In recent decades, a segment of the global Left has looked upon the U.S. government as the Great Satan in international affairs, responsible for the world's major ills. This warped vision became particularly apparent during the Russian government's military invasion, occupation, and annexation of Ukraine, when major organizations with this worldview, although supposedly antiwar and anti-imperialist, focused their criticism on the U.S. government, NATO, and Ukraine and gave the Putin regime a free pass for its imperialist aggression.
The release of the film, Oppenheimer, focused on the life of "the father of the atomic bomb," should help to remind us of how badly the development of modern weapons has played out for individuals and for all of humanity. But it's not too late to do something about that.
The immensely destructive Ukraine War could have been prevented if Vladimir Putin had not been determined to revive Russia's "great power" status or if the United Nations, established to preserve international peace and security, had had the power to take action to stop the war from occurring. And the war could still come to an end through either the Russian government's concluding that the conflict had become too costly in lives, resources, and internal stability to continue or the countries of the world concluding that it was finally time to empower the United Nations to safeguard international peace and security.
Little Vlad has had a tough life. But as the supreme ruler of the largest country on earth, determined to outdo his predecessors in manliness and imperial grandeur, he is now assuming his proper role, he believes, as a Man of Destiny!
It should come as no surprise that the world is currently facing an existential nuclear danger. But a strengthening of global governance could end that danger by producing a nuclear weapons-free world.
Although supporters of the Russian invasion, occupation, and annexation of Ukraine blame "U.S. imperialism" for the Ukraine War, the U.S. role has been relatively minor. The major actors have been Ukrainians, striving for independence, and Russians, striving to end it.
For many years, a portion of the world public has sought to wall itself off from people abroad by hiding behind national borders. This nationalist approach runs counter to most of the world's great ethical and religious teachings and, also, fails to cope effectively with major problems that afflict the entire world, such as war, climate catastrophe, disease pandemics, resource scarcity, and widespread poverty. Fortunately, however, as the development of international social movements and institutions has shown us, people around the globe can work together in the interest of a brighter future for all.
In recent decades, the term "Red Lines" has been employed by individual governments -- and especially those of the major military powers -- to warn other nations not to impinge upon their self-proclaimed spheres of influence. This threatening behavior not only heightens international conflict, but flies in the face of the need to reconcile competing national priorities and enforce international agreements.
Given the Russian government's brutal repression of dissent, the level of Russian resistance to the Putin regime's war on Ukraine is quite remarkable. Defying the authorities, vast numbers of people have signed antiwar petitions, many thousands of Russians have participated in peace demonstrations, and approximately a million Russian citizens have fled abroad rather than serve in the armed forces or compromise, in other ways, with their government's military aggression.
By invading the sovereign nation of Ukraine and annexing large portions of its land, the Russian government has clearly violated international law. But, despite agreement among the world's nations on the principles of international law, the major entities providing global governance -- the United Nations and the International Court of Justice -- lack the power to enforce these principles.