People talk about “international law” as if it’s some kind of global rulebook floating above countries, enforced by a neutral world government. It isn’t. International law does not exist on its own. It only exists because sovereign nation-states choose to sign treaties and then write those obligations into their own domestic law.

There is no global parliament passing binding laws. There is no global police force or army. The UN cannot arrest anyone. The International Court of Justice cannot compel compliance unless a state has already agreed to be bound. Even the ICC only applies to countries that opt in, and the biggest powers simply do not.

What really exists is power. Superpowers like the United States and China sit at the top of the system and ultimately decide which rules matter and when. They enforce norms selectively through economic pressure, military force, or by ignoring rulings they dislike. No court can override them.

Smaller countries operate inside spheres of influence. Their sovereignty is real but conditional, shaped by alignment with a dominant power bloc that provides security and access to markets. Step outside that protection and international law will not save you.

The problem is that many so-called international law experts sell grandiose theories about a rules-based global order that simply does not exist. They confuse aspiration with reality and treat press releases as enforcement. International law is coordination, not authority, and pretending otherwise just obscures how the world actually works.

International law is international delusion.

What makes it even worse is that the UN represents a bunch of dictators who see the UN as nothing more than another tool to subvert democracy, human rights and true justice. And the CCP is gradually buying them all off so the UN can rubber stamp it killing a few million Taiwanese.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/international-law



International law is an independent system of law existing outside the legal orders of particular states. It differs from domestic legal systems in a number of respects. For example, although the United Nations (UN) General Assembly, which consists of representatives of some 190 countries, has the outward appearances of a legislature, it has no power to issue binding laws. Rather, its resolutions serve only as recommendations—except in specific cases and for certain purposes within the UN system, such as determining the UN budget, admitting new members of the UN, and, with the involvement of the Security Council, electing new judges to the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Also, there is no system of courts with comprehensive jurisdiction in international law. The ICJ’s jurisdiction in contentious cases is founded upon the consent of the particular states involved. There is no international police force or comprehensive system of law enforcement, and there also is no supreme executive authority. The UN Security Council may authorize the use of force to compel states to comply with its decisions, but only in specific and limited circumstances; essentially, there must be a prior act of aggression or the threat of such an act. Moreover, any such enforcement action can be vetoed by any of the council’s five permanent members (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States). Because there is no standing UN military, the forces involved must be assembled from member states on an ad hoc basis.

MattE wrote on Jan 9^th, 2026 at 11:55am:


Excellent summation, thanks.

Yes, at the beginning of the age of MAD, people aspired to elimate war (for obvious reasons...)

But they weren't prepared to forgo the (in my view) obsolete concept of absolute national sovereignty, in force  since the Westphalian doctrine:

(google):

The Westphalian doctrine, or sovereignty, is the principle in international law that each state has exclusive control over its territory and internal affairs, free from external interference, establishing the modern system of sovereign nation-states with equal standing. Named for the 1648 Peace of Westphalia that ended the Thirty Years' War, it enshrines non-interference in domestic matters and territorial integrity

But the 30-years' war was fought well before the age of MAD.....

Frank wrote on Jan 9^th, 2026 at 1:38pm:


A repeat of the OP from MattE.

thegreatdivide wrote on Jan 9^th, 2026 at 6:18pm:

You mean you do not understand.

thegreatdivide wrote on Jan 9^th, 2026 at 5:55pm:


So, no people or countries then?

When you say world "peace," is that the same peace as your suggestion that the CCP would take back Taiwan "peacefully" by killing anyone who gets in their way? You never came up with an estimate of how many millions of people would die. I think the count is about 100 million Chinese people killed by the CCP so far.

Quote:




What jury? You don't see many people in democracies calling for them to be replaced by single party dictatorships, but plenty of Chinese are calling for real democracy, when they aren't getting run over by tanks. The worst human-made disasters in the history of the world came from our two single party communist behemoths: China and Russia, with he smaller ones only falling short because they would run out of people to kill. The only thing more dangerous than a Nazi trying to kill you is a communist trying to help you.