Summarizer

International Relations Anarchy

Power wins in anarchy, no actual international law, spheres of influence, superpower behavior normalization

← Back to There were BGP anomalies during the Venezuela blackout

In a global landscape defined by fundamental anarchy, power consistently supersedes international law, leaving smaller nations to navigate a limited sovereignty dictated by the spheres of influence of superpowers. Some perspectives suggest that nuclear conflict may no longer be a binary of total armageddon, as tactical strikes against non-nuclear states could potentially occur without triggering global retaliation. This erosion of traditional red lines by one superpower often serves to normalize and justify the expansionist or interventionist ambitions of rivals like Russia and China. Ultimately, these viewpoints frame international relations as a calculated game of strategic dominance where "might makes right" and formal legal frameworks are increasingly treated as illusions.

9 comments tagged with this topic

View on HN · Topics
>There are 9 nuclear-armed states today. Likely this has set us on a path where nuclear war is inevitable. It's really hard to guess how retaliation would happen in practice, a large-scale nuclear war certainly isn't inevitable . The most likely targets for nuclear strikes right now are also non-nuclear states.
View on HN · Topics
People massively simplify the dynamics of launching a nuke. If Russia launched a nuke on a Ukrainian military target away from civilians there is virtually 0 chance of nuclear retaliation. Ukraine doesn't have them. Does anyone think the US, France, etc. would nuke Russia? Of course not. It's scary, but in some scenarios one nation can absolutely nuke another nation without threat of getting nuked themselves. In reality, the cat coming out of the bag looks more like that than nuclear armageddon.
View on HN · Topics
Well, really any leader who dissatisfies the president of the US, really
View on HN · Topics
That is a bold assertion to make considering China literally did retaliate against the US in North Korea once already, to the tune of war. Kidnapping heads of states is an act of war. Venezuela can't defend itself, but China certainly will do whatever is necessary to secure its vassal if the alternative is NK collapsing and having US military bases on its border. You also rule out the possibility of an invasion of Seoul, as though it would be "unfair" -- when you're advocating for and actively in the process of tearing whatever remains of the concept of international law to shreds, what makes you think PRC would be inclined to play nice?
View on HN · Topics
Sure, but I think these discussions are more enlightening when we model superpowers as rational actors within their ideological system rather than just whatever propaganda is locally convenient.
View on HN · Topics
> Is Venezuela a sovereign nation or a colony? Reality is not that black and white. We may no longer have formal colonies, buy the world is still carved up by spheres of influence by the superpowers. Displease them and you'll find out how limited your sovereignty really is.
View on HN · Topics
Power wins in anarchy. International relations are anarchy. There is no actual international law.
View on HN · Topics
Of course they didn't. While I can't imagine Russia is exactly happy that it lost an ally in the Western Hemisphere, this kind of action is very much aligned with Putin's multi-polar worldview where the great powers leave each other to play empire in their respective spheres of influence. It helps justify things like invading Ukraine. I can imagine some in the Chinese military are over the moon right now, taking notes on how to force regime change in Taiwan.
View on HN · Topics
understandably, it's more about the acceleration in aggressiveness from Trump clan and the precedent of crossing the usual international red lines