In der Geopolitik leiden die Schwachen immer noch, was sie müssen
https://iai.tv/articles/in-geopolitics-the-weak-still-suffer-what-they-must-auid-3193?_auid=2020
In der Geopolitik leiden die Schwachen immer noch, was sie müssen
https://iai.tv/articles/in-geopolitics-the-weak-still-suffer-what-they-must-auid-3193?_auid=2020
5 Kommentare
Submission statement: From ancient times until the present day the weak have had to suffer the whims of the strong. The question of whether that still remains the case today was the subject of the debate held at HowTheLightGetsIn Festival in Hay-on-Wye this past May, [which has been released in full on iai.tv today](https://iai.tv/video/the-rules-of-war). The discussion centred around international law and what, if any, efficacy it has. Former Labour politician Jeremy Corbyn, former Conservative Minister Malcolm Rifkind, hero of the Left Yanis Varoufakis, and CEO of Chatham House Bronwen Madddox debated this question. Alyssa Erspamer here analyses their divergent, and sometimes opposed, perspectives, all of them however ultimately defending the necessity of our rules-based international order. She questions, instead, whether it itself is merely another tool for the strong.
>Our four speakers reached a perhaps surprisingly shared conclusion of international laws’ ultimate necessity. Is it a lack of imagination or courage on their part that none of them can imagine a world without international law?
Interesting observation.
Ooh… they *cannot* imagine a world without international law, even though that is basically the world that exists and has existed forever.
Otoh… They also *don’t* really imagine a world where international law *does* exist. Actually imagining how such a world would come to be or work.
Here’s the thing… these people are not real intellectuals. They’re politicians. Some explicity and other have just adopted politcian ways.
That explains the lack of imaginative courage.
That imaginative block keeps the conversation abstract and aloof. Does it matter, for example, that much of the world is undemocratic…. That many democracies are illegitimate according to one another’s standards?
Also… *“the weak suffer what they must“* also happens when law does exist. As lefties, I am sure both have lamented this very thing often.
In any case… „enforcing international law“ vis a vis Russia is what Ukraine is doing… trying to do. Physically prevent invasion.
The only „institution“ capable of preventing violations of this international law is an army. A big one. An army strong enough to „do what it likes“ while it’s opponent „suffers what it must.“
Regardless… they should have some courage and propose/speculate/imagine. How does international law of the kind they want come into existence.
The complete quote goes something like, „the strong do what they want, the weak suffer, what they must“.
Still?
International “law” doesn’t stop anything. The big difference over the last 100 years is that nations have grown more interdependent, alliances have formed to address the complexities of self-interest, and laws were created to better articulate these interests. But these alliances are just another form of strength, and strength is what ultimately dictates behavior.
A real “law” would punish the strong if the strong misbehaves. Russia, for example, is sanctioned for misbehavior only because (and to the extent that) Russia is weak.