Neither interest nor identity theory completely account for the transnational legal process that is normative. As an effect of continued interaction with other governmental and non-governmental actors in the international system, act as obey international law in part. Estates infringement of law creates contradictions and unavoidable clashes that hinder its continuing involvement within a transnational legal process. Connectivity impairs its ability to secure new lending when the sovereign debt is defaulted on by a developing nation. The country’s leaders may shift over time to one of compliance for a policy breach of international law to avoid such clashes in its relations that are continuing. company profile on LinkedIn
As transnational actors interact, they create patterns of behavior and generate norms of conduct that is external which they in turn internalise. States also responds to other states reputations as law abiding or not. Legal ideologies prevail among national decisionmakers such that they’re influenced by perceptions that their actions are unlawful, or that other nations in the global regime or domestic opponents also categorise them. Also, domestic decision making becomes enmeshed with international legal norms, as institutional arrangements with the making and maintenance of an international dedication become entrenched in domestic legal and political procedures. It truly is through this continued process of interaction and its stickiness is required by internalisation of international law as it is understood, that nation states obtain their identity, and that countries to locate encouraging the rule of international law as part of a national self-interest. It really is important to understand that although at times international law seems a weak, the reality is that states use the rhetoric of international law for his or her own purposes at any particular time to justify their political position.