https://pixabay.com/photos/letter-document-handwriting-paper-1840354/
Contracts, agreements and commitments have been made for hundreds of years. In the old days, what counted most was undoubtedly the word.
If two parties, or two people, spoke to each other and shook hands at the end, the contract was signed. And since not all agreements were drawn up in court or by notaries, that was all it took to realize that both parties would abide by it.
Nowadays, there are few situations in which we can rely solely on the word of the other party.
And what has led to this “chronic” distrust of the other person's word?
A world that seeks the best for itself, without looking the other way, is one of the explanations we can give for why this phenomenon has grown among us over the last few decades.
In the last few hours, we've seen a contract being concluded without one of the parties being present at its inception. What does this indicate to the rest of the world? That we are only giving voice and listening to the concerns of those who have the most power. Does such a contract have any legitimacy? Or is it just the submission of the less powerful, facing the aggressor?
How can someone decide the future of a border, not being in the sphere of physical proximity, and only inviting one of the parties involved?
I don't know who can be trusted today, and I'm afraid of the path we're deciding to take... If for some reason Russia manages to take all the land it has conquered through death and continued aggression, what is the point of having international law?
With a border of more than 1500 km between the two nations, how can we guarantee that Russia won't attack its neighbor again with the same excuse?
If we act according to the principle of unequal treatment, we are taking the world into a New Order. And when we wake up the next day, we can't help but look at the sky, which will surely be darker.
Free image from Pixabay.com
A handshake was enough to seal an agreement, because trust was the foundation of every commitment. In any case, the true strength of an agreement lies in mutual trust. After all, a contract without trust is just a piece of paper from which a good lawyer will always know how to get out. And for war? We are the most ruthless, bloodthirsty, power-hungry species on this earth. Have a agreement or treaties ever blocked the will of autocratic dictators that we ourselves often bring to power with our vote? Maybe for a while, not till they are defeated or satisfied.
Sadly, the only truth about all that we are living...
Haven't you heard? Contracts are made to be broken... Sadly, that is how the world has always worked and always will. You can't trust Putin to keep his word or Xi from China. It's a sad truth, but the world is slowly falling back into more chaos rather than forward towards peace.
Yes, it's a conclusion that I know is almost inevitable. But to think that agreements that were established to guarantee the maintenance of peace, and the borders and independence of free nations, are overturned at the cost of power, is hard to "swallow"... a New Era (darker one) is about to begin