6 ms·

I don't think there are many penalties for breaking the international law. Clearly, in the environment where Europe's adversaries are flagrantly breaking it on

I don't think there are many penalties for breaking the international law. Clearly, in the environment where Europe's adversaries are flagrantly breaking it on the daily basis, keeping to it meticulously would be foolish and dangerous. Just like pacifism, abiding by the international law in this case will only serve to embolden the totalitarian regimes, which neither desire peace, nor obey the law.

lxgr 2y ago
Trust is hard to earn and very easy to lose. The appropriate answer to somebody violating hard-won international laws and norms isn't to just also start violating them.
- scotty79 2y ago
  Laws are for participants who willingly obey them. If they don't they automatically shouldn't be covered by them. There might be separate subset of laws on how to treat them but they cannot be treated the same as conforming entities. You have freedom but if you do a crime your right to freedom is void. Now you have right to get punished.
  - lxgr 2y ago
    Not sure what to call a rule that immediately stops applying to any involved party as soon as one violates it, but "law" isn't a word that comes to mind.
    - scotty79 2y ago
      It's called pragmatism. It's one level above the law for practical purposes. It dictates when to apply the law in the international setting.
    - Sabinus 2y ago
      Our usual understanding of law has an enforcement mechanism of the nation on individuals, not voluntary agreements sovereign nations enforce on each other.
matt-p 2y ago
And then you enable them to use the argument against you. They broke the law last time therefore it's fine for us to.
- dagenleg 2y ago
  Who cares? It's just words. It's better than getting attacked while being paralyzed with indecision.
  - lxgr 2y ago
    Yes, the UNCLOS is ultimately just words, just like the Geneva convention, a formal declaration of war, a country's nuclear doctrine etc. Words aren't as meaningless as you claim even at wartime.
    - dagenleg 2y ago
      I think if you wanted to bring up meaningful words, those were not the best examples to give. In the recent years, somewhere amongst the endless nuclear threat screeching and the ignored ICC arrest warrants, they have lost a lot of meaning. The declaration of war is a pretty good example of that, actually, being an outdated and withered concept. I'm simply pointing out that words do not matter as much, willingness to do something, to respond, to defend yourself, that's what matters. I'm not ignoring the value of laws, and rules, and regulations, but they clearly are not an ironclad defense. Just like Article 5 isn't.
      - GoblinSlayer 2y ago
        Why declaration of war is outdated?
        JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > Why declaration of war is outdated? Plot every declaration of war since WWII. Now plot every military conflict. Nobody declares war by declaring war, we declare war by bombing.

lxgr 2y ago

Trust is hard to earn and very easy to lose. The appropriate answer to somebody violating hard-won international laws and norms isn't to just also start violating them.

scotty79 2y ago
Laws are for participants who willingly obey them. If they don't they automatically shouldn't be covered by them. There might be separate subset of laws on how to treat them but they cannot be treated the same as conforming entities. You have freedom but if you do a crime your right to freedom is void. Now you have right to get punished.
- lxgr 2y ago
  Not sure what to call a rule that immediately stops applying to any involved party as soon as one violates it, but "law" isn't a word that comes to mind.
  - scotty79 2y ago
    It's called pragmatism. It's one level above the law for practical purposes. It dictates when to apply the law in the international setting.
  - Sabinus 2y ago
    Our usual understanding of law has an enforcement mechanism of the nation on individuals, not voluntary agreements sovereign nations enforce on each other.

matt-p 2y ago

And then you enable them to use the argument against you. They broke the law last time therefore it's fine for us to.

dagenleg 2y ago
Who cares? It's just words. It's better than getting attacked while being paralyzed with indecision.
- lxgr 2y ago
  Yes, the UNCLOS is ultimately just words, just like the Geneva convention, a formal declaration of war, a country's nuclear doctrine etc. Words aren't as meaningless as you claim even at wartime.
  - dagenleg 2y ago
    I think if you wanted to bring up meaningful words, those were not the best examples to give. In the recent years, somewhere amongst the endless nuclear threat screeching and the ignored ICC arrest warrants, they have lost a lot of meaning. The declaration of war is a pretty good example of that, actually, being an outdated and withered concept. I'm simply pointing out that words do not matter as much, willingness to do something, to respond, to defend yourself, that's what matters. I'm not ignoring the value of laws, and rules, and regulations, but they clearly are not an ironclad defense. Just like Article 5 isn't.
    - GoblinSlayer 2y ago
      Why declaration of war is outdated?
      - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > Why declaration of war is outdated? Plot every declaration of war since WWII. Now plot every military conflict. Nobody declares war by declaring war, we declare war by bombing.