"For realists, the causes of war and peace are mainly a function of the balance of power, and institutions largely mirror the distribution of power in the system. In short, the balance of power is the independent variable that explains war; institutions are merely an intervening variable in the process." In this statement Mersheimer delegates a lot of the power institutionalist claim that regimes, have on balance of power politics. In his article which discusses the realist perspective on institutionalism John Mersheimer goes on to bring WWI as an example of the lack of power of institutions. Although in the late 1800's and early 1900's a great amount of regimes and cooperation existed between states it did not prevent the war. To this an institutionalist might argue that not enough economic ties existed between the countries to prevent a war. The realist's perspectives attacks the institutionalists on the fact that they do not examine the role of institutions when states are being attacked. However, the realists" perspective does not spend much time explaining why institutions fail in cases where one state must decide how to interact with two others states in a dispute. .
While realists are concerned with the questions of war and peace, neoliberal institutionalists focus more on how institutions promote cooperation. Institutionalists examine much closer how regimes effect economic ties between the states, and what effect this has on how the states conduct themselves in a dispute. A state for example, is less likely to choose sides in a conflict that involves countries with which it has economic ties. Instead the state is likely to remain diplomatic and might even turn to an organization such as the UN to have the dispute settled. .
According to the institutionalists cheating is a major concern of states in international relations. Organizations erase that fear by making information widely available.