| To avoid wars and disorder, the world needs fairer rules. Unfortunately, the European Union is not active in promoting such changes. World order is usually decided by the victors of major wars. The most important example is the order instituted after World War II, which includes the creation of the United Nations and the Bretton-Woods system which includes the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the World Trade Organisation. This officialised a system in which the US dollar is king. The newly created United Nations Security Council was tasked with ensuring international peace and security – or rather, perpetuating a ‘pax Americana’, in which many small wars were fought, but without putting at risk the system. The US, the UK, France, the USSR (Russia after 1991), and China became the five permanent UNSC members with veto power. But it soon became clear that the UNSC could not act except in conflicts in which the permanent members didn’t have a stake. There was a rare exception in 1950 when UNSC passed a resolution authorising a US-led coalition to repel the North Korean invasion of South Korea, thanks to the absence of the USSR representative at the meeting. Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine highlighted once again the lack of power of the UNSC to prevent disorder created by one of its members. The composition of the UNSC also looks outdated: What is today the largest country in the world, India, is not a member, while large continents such as Africa and Latin America are not represented in any way. Conversely, Europe, a small continent both by geography and demographics, is over-represented. But would France, for example, agree to abandon its seat at the table? | 
The Roundup
