According to realism, will an anarchic international system ever establish

sustainable peace? 

Taking Realism and its Meaning in Brief, Realism views international relations
as a system in which states are the main actors. This theory is based on the
generalization of centuries of experience in classical diplomacy and has
repeatedly proved its effectiveness in the analysis of current international
politics. The anarchist system is more about freedom of action and choice, or the
absence of human power over humans. In this case, people themselves will rally
to make many decisions without any harm to those around them.  
 
To answer the question I can say from my point of view I think that an anarchic
international system will not be able to establish world order. 

These days freedom of speech and thought have almost no restrictions that allow
people to fully interact with the state. However, there are still those who will be
against these decisions which means eternal debates, but also without them, there
will be no development of the state. Coming back to anarchism, people with their
ideologies and decisions will control the state, but there will also be opposition,
and the worst outcome of this government may be war. As for the collective
decision-making itself, it should not be mentioned that this system may lead to
degradation of society, e.g. degradation of minorities or nationalism, or even
racism. In such a world, the person with the best quality of conviction would
rule. The entire world would turn away from such a state. If you imagine a world
with an anarchic international system, then in time, anarchy will be over,
because society will be looking for a leader who can lead all by himself. It was
anarchy for a while because the terrorists had captured Syria, and at the same
time, many countries were interested in this because they wanted to weaken
Syria and then expand the territory of other countries. 

Another reason why the anarchist regime cannot coexist with the current
realities. In many ways, the first thing that comes to mind is that many people
like the current order of things and no one is ready for a drastic change. People
in power will be against giving their positions and positions to other people
because overseeing the country gives you power and money and the right to
decide how the country will develop. People can turn the current government
and the situation in the country completely upside down. People usually hold
peaceful rallies where the government can quickly adjust to the demands of the
country, but there are exceptions, such as the rally in Kazakhstan and the 2010
coup d'état in Kyrgyzstan(McGlinchey, 2011), (Gabyev & Umarov, 2022).By
giving these examples I mean to say that such drastic changes in the country lead
to discord and bloodshed, and with anarchy, the number of such events will
increase. 

Many different thoughts arise when examining the issue, in addition to negative
ones, some positive ones are arising, such as the unity of the people and complete
freedom of action. However, one should not forget that in the history of mankind,
we have developed a system of state convenient for all, as a result, the quality of
life and the number of births around the world have increased.  Though anarchy
gives freedom to all people and their actions, there will be someone who will take
control of the entire country, and much will depend on the power and financial
position of this person. 
For example, I would like to take Colombia and the city of Madelin. The man
who was able to establish complete anarchy in the country and the most famous
drug trafficker was Pablo Escobar(Bowden, 2007). 

Pablo was born on December 1, 1949, in Madelin, he was an ordinary farmer and
lived in poverty. As a child, he was involved in petty robberies and was often
involved with the drug cartels. In 1971 the first year Pablo committed his first
serious crime. Pablo's men kidnapped a wealthy Colombian industrialist, Diego
Echavarria, who was murdered after prolonged torture. Pablo wanted to get a
ransom for him but never got it. He later began smuggling cocaine into the
United States. The business grew to unprecedented proportions in Colombia.
Eventually, Pablo became the most influential and most wanted man in
Colombia. His capital was bigger than all of Colombia and with that Pablo
Escobar started a complete takeover of Colombia. In his city, he declared
anarchy, distributed weapons to civilians, and paid for the murders of police
officers with sums of money unimaginable to Colombians.  It was not until 1993,
the day after his birthday, that Pablo Escobar was stopped. To me, this is the
most vivid example of what can happen to a country if there is anarchy in it.

In summary, anarchy can destroy the state and the people living in it, not to
mention the entire world. It is right to say that anarchy provides complete
freedom of action in the state, but people can destroy peace, many countries will
refuse to cooperate in any way, and the state will gradually destroy itself. Of
course, I do not think that I am completely satisfied with the situation in the
world, and I think that many decisions of states are wrong. I am calm if my
family and loved ones are alive and well. Our world still has work to do and I
believe that all the problems will eventually be solved. In our time we have
unlimited possibilities and each of us can contribute to this world. This is not the
time for war or any kind of opposition to other countries. Our world has evolved
over thousands of years to become what we know it to be. 
This war will only slow down the development of the world. Not to mention the
anarchy that can completely stop the development process. The role of our and
future generations is to prevent wars and establish world peace so that the
anarchic system does not become the system of world government.