DEFINING STATE SOVEREIGNTY State sovereignty is a broad concept… it's actually a two-in-one concept: the state and sovereignty. In order to give a correct meaning to the concept, I will therefore break it down and define each concept separately. I will begin by defining the State which, in simple language, designates a community of people living together in a confined territory with an institution recognized internally and externally to protect them. Sovereignty, on the other hand, can be defined as the externally recognized right and freedom of a state (the unit of analysis of sovereignty) to conduct its affairs. Sovereignty gives the state territorial integrity and allows it to enjoy recognition in international politics. If we now join the two concepts, we can define state sovereignty as the freedom of the state to make decisions within its defined geographical boundaries. The distribution of power within and outside the state concerns the role of the state in the international order and whether or not it can function as an independent and autonomous actor (Heywood 2004, pp90). MEANING OF THE CONCEPT The importance of state sovereignty lies in its structure – it combines two very key concepts of IR – the state and sovereignty – key players in international relations. State sovereignty also implies obligation and authority - the state's obligation to its citizens (and its same actors) as well as its power (authority) to make decisions within its borders defined geographic areas. Above all, it constitutes a fundamental element of contemporary politics and international law. , according to the Westphalian concept. It is a concept that ensures order, stability and predictability in international relations (i...... middle of paper ......r even when no state wants it. The A classic example of this is World War I. Similarly, Iran's nuclear program, which has sparked heated debate and objections from the superpowers, the United States in particular, is also a global security issue on which liberalism lies. is firm and a question of balance of power of realists Realists would on one side support Iran's decision asserting that as a sovereign state it has the right to develop nuclear weapons and that this decision. would actually be healthy for the country, on the other hand, they would see it as a costly and dangerous decision that could end up triggering a nuclear race (Dunne, Kurki, Smith 2010, 63).CONCLUSIONAs I said earlier in this essay both theories have a direct engagement with state sovereignty and everything that evolves around the concept can be explained (using the theories) from different perspectives..=====================