The inability to create on uniform worldwide government is a direct result of the lack of hard power instilled in an international body. The whole notion of a value system relies on the assumption that there is a governing body with sufficient power to punish those who do not abide by the sanctions set forth by that government. For example, would a police force be effective against criminals without the power to indict, arrest, or sentence them? In an environment in which no authoritative figure exists to deter such criminals from mindless acts rendering from any societal advancements, criminals not only disobey the law, but discard it from validity. The idea that any governing body can operate without adequate hard power is only viable in theory, while practically it becomes a major issue. Force and authority prove to be the most important assets of the government. Joseph Lorenz describes the historical significance of this realization when he writes,
To the founders of the United Nations, the failure of the League of Nations to prevent the aggression of the 1930s was not so much an indictment of collective security as a result of the major powers' unwillingness to use the system.
Another example of this disregard of international government due to it's insufficient hard power comes during the very recent war on Iraq, when the United States of America openly disregarded the sanctions of the United Nations Security Council and proceeded to invade Iraq. The international organization stood no chance against the strong, stubborn U.S. army. George Hunsinger predicted this disregard for international authority in 2002 when he wrote,
Article 51 of the UN Charter allows for international attacks only if there are no alternatives, and if there is immediate danger with no time for deliberation. The U.S. will...