The global framework designed to prevent catastrophic wars between major powers is facing its most severe crisis, with alarming signs it may be failing for a third time in modern history. This pattern of collapse carries a grim warning: if this attempt fails, humanity may not get a fourth chance.
A History of High Hopes and Bitter Failures
The world's first major attempt came after the Napoleonic Wars (1803-1815), a conflict so vast it is often considered the first world war. In its aftermath, the major powers of Europe established the Concert of Europe. This was a revolutionary departure from simple peace treaties. For nearly a century, it successfully used diplomacy and collective action to maintain peace among great powers, until nationalism and autocratic leaders plunged the continent into World War I, claiming 22 million lives.
The second attempt was the League of Nations, championed by US President Woodrow Wilson after the "war to end all wars." It sought not just peace but an end to imperialism. Its failure was catastrophic, leading directly to World War II.
The UN and the Modern Rules-Based Order
The third and current system emerged from the ashes of WWII. The United Nations was founded, alongside a rules-based financial system and a pivotal legal innovation: holding individuals criminally responsible for waging aggressive war. This marked a fundamental shift. As the Nuremberg trials established, waging aggressive war became the "supreme international crime".
The UN Charter made it unlawful for any nation to wage war except in clear self-defence. The philosophy was clear: it is better to tolerate a local tyrant than to threaten world peace with unilateral aggression. The very names of defence departments in the US and UK reflected this new, cautious norm—until recently.
A System Under Direct Assault
The current crisis is epitomised by recent actions and statements from US President Donald Trump. His declaration, "I don't need international law," following the US invasion of Venezuela and kidnapping of its president, represents a direct rejection of the post-WWII order.
Analysts argue that ordering such an invasion constitutes a war crime under the very framework the US helped create. This stance forces urgent questions upon allies like Australia. The ANZUS treaty is founded on faith in the UN Charter. When the pre-eminent power undermines that charter, the alliance's moral foundation cracks.
This rejection of diplomacy and collective security risks returning the world to a dangerous state reminiscent of George Orwell's "Nineteen Eighty-Four", where perpetual war between superstates becomes the norm. When major powers dismiss international law, discussions shift to "winning" wars—a concept rendered obsolete by modern, devastating arsenals where there are no victors, only victims.
The lesson from two centuries of history is stark. The cost of abandoning diplomacy, international institutions, and law is measured in millions of civilian lives. The Concert of Europe, the League of Nations, and now the United Nations system each rose from the rubble of failure. The world is watching to see if the third attempt can be salvaged, or if the unthinkable becomes inevitable.
