The Wars which Countries wage, what they want to gain, it didn’t changed in all the Wars and Bigger military conflicts in the last decades.
It is power through wealth, influence, military might, control over most needed natural ressources. Minerals, Energy- Ressources, Oil-/Gasfields, Water, Agri-culture lands… More than a century ago it was even human ressources to exploit, nowadays they are evermore just seen as collateral damage.
Just ask yourself, why Donbass, Crimea, Kherson and the parts of the Black Sea in Front? Why the dispute between Cyprus/Turkey offshore? Why Gaza/Palestine offshore? The middle east as a whole?
Mining rights in Africa, are also never ending interesting zones for conflicts. Dominance, influence, control, wealth and military might are still the brutal tools, to exert pressure to diplomacy. Loss of human life’s, are not still not a priority of risk/cost evaluation, if and how to wage a war or for a military intervention.
Other than armed fighting against occupation, suppression, the faction with more powerful military ressources, will inflict, dominate and destroy the enemy, till they are surrender, to gain and keep in control and not give diplomatic pressure or negotiated solution a real chance.
Military power and show of force to defeat the enemy, is the calculation… Not the human life’s, human ressources in these conflicts lost.
Renewable energy and new technologies, changed the most important natural ressources, the future needs, to have control, dominance, influence, wealth of… Which gives constant financial gains, to keep control, influence and diplomatic pressure trough dominance and might of a powerful military.
Influential control over a big part of the World is US, China, Russia and India’s most prioritized diplomatic playing field, for gain in influence, power, control and wealth, to have a huge leverage and to have a great share of dominance, diplomatic pressure, wealth and military power in a possible changing future
World Order.
The Conflicts of the past century and the next century (100years), still doesn’t need to prioritize and value human ressources, human life’s as high in any calculation as the other ressources of potential cost/gain of military intervention.
As evil as it is sounds, humanity, humanitarian laws, human rights of a people, are not unilateral enforceable, grave violations of human rights, humanitarian laws
and crimes against humanity, didn’t automatically trigger a Justice system, to punish perpetrators, to enforce the law and keep the unilateral and equally applicable Rule of laws as enforceable standard, of agreements of the United Nations (General Assembly) and as a minimum of any World Order.
The Security council, especially the Veto-Power, did not serve the World, which the noble idea, was thought about: As a mandated security tool of diplomacy: To keep, uphold and serve humanity, civilisations and peoples their unilateral basic human rights.
No race, religion, nationality, gender or other differences should ever become again: Valued between one group of people or another.
No group of humans valued as more worthy, than the other. No deep hatred and systematic dehumanising of others again, to inflame a deadly violent war-machine of brutality, massacres, killing and genocidal mania!
The Security Council, “The Big 5” didn’t served humanity, the noble mandated principle of a Veto in a possible Conflict.