Seven lessons to escape a world in disorder

Published in The Korea Times, 1 July 2026

Our international environment today is as chaotic, disorderly and bleak as any of us can remember. The last decade or more has been a far cry from the cooperation and optimism that broadly prevailed in the first two decades after the end of the Cold War.

The litany of what has gone wrong is long. We have seen an erosion of respect, especially by the biggest powers, for international law, multilateral institutions and processes. We have witnessed the waging of aggressive war in Ukraine, the militarisation of the South China Sea, paralysis in the Security Council, and a collapse of development assistance funding. The United States has retreated from the WTO while adopting trade coercion. There has been a failure of response to mass atrocity crimes, assaults on the International Criminal Court, and weakness in collective responses to the great existential threats of climate change, pandemics and nuclear war. Nuclear arms control agreements are either dead, dying or on life support, and now we face new problems associated with artificial intelligence.

What are the main drivers of this bleak environment? One has clearly been the general absence of effective leadership in too many of the countries that really matter. The digital media age has encouraged dumbed-down populism, making courageous or sophisticated policy responses ever more difficult. And there is a troubling amnesia among policymakers and publics about how military aggression so often ends catastrophically, and how peace and prosperity are best ensured by diplomacy and cooperation, by finding security with others, not against them.

But while the current breakdown may seem structural and depressingly complete, I believe there is a chance it may prove temporary if current and future leaders absorb and apply the lessons now available to be learned. Let me list seven of them.

First, military might does not necessarily guarantee victory or dominance. Russia found that in Ukraine. The United States has found that in Iran. Nor does it guarantee one's own security, as Israel has found in the context of its dominance in Palestine.

Second, nuclear weapons are simply not the assets they are so often assumed to be. They are not usable as weapons of compellence, as Russia has found in its inability to leverage nuclear superiority against Ukraine. They are not effective as weapons of deterrence, as Israel has found, with its nuclear arsenal not stopping assaults from Iran's proxies and from Iran itself. The real threat of nuclear weapons lies not in deliberate aggressive use but in the ever-present risk of miscalculation or system error. There is a critical need for risk-reduction strategies, and that lesson is becoming clear again.

Third, there is power in competence. Impetuous, irrational, non-evidence-based decision-making, especially to initiate military action, is more likely than not to end in tears. A madman strategy only works if the decision-maker is not actually mad. It is beginning to dawn on the US administration that preserving primacy in the Asia-Pacific is a lost cause, and that a far more intelligent approach than confrontation is the pursuit of Cold War-style detente. The Xi-Trump summit language on strategic stability a few weeks ago suggests this realisation is emerging on both sides.

Fourth, there is power in numbers. As Mark Carney's rallying call at the World Economic Forum made clear, the world's middle powers have a real capacity to step up through creative and cohesive coalition-building. After the United States walked away from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the remaining partners recreated it as the CPTPP. We have seen collective pushback against tariffs through alternative supply chains, cohesion in the EU and NATO response to Ukraine, and new minilateral formulations emerging in our region. There is more to come.

Fifth, there is power in decency. Soft power really does continue to matter. Being seen to be a good international citizen, committed to purposes beyond narrow self-interest, including peacemaking, atrocity prevention, humanitarian response and poverty reduction, is in every country's national reputational interest. It also helps in addressing collective action problems and reducing the big existential risks of climate change, pandemics and nuclear war.

Sixth, there is power in honesty. The lesson is beginning to dawn that attacking corruption, or at least excessive capture by big money, may be the most effective way to challenge poor populist leaderships. That certainly proved the case with the overthrow of Orban in Hungary.

My final point is this: there is power in optimism. I have always believed that it is crucial for all of us in government and civil society who want to recreate a better regional and global order to stay optimistic. Never stop believing that change is possible. Never stop working toward that change. Optimism is self-reinforcing, just as pessimism is self-defeating.

Gareth Evans is a former Foreign Minister of Australia, former President and CEO of the International Crisis Group, and former Chairman and current International Advisory Board member of the Asia Pacific Leadership Network (APLN). This article is based on a presentation given at the 21st Jeju Forum for Peace and Prosperity on 25 June 2026.

This article was first published in The Korea Times on 1 July 2026