The international landscape is undergoing a significant transformation as strongman politics reshape global norms and challenge established laws. This shift, referred to as the Age of Aggression, is marked by the erosion of accountability mechanisms that have guided international relations since 1945. The rise of authoritarian leaders and the blatant disregard for the United Nations Charter threaten to normalize aggression as a valid tool of statecraft.
Understanding the Four Waves of Accountability
Over the past eight decades, the world has witnessed four distinct waves of atrocity accountability, each reflecting varying degrees of commitment to justice and international law.
The first wave began in 1945 with the Nuremberg Trials, where leaders were held criminally responsible for war crimes. This pivotal moment established fundamental principles, including individual accountability for international crimes and the rejection of impunity for heads of state. It laid the groundwork for a rules-based international order, with the UN Charter serving as a promise of “never again.”
The second wave, spanning the 1990s to 2010s, saw a resurgence of commitment to justice in the aftermath of atrocities in the Balkans and Rwanda. The establishment of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) exemplified this period, alongside the creation of hybrid courts and the International Criminal Court (ICC). This era was characterized by optimism that accountability could be institutionalized on a global scale.
In contrast, the third wave, beginning in the 2010s, marks a regression towards authoritarianism. During this time, strongman leaders emerged, consolidating power and dismantling democratic norms. The weakening of multilateral institutions, including the UN Security Council, has allowed for the normalization of disinformation and political repression. This wave presents a direct challenge to the progress made in previous decades.
The Implications of the Age of Aggression
The current fourth wave, the Age of Aggression, extends the third wave into outright defiance of international law. This shift is exemplified by powerful states, including the United States, which have embraced unilateral military action as a primary foreign policy tool. The abandonment of multilateralism has led to coercive posturing against countries such as Venezuela and Cuba, signaling that great powers may act without legal justification or international support.
When a leading nation disregards the UN Charter, it sends a clear message: the rules are no longer applicable. This lapse in accountability emboldens other states to act similarly. For instance, Russia’s aggression against Ukraine gains justification when powerful nations like the US set such precedents. The Security Council, designed to maintain international peace, becomes ineffective when its permanent members act without restraint.
As the world witnesses a return to might over right, the implications are dire. Increased interstate conflicts and mass atrocities could become commonplace, as strongman leaders leverage violence to maintain power. The erosion of global governance could leave crises unmanaged and vulnerable populations unprotected, further destabilizing international relations.
The Age of Aggression not only signifies a geopolitical shift but also represents a normative collapse, where the principles established post-1945 are increasingly disregarded. This trend threatens to unravel the protections that have been built over decades.
Envisioning a Fifth Wave
The trajectory of the first four waves points toward a pressing need for a fifth wave that re-establishes accountability as a core principle of international relations. Tools exist to facilitate this transition, including the ICC’s jurisdiction over aggression and efforts to create a Special Tribunal for Ukraine. Civil society networks continue to document atrocities, even in the face of institutional paralysis.
Achieving a fifth wave requires a renewed commitment to the UN Charter, an enhanced system for prosecuting aggression, and the formation of a global coalition willing to confront authoritarian leaders. The belief that law can effectively restrain power must be revitalized.
The Age of Aggression is not an inevitable outcome. It demands courageous leadership and a recommitment to the principles articulated during the Nuremberg Trials. The stakes are profoundly high, as the future of the 21st century hinges on whether nations choose to uphold accountability or accept atrocity as the new norm.
David M. Crane, a prominent figure in international criminal justice, emphasizes the importance of these discussions. With decades of experience as the founding Chief Prosecutor of the UN Special Court for Sierra Leone and a key architect of the Special Tribunal for the Crime of Aggression against Ukraine, Crane advocates for a collective response that prioritizes justice and the rule of law. The trajectory of global politics may very well depend on this renewed commitment to accountability.
