Among the three theories, nuclear war is least likely to occur using a liberal approach. Liberalism is an approach in which moral and political positions are based on the pursuit of freedom and equality for all before the law. While there are many different branches and subsets of liberalism, the approach generally advocates positions in favor of free markets, freedom of expression, democracy, and equality for all. When it comes to war, early advocates of liberalism realized that war is expensive. The benefits of territorial expansion are not counterbalanced by the losses that citizens will suffer. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay Liberalism requires greater alliances and interdependence than separatism. This is based on the knowledge that allies are less likely to go to war with each other. Furthermore, economic interdependence is strongly correlated with the nation having an advanced economy. (Martin and Simmons, 1998). Normally, international organizations such as the United Nations and the European Union look for ways to resolve disputes through discussion rather than the use of some sort of military force. From the liberal perspective, these international organizations and institutions are of utmost importance to achieve world peace. Liberalism is widely considered to be realism's main theoretical competitor (Slobodchikoff, 2019). On the other hand, nuclear war under realism ranges from probable under offensive (projection) realism to possible under defensive (posture) realism. Of the three theories, nuclear war is most likely under realism. Realism is a school of thought in international relations theory, which theoretically formalizes the politics of realpolitik of early modern Europe. While this is a very diverse body of thought, it can be considered unified by the belief that world politics is ultimately always and necessarily a field of conflict between actors pursuing power.” It is important to note that realism is not a single theoretical perspective. Realism contains many different facets and approaches, many of which are still used today. Regardless of the approach, the central focus of realism is the pursuit of power, thus making it nearly impossible to analyze the theory as a single cohesive piece. A common misconception about realism is that all realists reject the role of ethics in international politics. For example, there are classical realists who believe that national interest is of the utmost importance and at the same time do not reject the importance of moral judgment in international relations. Classical realism prefers to attribute value to political actions taken, given the alternatives and likely consequences of those actions. There are also four traditional assumptions when talking about realism. The first is that politics takes place between states and states play the role of the main actor in international relations. Within a given state you are bound to have multiple organizations, interest groups, and individuals, but from an international relations perspective, they are directed by the state they are associated with. The State will act as a unitary actor. This is especially true during times of international conflict where states typically speak and move with one voice to show a united front. The second assumption is that most decision makers are rational and will make decisions with the intention of improving and promoting the interests of their state. Most decision makers do not want the state to fall either.