there is a large body of international law in the world today. which theoretical perspectives (realism, liberalism, and constructivism) believe these laws are likely to be effective and which think these laws are meaningless? do you think these laws are actually effective in influencing state behavior? why or why not (be specific)?



Answer :

Liberalism is an International theory that believes that these laws are likely to be effective in the global world, and in different contexts, some of these theories are still relevant to today's world.

Liberalism believes that states are cooperative in nature, democratic government in more countries can reduce the possibility of war in the international arena, and economic interdependency are some of the factors which base this grand theory of International Law.

Today's law enhances the cooperative nature of all states and gives a platform to small and third-class countries for their say.

Realism talks about the power struggle between the states and they are self-oriented states. The presence of anarchy at the global level and nations interacting for the sake of their own national interest, which happens today also as countries like the United States, Russia, and China- They are ruling the world and are able to influence the other states because they are powerful in terms of military and economic.

Constructivism talks about the importance of social impacts for the source of any war besides economic or struggle for power. For instance, India and Pakistan are having constant clashes as they are having some cultural and social in common, and dreadful histories.

Therefore, These above theories are relevant to today's world to some extent.

To know more about International relations, follow the below link:

https://brainly.com/question/28137382

#SPJ4