The bond between freedom and responsibility is so strong that one cannot exist without the other. This realization may have inspired neurologist and psychiatrist Viktor Frankl to advocate for the installation of a Statue of Responsibility on the West Coast of the United States, complementing the Statue of Liberty on the East Coast.
The importance of morality in sustaining human unity and prosperity—an issue that extends far beyond empirical and scientific study into the realm of metaphysics—suggests the need for a transcendent foundation. A religious-metaphysical frame of reference is essential for any social or political collective. As the current state of most Western societies, particularly in the United States, demonstrates, when this foundation is corrupted or lost, political entities are doomed to decline in the long run.
Morality, as the foundation for prosperous human relations, applies to both the individual and societal levels. It works in the vast majority of personal interactions. In family, friendship circles, and the workplace, people generally respect the worth and identity of others. Where it fails, the enforcement structures provided by society—through governmental organizations, law, and law enforcement—intervene to achieve what voluntary action could not. However, in international relations, there is no effective law enforcement mechanism. While we have ius gentium (people's law), which is largely enshrined in the United Nations Charter, there is no enforcement authority. As a result, international relations are often governed by power politics, national interests, unilateral and imperialist goals, and other considerations of dominance and exploitation.
The mechanisms of international law, established by the UN Charter—particularly the Security Council's primary role in maintaining and restoring world peace—do not function effectively. Aside from the lack of enforcement capabilities, ideological bias and a lack of objectivity within the organization exacerbate the UN's weakness. Current examples of the United Nations' ineffectiveness include the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict and the Hamas-Israel standoff.
But what if warring parties and their backers adhered to timeless principles of international relations and national security ethics, rather than engaging in the old game of greedy power politics while promoting outdated enemy images? What if all nations recognized each member of the international community's equal standing and right to exist, regardless of their size, economic and military power, demographics, or ideological identity? What if all nations voluntarily adhered to the principle that no country may secure its own safety at the expense of the safety of others? What if even the most powerful nations accepted and welcomed the resulting balance of power within the international community?
Indeed, under such principles, we would not witness Ukraine’s utterly pointless and easily avoidable war, which has resulted in tens of thousands of dead soldiers, civilian casualties, millions of displaced people and refugees, and dire economic and social consequences for Europe. More importantly, a world founded on this understanding would provide a stable platform for economic competition, trade, the exchange of ideas and education, and cultural and artistic achievements.
No matter how unlikely the realization of this demand may seem, it is still necessary if Kant's Eternal Peace formula—often viewed only as an approximation to the state of complete peace—is ever to become a reality. Powers, nation-states, and their alliances must abandon the national security models and attitudes that have shaped global stability since World War II. New avenues for a minimal ethics of international relations must be explored, to supplement the rules outlined in international law and the UN Charter. Because the criterion of ethics is the voluntary application of an acknowledged rule, enforcement mechanisms would no longer be required.
