By Vivek Pattanayak in Bhubaneswar, August 16, 2025: As both Trump and Putin met at Alaska for a big-power summit of two nations to decide the future of war between Ukraine and Russia, few questions come to one’s mind.
First question is internationalism as reflected through growth of international institutions culminating in creation of the United Nations with evolution of international law over centuries dead? Did not nations, countries and states had explicitly and implicitly agreed towards growth of international law for common benefit of each nation, country and state who ultimately represent common interest of their people no matter to what race,religion ,ethnicity they belong and what language they speak or what is their sect and caste ,what belief and faith they have?
Has nationalism superseded internationalism? Another question arises when there is conflict between national interest and international interest, what interest will prevail?
.
Have nations ruled by monarchs, dictators, aristocracies or democracies agreed to limit their sovereignty in the evolution of international law and agreed global order.
The world many thousand years ago was much different from what it is today. Interdependence of countries has evolved over centuries with technology influencing transportation and communication system affecting trade, commerce, tourism and spread of education and academic institutions finally opening the frontiers of knowledge.
When conflict took place between nations they used to resolve through negotiation, mediation, conciliation, or arbitration or even through adjudication or resort to coercive measures like disruption of diplomatic relationships, embargo, sanctions, pacific blockades etc. The last resort was war.
Conflicts were on economic matters relating to trade, business and commerce, political matters concerning territory andcontrol over population.
Wars were causing human misery by death, displacement, refugees, and destruction of national and global assets.Hence there was the needfor an international body which was established after First World War called the League of Nations learning from experience of bodies like Universal Postal Union and International Telegraphic Union where international cooperation among sovereign states was not only essential but also fundamental.
Unfortunately, the League of nations within two decades of its birth faileddue to intransigence and obduracy of Fascist Italy led by Mussolini, NaziGermany under Hitler andoligarchic Japan under Tojo.Another devastating war began with much greater damage to the human race ending with the use of nuclear weapons.
Then came a new world body called the United Nations along with many specialized agencies who contributed to creating world order in many areas of human life.Consciousness has grown worldwide even with regard to the global environment including plants and animals and other forms of life and their preservation. Most importantly climate change, global warming, melting of glaciers and possible submergence of territory and endangering oflives have become a universal problem.
In this context can nations representing human race ignore role played by a global body to establish international law and regulate conduct of nations and human beings. As during the ancient time and during early forms of human society need for a ruler was felt, has not the same need exists now with regard to nations. Without a governor there could be jungle law. Hobbes called it state of nature when life was short, nasty, brutish, solitary, and poor. Similarly, without global governance life can be like a state of nature. Each nation asserting its position at conflict with other nation will result in continuous tension, hostile action and wars and finally human misery.
There are also conflicts within nations which are left to individual nations to regulate.When rulers are too oppressive and conduct themselves in inhuman way; they are also subject to control whetherthrough international opprobrium or sanctions or through international law like InternationalCriminal Court, a new legal regime which emerged in the beginning of the current century.
Next question comes when the United Nations exist as an institution why can that platform be used to resolve dispute. When Trump and Putin would meet what solution can emerge on the war in Ukraine which cannot be found in the United Nations. The Charter provides mechanism of settlement of disputes. Is the Security Council not the forum appropriate for it? Is it not the General Assembly not the forum? Is the veto problem as one of warring nation namely Russia enjoys veto power? If this is the case, then what solution can emerge if Russia does not agree to Trump’s solution?
Does Trump have any magical trump card? Has he become global governor to maintain order?
Having raised these questions one can reasonably conclude that although the legal institution of the UN exists it has become dysfunctional due to the intransigence of so-called major powers. History of the UN has shown that if a big power turns rogue, itbecomes impossible to control. It is almost like the situation of the League of Nations.
The world is relapsing to disorder. There are two wars continuing. Fortunately, one between two nuclear rivals in the sub-continent halted within four days. Hostilities between Israel and Iran have not waned. Tension between China and Philippines is raging. Taiwan is under pressure.Conflicts within nations are multiplying. Some can be seen openly while many are not receiving media attention.
The difference between what the situations was before the collapse of the League and now is that the people were not asconsciousas they are today. Live TV and internet have made all the difference.Leaders of nations are losing confidence in people except those who are loyalists.Discontentment is spreading although it is not publicly visible. Rulers are guided by their hubris and hunger to remain in authority.
Have the governing institutions become anachronistic? Is there unbridgeable chasm between the rulers and the ruled?
Dystopia prevailing in the globe needs immediate intervention. Letus not expect any divineintervention through arrival of an apostle, messenger, or incarnation of God. Let us not hope that Krishna, Abraham, Christ, Mahomad or Buddha or Gandhi will arrive to save the earth and human civilization including plants and animals or other forms of life. People themselves have to make an effort to bring peace and protection of the environment.
Revival the spirit of internationalism and democratization of international governing institutions whether UN, or other bodies technical or financial is the answer wherethe voice people will be reflected.The opening para of the Charterof the United Nations starts with the words “We the people of the United Nations….” This speaks volumes about the underlying principle.
In stead of reinventing the wheel and creating another institution, let member States of the UN convene a global conference of all stake holders to address the burning issue of making the international organization more democratic which would reflect views of the people and all within the existing framework.
Leave a Reply
Be the First to Comment!