International Order and the Fiction of the Pax Americana

Hawks don’t just overstate how bad conditions are today, but they usually forget (or never knew) about much worse conflicts in the not-so-distant past.

Hal Brands has written what may be the silliest response to Hamas’ surprise attack:

The international order is under more stress, in more places, than at any time since the chaotic aftermath of World War II.

Brands’ big conclusion is wrong, and it’s an absurd overreaction to recent events. The international order was under greater stress in many more places for most of the Cold War than it is now, and there have been times in the last thirty years when there was more stress on it than there is today. One reason why hawks are overreacting to recent developments is that they are always exaggerating threats and making them seem worse than they are. If a conflict erupts or resumes somewhere, it can’t just be a destabilizing development. It has to be proof of widespread global instability worse than anything we have ever seen. It’s not enough to acknowledge that a conflict is undesirable and destructive. Hawks insist on using it as an example of a world descending into chaos.