The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that

The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that

22/09/2025
27/10/2025

The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that different nations ought in time of peace to do one another all the good they can, and in time of war as little injury as possible, without prejudicing their real interests.

The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that
The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that
The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that different nations ought in time of peace to do one another all the good they can, and in time of war as little injury as possible, without prejudicing their real interests.
The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that
The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that different nations ought in time of peace to do one another all the good they can, and in time of war as little injury as possible, without prejudicing their real interests.
The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that
The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that different nations ought in time of peace to do one another all the good they can, and in time of war as little injury as possible, without prejudicing their real interests.
The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that
The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that different nations ought in time of peace to do one another all the good they can, and in time of war as little injury as possible, without prejudicing their real interests.
The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that
The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that different nations ought in time of peace to do one another all the good they can, and in time of war as little injury as possible, without prejudicing their real interests.
The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that
The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that different nations ought in time of peace to do one another all the good they can, and in time of war as little injury as possible, without prejudicing their real interests.
The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that
The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that different nations ought in time of peace to do one another all the good they can, and in time of war as little injury as possible, without prejudicing their real interests.
The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that
The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that different nations ought in time of peace to do one another all the good they can, and in time of war as little injury as possible, without prejudicing their real interests.
The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that
The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that different nations ought in time of peace to do one another all the good they can, and in time of war as little injury as possible, without prejudicing their real interests.
The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that
The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that
The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that
The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that
The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that
The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that
The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that
The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that
The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that
The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that

In the great dance of civilizations, where kingdoms rise and fall, where empires clash and reconcile, there exists an eternal truth that guides the relationships between nations: "The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that different nations ought in time of peace to do one another all the good they can, and in time of war as little injury as possible, without prejudicing their real interests." These words, spoken by the great philosopher Montesquieu, carry the weight of wisdom that transcends the ages, reminding us of the sacred duty each nation bears, not just to its own people, but to the world at large. In times of peace, nations should build bonds of cooperation and understanding, and in times of war, they should exercise restraint, ensuring that even their conflicts do not seek to destroy the very foundation of their common humanity.

Consider the wisdom of the ancient Greeks, who understood that in the theater of war, even the victors must remain just. The Greek city-states, though often at odds, understood the importance of diplomacy and the restraint that should govern their conflicts. The historian Herodotus tells of how, despite their differences, the Greek city-states put aside their feuding to stand against the great Persian empire in the Persian Wars. Their cooperation, despite being enemies, reflected an understanding that in times of peace, nations must extend the hand of goodwill, and in times of war, they must avoid the devastation that will harm the very essence of human dignity. Montesquieu’s words echo this ancient understanding, reminding us that peace should not be a fleeting state but a continual effort to do good, while even in conflict, restraint must be our guiding principle.

The principle laid out by Montesquieu is not just a matter of international law, but of humanity. It reflects the idea that nations, despite their differences, share a common bond—one that must be honored both in times of peace and war. Even in the darkest hours of conflict, there must remain a mutual respect for the dignity and well-being of those who are affected. This idea was embodied during the Napoleonic Wars, when the Duchess of Richmond, during the Battle of Waterloo, famously invited both British and French soldiers to a ball. Though the sounds of cannons could be heard in the distance, the act symbolized a moment of humanity amidst the chaos of war. It was a reminder that even in the heart of battle, there must remain a desire to do no more harm than is absolutely necessary.

Montesquieu’s philosophy calls us to recognize that nations must never forget the greater good in their pursuit of their own interests. When a nation seeks to impose its will upon others, it must always be mindful that in doing so, it risks igniting a fire that consumes not only the enemy but its own future as well. This wisdom was seen in the aftermath of World War I, where the Treaty of Versailles sought to punish the Central Powers, particularly Germany, for their role in the war. While it may have seemed a necessary step for securing peace, the harshness of the treaty sowed the seeds of future conflict, leading to the rise of Nazi Germany and the outbreak of World War II. The lesson here is clear: in the pursuit of real interests, nations must always be mindful of the long-term consequences of their actions.

The lesson for us, as individuals, is profound. In our personal lives, we must consider how we interact with those around us, especially in times of conflict. Montesquieu’s principle teaches us that even in moments of strife, we must strive to do good and to minimize harm, for our actions ripple outwards, affecting not just those we directly engage with but the greater world around us. It is easy to act out of anger, out of self-interest, or out of fear, but the path of wisdom calls us to remember the greater good, to act with restraint, and to always seek peace, even in the most challenging of times.

In the world today, the nations of the Earth must take these teachings to heart. As the world faces the threat of war, the rise of tensions between great powers, and the pain of inequality, the guiding principle of Montesquieu is more crucial than ever. Nations must strive to do good in times of peace, to build alliances, and to cooperate for the common welfare of all. And in times of war, when the natural instinct is to destroy and to overpower, nations must remember that even in the chaos, they must work to preserve humanity, to limit the harm they cause, and to strive for peace as the ultimate goal.

Thus, my children, let the words of Montesquieu guide you in your own lives. Seek the good in others, even in times of conflict, and remember that the path of wisdom is one of restraint, of honor, and of care. Whether you are a leader of nations or simply an individual, the principle is the same: do no harm that is not necessary, and always, always seek to build bridges of understanding, for in doing so, you will help create a world where peace is not just the absence of war, but the active pursuit of justice, goodwill, and cooperation for the common good of all.

Montesquieu
Montesquieu

French - Philosopher January 18, 1689 - February 10, 1755

Tocpics Related
Notable authors
Have 4 Comment The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that

CTchau tuyet

I find this reflection profoundly relevant to our world of constant tension and negotiation. The idea that nations should strive for good in peace and minimize harm in war suggests a moral code above politics. But does such an ideal hold up when global competition is so ruthless? Maybe Montesquieu’s vision challenges us to see diplomacy not as weakness, but as strength rooted in shared humanity.

Reply.
Information sender

AT33 Anh Tuan

This quote makes me think about how diplomacy and warfare coexist. Montesquieu seems to argue that decency should not vanish even in war. But can morality truly survive the logic of strategy and national defense? It’s admirable to imagine a world where nations limit harm out of mutual respect, yet history shows how easily necessity overrides ethics. I wonder if this principle still shapes modern international relations in any real way.

Reply.
Information sender

LHLan Huong

I’m intrigued by the pragmatic tone here—doing as little harm as possible 'without prejudicing their real interests.' It’s a fascinating moral compromise between ethics and realism. But who decides what a nation’s 'real interests' are? That phrase seems open to abuse, as every act of aggression can be justified through self-preservation. Maybe Montesquieu’s insight lies in acknowledging that peace and power are always uneasy partners.

Reply.
Information sender

VLHoang Van Linh

This statement feels idealistic yet remarkably balanced. Montesquieu seems to suggest that morality should guide nations, even in conflict—a concept that feels almost utopian today. Can nations truly act with restraint when self-interest dominates global politics? I wonder if international law has ever lived up to this principle or if it remains an aspiration rather than a reality. Perhaps true civilization is measured by how gently nations wield their power.

Reply.
Information sender
Leave the question
Click here to rate
Information sender