Armi convenzionali e nuove nelle relazioni internazionali

This article explores the enduring relevance of military force (both conventional and unconventional) in shaping international relations, particularly among Great Powers. While the use of force remains a last resort (ultima ratio regum), its mere threat continues to influence diplomatic interactions. Drawing on thinkers such as Renouvin, Kennedy, and Kissinger, the study emphasizes that military strength alone does not guarantee global supremacy; instead, it must be weighed alongside economic capacity, public opinion, ideology, and geography. The Industrial Revolution marked a turning point by introducing technological advancements that redefined the global balance of power, as illustrated by the Franco-Prussian War and the Montenegro-Ottoman dispute. The First and Second World Wars further highlighted the destructive potential of modern weaponry — culminating in the nuclear age and its moral dilemmas. Since 1945, the equilibrium between nuclear and conventional forces has deterred full-scale conflict, especially among major powers. The Cold War arms race and subsequent treaties underscore the strategic calculus of maintaining power without escalating into mutual destruction. Ultimately, weapons serve as both deterrents and tools of negotiation, reinforcing a fragile yet persistent balance. In today’s multipolar world, the legacy of Yalta endures: peace remains in the hands of a few, and global stability hinges on their willingness to cooperate or compete within the bounds of balance of power.