Preventing World War III

Preventing World War III

by Jerry Tetalman

611 words

Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the major countries of the world have been aligning in two different blocs: NATO (which includes most European nations, the United States, and Canada), Japan, and South Korea, on one side, and Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, and India on the other. 

Both blocs of countries are supporting their side in the war with weapons, trade, or troops. The negotiations to end the Ukraine-Russia war have so far failed due to Vladimir Putin’s reluctance to engage. NATO has so far supplied weapons and military support. 

Still, it has been careful not to confront Russia with troops directly?probably because Russia has a large nuclear arsenal and the United States and NATO are trying to avoid a full-scale war. This strategy, so far, has resulted in a protracted stalemate. 

If allowed to spread and escalate, however, the Ukraine-Russia war might trigger World War III. 

So, how does the United States deal with this dilemma? One option is to do more of what it has been doing:  provide more weapons and sanctions, in the hope that they will bring Putin to the negotiating table in earnest. Another, more daring approach is to look at what causes war and then address the root cause of war. 

We live in a world where most nations or groups of nations solve their disputes through the law of force rather than the force of law. But in some parts of the world, we have replaced war with law and government. For example, the European Union has created peace between its member states, such as France and Germany, countries that had fought bitterly against one another in World Wars I and II. Now these nations settle their disputes by voting in the European Parliament and the European Union courts. 

Why has the European Union succeeded in creating peace among its members while the United Nations has failed in these efforts?  The answer lies in the fact that the United Nations is based on treaty law, a voluntary system of agreements among nations that lacks an enforcement mechanism that true law uses.

A new, more powerful, and democratic United Nations, however, could create peace among the world’s countries. By convening a UN reform conference under Article 109 of the UN charter, it would be possible to engage the world’s nations in creating a rules-based system of international law that is enforceable rather than voluntary. Building a civilized world based on law and rules, rather than on military power, would create a global framework for peace, and hopefully, reverse the schism of the world into warring camps. 

Would such a framework solve the Russia-Ukraine war? Not directly, but it would provide an institution capable of resolving it. 

If left on their current trajectory, international relations and military conflict will soon reach a dark place that will be difficult to recover from. The alternative is not radical; indeed, rules and laws provide the basis of civilization, and today they are desperately needed at the international level. These can be provided by a structure of limited world government, similar to that of the European Union. 

Individual nations would remain free to develop their own laws dealing with their internal affairs, but, in international affairs, they would abide by the laws between countries.  In this fashion, a small piece of sovereignty would be exchanged for a peaceful world. 

The world’s nations can begin this process by invoking Article 109 of the UN Charter to call for a global conference to craft a new, more effective United Nations. Many details must be worked out for such a mission to succeed, but the alternative of more war and destruction is unacceptable. 

~~~~~~~

Jerry Tetalman is the Chairman of the Development Committee of Citizens for Global Solutions.