply with its consequences derived from the international law.
In conclusion, the writer strongly sees that states would put the international law as its main consideration to behave in international community while still maintaining to accommodate its interest. The calculation of state interest and consequence to comply with international law will be the key to determine how state would behave in the international