To predict the likelihood of war perhaps we should evaluate the perils of peace. War can be used as a shield from certain legal liabilities for indicted or convicted leaders. This perverse system of incentives is probably why it would be a good idea not to frustrate the nation’s jurisdiction from reaching the actions of the decision makers of the country. We now are pouring our analysis over the future decisions of three leaders of powerful nations who may have more to lose in a world of peace and harmony than what can be gained with a nation at war frozen in its current structure of power. The future can be better predicted in these three leadership quandries by evaluating the private interests of those three leaders. The public interest seems at best in second place. They have all three demonstrated with remarkable fidelity their commitment to their own private interests. What are the perils of peace for the private people on top?

A Modest Proposal for Good

This one is simple. Leadership in a democracy is a public service and not a private enterprise and investment. ‘We the people’ are who have everything to lose so keep the government public. The interests of the leaders must once again be bent back to the interests of the people. Lets reform and keep it that way. Peace for the present is not at hand so this project suggests we take back the reins and build the necessary incentives for leadership-to-peace in our own systems of government. Make it possible for peace to break out.