Many people would agree that it would have been good, if all international disputes were resolved on the basis of justice rather than through wars. But then they say that this is an idealist dream, because in the real world there is no alternative to wars.
Establishment of workable supra‐national institutions for resolution of international disputes on the basis of justice and maintenance of international law and order is not an ideal, but an unpleasant necessity, just as criminal and civil justice systems are in nation states.
If the world were inhabited by ideal people, who were honest, reasonable and just, there would have been no need for a system of administration of justice or police — such ideal people would not commit crimes and would be resolving all misunderstandings between themselves without a need for courts and judges.
It is precisely because people are not ideal, but dishonest, violent and destructive, that courts, judges and policemen exit in most countries to keep law and order.
The reason that there are no workable institutions of supra‐national government is because politicians are hanging on to the ideal of “national sovereignty” — which in fact is their own personal “sovereignty” over the people of their own countries and the “right” to commit crimes against their own people and the people of other countries with impunity.
Establishment of workable institutions of supranational government would limit the powers of politicians to commit crimes with impunity and make them responsible for the results of their own actions. And this is why politicians prefer wars to supra‐national justice.
But crimes by governments lead to the victims of these crimes taking law in their own hands — and this leads to terrorism and world anarchy. It is time to recognize that governments are capable of committing crimes, and that criminality of this or that government should be determined by application of principles of justice to proved facts, rather than by national politicians punishing their enemies and rewarding their friends as it is convenient to themselves. As the world is becoming a single nation — the national governments will have to limit their powers and submit themselves to supra‐national law.
This will happen either because some national leaders will see the need for government by truth, honesty and justice, rather than by violence and politics, or through painful and sobering experience.
The reason that the governments of France, Germany and Russia are seeking to prevent war is not due to their idealism, but to their relatively recent and very painful experience of being at the centre of a major war. They still remember the post‐war France, Germany and Russia with ruined cities and people on crutches and with empty sleeves, people with faces disfigured by fire, and the blind and the deaf. One would meet such casualties of war in every European city everyday in the street, in the markets, in the shops and on public transport even some 10–15 years after the end of World War II.
The Americans had not experienced a major war on their soil — for them war is a glorious ideal. This is why a relatively minor incident of the 9/11 had produced such a shock in the United States.
Once the idealistic American view of war has given way to realism as a result of painful experience, the American administration (this or a future one) will become as enthusiastic about the need for supra‐national government, as France, Germany and Russia are enthusiastic today about the European Union and the need to avoid wars through use of the UN.