UN Ambassador to the Aliens

The issue of having an ambassador to aliens would obviously have different reactions in the contrasting realms of international relations theory. Specifically, I will be discussing the contextual differences of realists and constructivists.

Realists would not support the appointment of an ambassador to aliens. First of all, this theory does not have confidence in international institutions and allies, which undermines the UN altogether. Therefore, a realist would not view a UN ambassador as something that would beneficially affect nations. If a nation run by realists believed aliens to be a security threat, then it would establish its own alien ambassador so that it can independently approach the situation without relying on other nations. The realist idea of the world is that the global structure remains fundamentally the same; therefore they would predict most nations to focus on their own security because physical survival as a nation is the fundamental goal.

On the other hand, constructivists acknowledge the effect international law has on nations, including the power of the United Nations. To constructivists, an ambassador to the aliens would be a position that would benefit the globe as a whole if a situation of alien invasion occurred. Therefore constructivists would see it as a good move for all nations. If the possibility of an alien society finding Earth was deemed important enough to prevent, then constructivists would argue that it is imperative to have international norms and principles on how to approach such a situation already in place, which could be established through the UN Ambassador. The main issue with constructivism is its inability to predict the global structure, thus the presented constructivist argument as a preventative measure could differ greatly from how they would analyze such a situation after its occurrence.

The realist focus on physical security and the constructivist concentration on international institutions create completely contrasting approaches. Realists would take it as an opportunity to further internalize its power and security, whereas constructivists would use it to organize the world in a joint effort.