Peoples and governments primarily accept that security is not interdependent and will continue to pursue security unilaterally .Whilst economic interactions and limited cooperation will provide limited welfare for some gains and community development

Closed societies and governments with a firm domestic control should be regarded as a natural part of the international system ,because their behavior is in general a response to the safety necessities of the anarchical international society .

Anarchy continues to be the presiding factor in determining the extent of cooperation .Increasing interactions with in the international community enhance the prospect of misunderstanding and misperceptions .

Inter state cooperation is a feature of the international system ,the security dilemma produced by competition ,not the presiding feature. Interactions and exchanges between states are attributed to a reduction in conflict and rivalry.

The capacity of the ruling elite to sustain legitimacy and autonomy against external military ,technological ,social or political threats , to consolidate the survival of the political system above domestic political developments.

Autonomy for people to exchange ,or to devolve power and authority for the securing of more favorable socio-economic or technological advancements, or improvements in internal circumstances .

Autonomy from taking outside orders and the ability of government ,citizens and groups to have their own state , in which autonomy struggles can result in a risk to the state's physical or developmental security ,its sustenance implicitly linked to

The capacity of the state not to undertake any actions or strategies which may inadvertently risk the security of the state such as arms accumulation ,or military preparations which may undermine the physical security of the state from attack, or the

States have forged and embody the most powerful, efficacious and largest human communities.

States are unique concentrations of power. Beyond their importance as a geographically defined boundary they constitute the predominant point of identity for a person?s loyalty and sense of self.

States developed and have been shaped by the external pressures of international politics particularly its security features.

All of the above

States continue to be the predominant actor in international politics and continue to be so ,having their own interests and concerns .Whilst governments and domestic arrangements do determine the character of rule and there will be conflicts .

States continue to be the predominant actor in international politics but they are not significant by virtue of being a state .Governments and domestic arrangements are the predominant determinant of policies ..

State autonomy as an international actor is integral to security of the state within the international system .The emergence of arrangements that will blunt the autonomy of the state but have domestic advantages for domestic citizens such as development.

The importance of internal forces in the international system and the interest and concerns of domestic groups has implications on the security of the state .Domestic appeal to groups within a state therefore assumes primary consideration .

A persistent security concern of states survival in the international system is external with threat to state survival and systematic pressures continuing to be the most predominant concern of state actors .

The collapse of government at the end of the Cold War demonstrated the instability of the international system when there is a sharp decline in relative military power ,as with the communist regimes who continued to be retain legitimacy .

Following the collapse of communism there has been a persistently different pattern in cooperation than anticipated by realist theorization .Initiatives in cooperation have continued to deepen despite the realist claim that integration was a need.

The collapse of communism resulted in a version of multi polarity in which newly formed states act to balance the military power of the US. In response the US has attempted to suppress modernization and developmental capacity of potential rivals .

The liberalist conceptualization of power is understood to be synonymous with the universalization of principles of democracy, residual in the philosophy of Kant and the Wilson Ian principles, in which democracies are regarded as the most efficacious.

The liberalist perspective of power is understood to denote the internationalization of economic interactions inaugurated by capitalist economic .Business interest at domestic level become heavily involved by trade and foreign investment .

Coercive power is understood to denote the monopolization of capacity to exert influence in the domestic arena and also the capacity for relative military strength within the international arena.

Power within international society is regarded to be within the domain of expanding networks of activities by both private citizens and organizations ,and also with political systems(predominantly those democratic systems ) .

The Liberalist perspective is an optimistic account of contemporary international politics. Nationalism and basic interest are the dominant variable in cooperation and not democracy as the theory would suggest .

The Liberalist perspective is synonymous with western theorization and is an extension of Western political ,social ,and economic imperialism and imposition of cultural hegemony .

There is a practical difficulty in liberalist discourse as to the justification ,necessity ,and legalization of the deployment of force in international politics. Moral and analytical justification for force often conflict with political and financial .

All answers above have been cited as legitimate analytical problems with the liberalist perspective .

International anarchical society is characterized by inter-state rivalry ,competition, conflict and insecurity. Cooperation is inconsistent and only temporarily successful in containing conflict or competition and unable to create a highly secure system.

Since international politics is subject to rivalry ,competition ,conflict and insecurity ,true cooperation ,particularly amongst major states ,is important for security related matters .The durability of a cooperative agreement is viable .

Anarchical international society ,characterized by rivalry , conflict ,competition, and insecurity results in a situation in which true cooperation becomes a necessity on security  related matters .

Cooperation is not limited to a small group of states because the durability of cooperation is endorsed by the ability of States to gain the benefits of cooperation whilst incurring minimum costs. States seek to develop advantageous distributions.

States are not autonomous actors in the international system .The Security dilemma produced by a state's primary objective for absolute monopoly of power with in the international system ,result in competition and insecurity in international society

Anarchical international society results in the unlimited development of international community in which the international system operates as an unlimited sphere of autonomy and control ,parallel to autonomy of control in domestic systems.

Anarchical international society results in competition between states for relative power ,in which coercive capabilities determine the structure of the international system .States behavior drives power distribution .

Anarchical international society results in a situation wherein states are structurally insecure .Limited higher structures means that authority in international politics exists by states limiting themselves to cooperation in treaties and organization