Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is a reason Mearsheimer is part of an IR school of thought called "Realists." This analysis doesn't focus much on self-determinism or international law because it assumes that these concepts don't have much influence. I also think that it's regrettable, but people making foreign policy calls should be aware of this line of thinking. For what it's worth, what Mearsheimer is saying here about NATO expansion being…
> it assumes that these concepts don't have much influence. But international law has a lot of influence. As a set of shared norms, it's something that most competently-run countries and polities explicitly foster in order to achieve some sort of long-term stability and predictability that ultimately benefits them all. A "realist" analysis that simply ignores these dynamics and pretends they do not exist is not very…
“Anarchy is what states make of it” is a great search phrase to pull on this thread with to say the least.