By Giannis Papadimitriou

The questioning of rules and case law in international relations becomes dangerous and now reminds of the darkness of the Middle Ages.

“War is the continuation of politics by other means“Prussian General Carl von Clausevic wrote in the 19th century, in times when not only empirical truth, but also legal. Prussia was exploited by it, a rising power of the time in Europe, for which Count Mirambos, one of the leaders of the French Revolution, claimed that “it is not a state that has an army, but an army that has a state”.

As a rule, therefore, transnational differences were resolved on the battlefield. At best for the winner, the opponent was twice lost, as he had to pay compensation after the defeat if he was the attacker.

OR prohibition of using violence In international relations, it was established only after World War II on the UN Charter (with the sole exception of the right to self -defense or the intervention of the Security Council based on Chapter VII). Top conquests of legal culture had previously been considered to be the Hague conventions (1899-1909) that predicted that prisoners are not executed in times of war, civilians are not humiliating, property is not looted.

“Father” of modern international law, however Dutch Hugo Grotianwho in the early 17th century taught at the renowned University of Leiden and published “De Jure Belli AC Pacis” (“About Law of War and Peace”). He was the first to work on such a systematic coding of rules that govern international relations, while contributing to the “recovery” of law after the darkness of the Middle Ages. Grotius does not exclude the war, but he teaches that war must be “justified” and this can only happen for three reasons: for self -defense, for territorial recovery or for “punishment”.

Law or law of the powerful?

Why do we say all this? To recall that peace, freedom of religion, respect for law and multilateral diplomacy were conquered by blood and sacrifices. It took centuries, hundreds of dead and countless “lost generations” until they agreed winners and losing in the ashes of the war that the law is in paced. And not the law of the powerful. Greece, a country “too small to commit great impatience” during the Venizelian saying, in any case only international law can rely on.

But even the “rich and powerful” only profits have gained from peaceful coexistence on the basis of stable rules of law. The collective security system we have invented post -war is not unmistakable, often not effective or not even respected, but it is certainly much better than the daily jungle of the trenches. As the American internationalist Louis Henkkin rightly pointed out “ALMOST ALL NATIONS OBSERVE ALMOST ALL PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW ALMOST ALL THE TIME”.

Prerequisite for well -being Peace

The awareness of the law, the preservation of historical memory and the fear of war have led us to the greatest prosperity of humanity – a period that lasts to this day. Only in Greece The gross national product (GDP) increased by 500% from 1960 to 2010. Economic data for other countries are respectively or even more impressive.

It is therefore worthwhile because so many within such a short period of time rushing to renounce or despise the validity of the law. Another is overseeing half of Ukraine, another stands in Greenland, another dreams of a “great Hungary”. Are they bored of their prosperity? Do they imagine Andragos in mental battles? Looking for life content in the darkness of death?

Ask those who have experienced armed conflicts on European territory in recent decades. The civil war of Yugoslavia or the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Most people say the same: “We could not imagine that we would end up in war.” History warns us. But it is not enough to avoid the worst…