Three Existential Threats Destabilizing the 1945 UN Order

By Ahmet Taş | Wise News Press

ISTANBUL, TURKEY —  Recent international gatherings, first in Davos and subsequently in Munich, have arrived at a stark consensus: the international order is undergoing a process of total destruction. This order, established in 1945 following the conclusion of World War II, is fundamentally a "UN order" defined by the nuclear-backed veto power of the five permanent members of the Security Council. While European leaders frequently lament the erosion of this framework, analyst Mehmet Ali Güller argues that Europe itself bears significant responsibility for the current state of collapse.

According to Güller’s analysis, the 1945 order—and the American-centric path carved out by the 1947 Truman Doctrine and Marshall Plan—is currently besieged by three distinct and escalating threats. These threats represent a shift away from multilateral diplomacy toward unilateral military power and a new era of nuclear proliferation.

NATO’s Post-Cold War Expansionism

The first major threat to the UN order originated with the aggressive posture adopted by NATO following the dissolution of the Soviet Union. This period of expansionism began with the fragmentation of Yugoslavia and moved systematically toward Russia’s borders. While European nations characterize Russia’s intervention in Ukraine as an unlawful use of force against sovereignty, Güller suggests that this intervention was not a primary cause of the order's collapse, but rather a consequence of NATO’s encirclement.

From the perspective of Moscow, the military operation in Ukraine serves as an existential reaction to NATO’s encroachment. By supporting this aggressive expansion and, in the case of Germany, playing an active role in the dismantling of Yugoslavia, Europe fundamentally undermined the very UN order it now claims to protect. This shift prioritized the expansion of the US-led alliance over the stability of the international legal framework established in 1945.

Israeli Aggression and the Crisis of the Veto

The second threat identified by Güller is the regional aggression exhibited by Israel, which has escalated beyond the borders of Palestine. The United States has utilized its veto power within the UN Security Council to shield this aggression, effectively paralyzing the UN’s ability to act as a stabilizing force. By acting as the primary military, financial, and political sponsor of Israel's actions, Washington has struck at the core of the UN’s credibility from within.

The current administration in Washington appears to be seeking alternatives to the UN framework altogether. Narratives suggesting that "the UN could not bring peace to Gaza, but the US President did" indicate an attempt to transform a Trump-led "Peace Board" into a functional alternative to the United Nations. This move would represent a definitive shift away from the 1945 diplomatic arrangement toward a world governed by direct American mediation, further marginalizing the collective security interests of the global community.

The New Nuclear Aspirations: Germany, Japan, and Poland

Perhaps the most significant long-term threat to the 1945 order—which Güller refers to as a "nuclear order"—is the resurgence of nuclear aspirations among nations previously excluded from the nuclear club. Contrary to the Western focus on Iran’s peaceful nuclear research, Güller argues that the real danger stems from Germany, Japan, and Poland.

Writing in Foreign Affairs on February 13, 2026, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz disclosed that Germany has entered into secret discussions with France regarding nuclear deterrence in Europe. Simultaneously, advisors to Japan’s Prime Minister, Sanae Takaichi, have signaled to Japanese media that the time has come for Tokyo to develop its own nuclear deterrent. This marks a historical turning point where the two fascist-defeated powers of 1945 are seeking to crown their recent remilitarization with nuclear capabilities.

Adding to this tension, Polish President Karol Nawrocki has explicitly stated that Poland should develop its own nuclear weapons program, citing the perceived threat from Russia as justification. These developments threaten to dismantle the delicate balance of power that has defined global nuclear stability for over eighty years, potentially leading to a chaotic and multi-polar nuclear landscape.

China’s Vision for Reform and Global Representation

In contrast to the shifts occurring in the West, China has positioned itself as a defender of the "UN’s leading role." Alongside Russia, China remains one of the few pillars supporting the continued existence of the 1945 order, albeit with a call for significant internal reform. Beijing argues that the UN’s relevance can only be restored through a structural overhaul of the Security Council.

The central criterion for this reform would be the direct and meaningful representation of South America and Africa within the permanent membership of the Security Council. By broadening the council’s membership to include these regions, the UN could transition from a relic of the post-WWII era into a truly global institution. Without such changes, the 1945 order remains vulnerable to the unilateral interests of the US-led bloc and the burgeoning nuclear ambitions of regional powers.

www.wisenewspress.com