Skip to content

nadeum-wiko.eu

P012.02 Integrative fundamental rights for humans, nature and the state

This icon was created with the help of Copilot (Windows) and used here by NADEUM 2026.03.02. The text remains ‘German’ and means in English >Integrative fundamental rights, nature and state<.

Table of contents

🌐 Guiding principles for dignity, justice and the protection of life

In many parts of the world, there is a growing awareness that stable communities are based on shared fundamental values. These include respect for universal human rights, compliance with international standards, protection of natural resources and equal treatment of all people before the law. These principles are not tied to individual countries or political systems, but reflect a global understanding of what makes human coexistence safer, more just and more sustainable.

They serve as a guide for individuals, organisations and communities committed to peaceful cooperation, responsible action and the protection of the dignity of every human being. At a time of increasing international tensions, power shifts and uncertainties, such values provide a stable framework for promoting dialogue, trust and mutual respect – regardless of origin, culture or political context.

Integrative fundamental rights for people, nature and the state

Foreword

In a rapidly changing world, there is a growing awareness that stable and peaceful societies are based on shared fundamental values. These include respect for universal human rights, compliance with international standards, protection of natural resources and equal treatment of all people before the law. These principles are not tied to individual countries or political systems. They reflect a global understanding of what makes human coexistence safer, fairer and more sustainable.

1. International legal order – fundamentals and significance

International law provides the framework that regulates the behaviour of states and armed actors. It encompasses the UN Charter, international humanitarian law, international human rights agreements and numerous multilateral treaties. These norms were created to limit conflicts, protect civilian populations and enable peaceful cooperation.

Why these standards exist

  • To prevent violence between states
  • To protect human dignity and fundamental rights
  • To enable global stability and economic development
  • To create common rules for conflict, diplomacy and cooperation

Why they are binding

  • States have voluntarily ratified these rules
  • The UN Charter is binding on all member states
  • Human rights are considered universal standards, regardless of political order
  • Many rules are customary international law, i.e. recognised worldwide

2. Human rights – the universal basis of human dignity

Human rights are rights that every human being is entitled to simply by virtue of being human. They apply regardless of origin, religion, gender or political affiliation.

Key principles

  • Right to life and physical integrity
  • Protection from torture and arbitrary violence
  • Freedom of expression, religion and assembly
  • Equality before the law
  • Protection of particularly vulnerable groups

Why they were written down

After the catastrophes of the 20th century, the international community recognised that peace is only possible if the dignity of every human being is protected. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) therefore became the moral and legal foundation of the international order.

3. International law – rules for peace, cooperation and security

International law governs relations between states. It defines what is permitted, what is prohibited and how conflicts should be resolved.

Core principles

  • Prohibition of the use of force
  • Respect for territorial integrity
  • Obligation to settle disputes peacefully
  • Protection of civilians in conflicts
  • Compliance with international treaties

Why it is binding

States have committed themselves to complying with these rules through their membership of the UN and by ratifying international agreements.

4. Rights of nature – protection of the foundations of life

More and more countries are recognising that nature is not just a resource, but the basis of life itself. Rights of nature protect ecosystems, biodiversity and the long-term viability of the planet.

Basic idea

  • Nature has a right to exist, regenerate and be protected
  • Countries and societies are responsible for sustainable use
  • Environmental destruction threatens peace, health and economic stability

Why these rights had to be created

The global environmental crisis shows that without clear rules, resources are exploited, leading to conflict, poverty and instability.

5. Equality before the law – the foundation of any stable order

Equality before the law means that all people have the same rights and obligations – regardless of power, wealth or social status.

Significance

  • Protection from arbitrariness
  • Independence of the judiciary
  • Transparent and fair proceedings
  • Public trust in state institutions

Why this principle is indispensable

Without equality before the law, corruption, inequality and instability arise. Equality before the law is therefore a core pillar of any functioning society.

6. Why the UN has codified these rights

After two world wars, the international community recognised that peace must be secured not only through power, but also through common rules. The UN Charter, human rights and international humanitarian law were created to:

  • prevent wars
  • protect civilians
  • oblige states to cooperate
  • ensure global stability
  • enable economic development

These standards are the result of a global consensus – not the idea of individual states.

7. Summary: Why a systemic change is taking place worldwide today

Many people observe that large states interpret international rules differently. This leads to uncertainty and the impression that international law is losing its significance. But in fact, something else is happening:

Global power shifts

Economic, technological and geopolitical changes are leading states to redefine their interests.

New forms of conflict

Cyber attacks, non-state armed groups and asymmetric warfare pose challenges to traditional international law.

Competition between major powers

The US, Russia, China and other actors are increasingly interpreting international norms strategically – and not always consistently.

Loss of trust in international institutions

When powerful states apply rules selectively, smaller states lose trust in the global order.

Nevertheless, the law remains valid

The norms continue to exist – the question is how they can be enforced in a changed world.

Final thought

International rights are not outdated. They are the foundation upon which peace, stability and human dignity rest. But their effectiveness depends on societies building strong institutions that uphold and protect these rights.

In a changing world, these principles are more important than ever – for every community that wants to build a just, peaceful and sustainable future.

! ATTENTION ! Here is the cause of the current legal opinion discrepancies

1. The world is moving from a US-dominated order to a truly multipolar structure

The global situation today is characterised by a trend that has been confirmed by several international analyses: the world is becoming multipolar. This means that there is no longer a single dominant power, but rather several centres that exert influence simultaneously. According to current geopolitical assessments, these include:

The United States and China as leading powers – their relationship shapes the global economy and security architecture.

Europe and the ‘Global South’ are gaining influence, even though Europe remains politically fragmented.

New alliances and power blocs are emerging as old rules and norms lose their binding force.

The international system no longer has stable rules, but is a fluid network of competing interests.

This shift is at the heart of what you are observing.

2. An overview of the major players – and why they stretch the law

USA – still strong, but no longer unchallenged

The USA remains the military and economic leader, but its ability to enforce international rules is more limited than in the past. It is increasingly focusing on its rivalry with China and less on global leadership roles.

As a result, Washington sometimes strategically interprets rules when national interests are at stake.

China – economically expansive, politically cautious

China is expanding its influence through trade, infrastructure and technology, but avoids direct military confrontations. It is pursuing a long-term strategy aimed at economic dominance.

China formally adheres to international law, but exploits grey areas – such as in the South China Sea – to create facts on the ground.

Russia – militarily relevant, politically isolated

Russia has weakened its economic and political position through the war against Ukraine. It is increasingly relying on unconventional means such as cyber operations and influence networks.

Russia openly violates international law – but in the absence of global enforcement mechanisms, the response remains limited.

Europe – economically strong, politically fragmented

The EU is an economic giant, but it is dependent in terms of security policy and divided in terms of domestic policy. This weakens its ability to enforce international norms.

At the same time, Europe is establishing new trade axes – for example with India, Japan and Canada – in order to become more independent.

Africa – The African Union as a geopolitical actor

In recent years, the AU has developed from a regional organisation into an active co-designer of global security policy. It is becoming increasingly self-confident and is attempting to represent African interests in a world that is currently undergoing a process of realignment.

At the same time, Africa’s own political aspirations are growing: the AU is pursuing the goal of establishing Africa as a ‘strong, united and influential global player’.

(*) See the chapter on Africa, ‘A silent giant awakens’.

India – an emerging power with internal tensions

India is experiencing strong economic growth and is deliberately positioning itself between the blocs. It is neither clearly pro-US nor pro-China. Domestically, there are tensions between secular and religious forces.

India is expected to be one of the three largest economies in the 2030s – a real powerhouse.

South America – underestimated, but on the rise

South America is not irrelevant – but it is politically fragmented. Brazil is attempting to take on a leading role in the ‘Global South’. Raw materials (lithium, rare earths, agricultural products) make the continent strategically important.

However, a lack of integration prevents South America from acting as a unified power bloc.

Australia & New Zealand – small but strategically important players

Both countries are part of the Indo-Pacific security architecture (AUKUS, Quad). They play a key role in containing Chinese expansion in the Pacific. Economically, they are closely intertwined with Asia, and in terms of security policy, with the US.

3. Why international law is being ‘bent’

a) Power partially replaces law

Large states are increasingly asking themselves: ‘Who can stop me?’ If the answer is ‘no one,’ the law is interpreted flexibly.

b) Institutions are overwhelmed

The UN, WTO, WHO – all depend on consensus. In a multipolar world, this consensus is becoming increasingly rare.

c) New forms of conflict do not fit old rules

Cyber attacks, drone wars, private military companies, hybrid warfare – there are hardly any clear standards for these.

d) Resource scarcity intensifies competition

Water, energy, rare earths, food – everything is becoming more strategic. The law is often considered ‘flexible’ when it brings economic disadvantages.

e) Domestic political polarisation

Many states are divided internally. Leaders rely on strength rather than diplomacy to score points domestically.

4. What this means for small and medium-sized states

They cannot rely on power – only on the rule of law.

They need strong institutions to avoid becoming pawns of external interests.

They must diversify economically to avoid dependence.

They must strengthen regional cooperation to gain influence.

For the DRC – without naming it directly – this means that

the rule of law, human rights, resource management and institutional stability are not moral issues, but survival strategies.

5. The core issue: why the law is not disappearing, but is being applied differently

International law remains valid. But its enforcement now depends more heavily on:

  • power relations
  • economic dependence
  • technological dominance
  • regional alliances
  • domestic political stability

 

It is not the law that is becoming weaker – it is the world that is becoming more confusing.

Cookie Consent with Real Cookie Banner