2014: Good Year for a Great War?

[n2doc]

Graham Allison | January 1, 2014

Precisely a hundred years ago today, the richest man in the world sent New Year’s greetings to a thousand of the most influential leaders in the U.S. and Europe announcing: mission accomplished. “International Peace,” he proclaimed, “is to prevail through the Great Powers agreeing to settle their disputes by International Law, the pen thus proving mightier than the sword.”

Having immigrated to the US penniless, created the steel industry as a pillar of America's rise to preeminence, and become fabulously wealthy in the process, Andrew Carnegie had the confidence of a man who had achieved the impossible. When he turned from making money to spending it for public purposes, his goals were universal literacy at home (funding public libraries in cities and towns across America), and perpetual peace abroad, starting with the great powers of Europe and the US.

Events in the year that had just ended convinced Carnegie that 1914 would be the decisive turning point towards peace. Just six months earlier, his decade-long campaign culminated in the inauguration of the Peace Palace at the Hague, which he believed would become the Supreme Court of nations. The Palace was built to house the new International Court of Arbitration that would now arbitrate disputes among nations that had historically been settled by war. As the Economist noted, “the Palace of Peace embodies the great idea that gradually law will take the place of war."

Carnegie's Peace Palace captured the zeitgeist of the era. The most celebrated book of the decade, The Great Illusion, published in 1910, sold over two million copies. In it, Norman Angell exposed the long-held belief that nations could advance their interests by war as an "illusion." His analysis showed that conquest was "futile" because "the war-like do not inherit the earth."



more

http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/2014-good-year-great-war-9652

[pscot]

1. European leaders agreed

but the Serbs had a less enlightened view of things.

[AverageJoe90]

2. Here's the thing, though. This isn't 1914. Not even close.

There had been severe & long-standing tensions in Europe for quite a while before the Archduke was killed and the leaders of the West were *actively* trying to ignore what was in all reality, rather imminent(and then they foolishly threw themselves all in after the fact, even though many of the people didn't want war).

This is not, however, the case today. In fact, today, it would take either a truly unlikely and unfortunate string of coincidences, or a global conspiracy that would stun even Alex Jones, or even both, to achieve World War III, even a WWI style WWIII.

And before anyone jumps at me, I'm not saying that a major regional war couldn't happen somewhere; it could start with Israel-Iran, or India-Pakistan, etc.....but there just isn't the makings for a global war right now, not without what I've pointed out above. I will, however, grant Allison this: if a Second Cold War were to develop, which isn't likely but not impossible, then there may be some truth to this.

But until then, we've got far bigger things to worry about, and honestly, 99% of this WWIII stuff is a distraction anyhow. The media thrives on fearmongering these days, folks.....

[bemildred]

3. Not bad.