Earth Army logo Earth Army

Earth Army Foundation

One Earth.One Humanity.Shared Security.

Building the foundations for a United World Army by 2035.

Read the Charter Join the Global Dialogue
UNITED WORLD ARMY

Humanity's greatest threats no longer stop at national borders.

Humanity has entered a period in which the greatest threats to civilisation increasingly transcend national borders.

  • Nuclear war does not stop at borders.

  • Climate destabilisation does not stop at borders.

  • Economic crises do not stop at borders.

  • Pandemics do not stop at borders.

  • Cyber threats do not stop at borders.

  • Ecological collapse does not stop at borders.

Yet the institutions responsible for humanity's security remain largely organized around sovereign states competing to protect themselves from one another.

This is the central contradiction Earth Army seeks to address.

Our threats are becoming global.

Our security architecture remains fragmented.

Earth Army exists to help humanity close that gap.

The civilisational question

Can humanity remain secure while its greatest threats are planetary and its security institutions remain national?

For centuries, nations have relied upon military power to protect their sovereignty. That system emerged from a world of competing territories and limited technological reach.

But humanity now possesses weapons capable of destroying civilization, technologies capable of altering planetary systems, and economic networks capable of transmitting instability across continents.

The scale of human power has expanded enormously. Our systems of political coordination have not expanded at the same pace.

The result is a growing mismatch between the scale of the threats we face and the scale of the institutions available to manage them.

Earth Army proposes that humanity begin addressing this mismatch.

The mismatch Time Scale
  • Scale of human power and global threats
  • Scale of political coordination
Conceptual illustration, not measured data.

The security dilemma

Nations prepare for war because they cannot be certain that other nations will not.

  1. One state increases its military capability because it feels threatened.
  2. Another state sees that increase and becomes less secure.
  3. It responds by strengthening its own military.
  4. The first state interprets the response as confirmation of the threat.

The cycle continues. Neither side necessarily needs to want war. The structure itself can produce militarisation. This is the security dilemma.

State A State B builds up its military responds in kind Neither side needs to want war

And it creates a fundamental question:

What if the long-term solution to the security dilemma is not better competition, but eventually removing the need for military competition between states?

Three warnings

The first warning

Nuclear weapons

Humanity has created a security system in which civilisation's survival partly depends upon deterrence.

The world entered 2026 with approximately 12,187 nuclear warheads, including around 9,745 in military stockpiles, according to SIPRI. SIPRI has also warned that a new nuclear arms race is emerging as nuclear-armed states modernise their arsenals and the international arms-control architecture weakens.

12,187 warheads
  • 9,745 in military stockpiles
  • 2,442 not in military stockpiles
SIPRI, start of 2026

The problem is deeper than the number of weapons. Nuclear deterrence requires the continuing reliability of:

  • Information
  • Command systems
  • Communication
  • Human judgment
  • Political decision-making
  • Cybersecurity
  • Early-warning systems
  • Crisis management

It also assumes that these systems will remain reliable indefinitely. They will increasingly interact with artificial intelligence, cyberwarfare, autonomous weapons, hypersonic systems and increasingly compressed decision-making timelines.

A civilisation cannot indefinitely rely upon the threat of mutual destruction as its permanent security architecture.

The long-term objective must be to remove the structural necessity for nations to threaten one another with mass destruction.

The second warning

Climate destabilisation

Climate change is becoming a security problem.

Climate disruption can affect:

  • Food production
  • Water availability
  • Migration
  • Economic stability
  • Political stability
  • Resource competition
  • State fragility
  • Regional conflict

The pathway can become:

  1. Climate stress
  2. Resource insecurity
  3. Economic stress
  4. Displacement
  5. Political instability
  6. Geopolitical tension
  7. Militarisation
  8. Conflict

The result is a feedback system in which environmental instability can amplify geopolitical instability.

And the problem cannot be solved by individual states acting entirely independently. Climate, oceans, atmospheric systems, food systems and global supply chains are interconnected.

Planetary problems require planetary coordination.

The third warning

Institutional fragmentation

The institutions created to prevent global war were not designed for today's level of interdependence.

The United Nations has made major contributions to diplomacy, peacekeeping, humanitarian action and international law. But collective security remains dependent upon states.

The Security Council's permanent-member veto can prevent collective action even during major conflicts.

Collective action can be blocked at the veto.

The institution responsible for international collective security does not independently control the means necessary to guarantee collective security.

That does not make the UN irrelevant. It demonstrates the need to examine how international institutions can evolve.

Three crises. One system.

These problems do not exist independently. They can reinforce one another.

Nuclearcompetition Climatedestabilisation Institutionalfragmentation One system War Instability Militarisation Climate stress Geopolitical tension Military competition And the cycle continues
  • Warcreates economic disruption and political instability.
  • Instabilityencourages militarisation.
  • Militarisationconsumes resources needed for resilience and climate adaptation.
  • Climate stressintensifies resource insecurity and displacement.
  • Geopolitical tensionincreases the incentive for military preparation.
  • Military competitionmakes international cooperation more difficult.

The question is therefore not simply: How do we stop the next war? The deeper question is:

How do we redesign the conditions that repeatedly produce large-scale insecurity?

The global security gap

Humanity spends enormous resources preparing for national security.

≈ 16.6×

military spending relative to development assistance

Ratio calculated from the two figures above.

This does not mean military expenditure can simply be transferred elsewhere. States have legitimate security concerns.

But it does reveal the scale of resources consumed by a system based upon permanent military competition.

What becomes possible when security no longer requires every nation to maintain the capacity to wage large-scale war against other nations?

Potential gains could include greater capacity for:

  • Climate adaptation
  • Renewable energy
  • Ecological restoration
  • Healthcare
  • Education
  • Scientific research
  • Food security
  • Water infrastructure
  • Disaster preparedness
  • Poverty reduction
  • Resilient infrastructure

Peace is therefore not merely the absence of war. It can become an infrastructure for civilisation.

The United World Army

The proposed next stage of collective security.

Earth Army Foundation envisions the progressive development of a United World Army as the military component of a broader global security architecture.

  • It would not be an army for one nation.
  • It would not belong to one political bloc.
  • It would not exist for conquest.

Its proposed purpose would be collective security:

  • Prevent interstate war.
  • Protect civilian populations.
  • Respond to major international security crises.
  • Support international law.
  • Provide legitimate collective defence.
  • Respond to threats beyond the capacity of individual states.
  • Protect humanity against civilisation-scale security threats.

The fundamental principle would be:

The legitimate capacity to wage interstate war should progressively move from competing national military systems toward a common international institution.

This would not require the immediate disappearance of nations. It would mean changing the relationship between sovereignty and military power.

From balance of power to balance of humanity

Balance of powerCompeting centres of power, each arming against the others.
Balance of humanityOne common institution for interstate security.

The existing international system attempts to prevent domination through competing centres of power. One state becomes stronger. Others respond. All attempt to maintain sufficient military capability to prevent another from becoming overwhelmingly powerful.

This is the logic of the balance of power. But it creates a permanent question: What happens if the other side becomes stronger? That question generates arms races.

A different principle is possible.

No nation needs to become powerful enough to defeat another nation because no nation possesses an independent right to wage interstate war.

That would transform security from a competitive good into a collective good. One nation's security would no longer depend upon another nation's strategic vulnerability.

From a balance of power to a balance of humanity.

Why a United World Army cannot exist alone

A global military without legitimate political authority would create another danger: the concentration of coercive power without adequate accountability.

Collectivesecurity Democraticglobalgovernance Legitimateglobalsecurity

Therefore, Earth Army's vision does not end with an army. It leads toward a broader system of democratic global governance. A future global security architecture would require:

  • Democratic representation
  • Constitutional limitations
  • Separation of powers
  • Independent judiciary
  • Enforceable human rights
  • Protection of minorities
  • Independent auditing
  • Civilian control of military forces
  • Transparent financing
  • International legal accountability

Global military power without democratic governance would be dangerous. Democratic global governance without credible collective security would be vulnerable.

The two must eventually develop together.

Minimum necessary global governance

Earth Army does not envision eliminating political, cultural or national diversity. The objective is not uniformity. The principle is subsidiarity:

PlanetaryRegionalNationalLocal
  • Local problems → local governance.
  • National problems → national governance.
  • Regional problems → regional governance.
  • Planetary problems → global governance.

A village should govern its local affairs. A nation should retain authority over matters it can legitimately manage alone.

But no individual nation should possess unilateral authority to trigger a nuclear catastrophe, destabilise the global climate or initiate a war capable of producing civilisation-scale consequences.

Centralise only what humanity genuinely needs to govern collectively.

The pathway

From national militaries to collective global security.

A global security system cannot be declared into existence. It must evolve.

  1. Phase 1

    Strengthen collective security

    • Expand international peacekeeping.
    • Establish permanent multinational rapid-response capabilities.
    • Strengthen conflict prevention.
    • Improve communication between nuclear-armed states.
    • Establish stronger controls over emerging military technologies.

  2. Phase 2

    Integrate arms control

    • Greater transparency of strategic weapons.
    • Nuclear risk-reduction mechanisms.
    • International verification.
    • Progressive arms reductions.
    • Stronger controls over biological, chemical and autonomous weapons.

  3. Phase 3

    Establish global security authority

    • Develop representative international security institutions.
    • Transfer increasing responsibility for interstate military enforcement.
    • Establish democratic oversight.
    • Reduce the independent capacity of states to wage interstate war.

  4. Phase 4

    Deepen political integration

    • Reform global representation.
    • Strengthen international judicial authority.
    • Establish enforceable global environmental rules.
    • Develop stronger mechanisms for international economic stability.

  5. Phase 5

    Civilisational federation

    • National and regional governments continue to exist.
    • Political and cultural diversity remains.
    • But the most dangerous threats to humanity are governed collectively.

The objective is not a world without nations. The objective is a world in which nations no longer need to fear one another enough to prepare for war.

Earth Army 2035

A decade to begin building the architecture.

2035 is not the proposed date for abolishing national armies. It is the first major milestone.

By 2035, Earth Army Foundation aims to transform the United World Army from a theoretical proposition into an established subject of international diplomacy, research and negotiation.

2026 to 2035: from idea to international process

  1. 2026Now

    Foundation

    Establish Earth Army and develop the core proposition.

  2. 2027

    Research

    Build the international research network.

  3. 2028

    Dialogue

    Begin regional and international dialogues.

  4. 2029

    Charter

    Publish and internationally debate the Earth Army Charter.

  5. 2030

    Coalition

    Build a coalition of governments, institutions and civil society.

  6. 2031

    Diplomacy

    Begin sustained governmental and diplomatic engagement.

  7. 2032

    Institutional design

    Develop detailed models for governance and military integration.

  8. 2033

    Global consensus building

    Address objections, risks and competing institutional models.

  9. 2034

    Founding dialogue

    Convene a high-level international dialogue on unified global security.

  10. 2035

    The global security milestone

    Establish the foundations for a formal international process toward the progressive development of a United World Army.

By 2035, we aim to have:

  • A Global Charter

    A developed and internationally debated Earth Army Charter for Global Peace and Collective Security.

  • A Coalition of States

    Governments willing to formally examine unified global security.

  • A Permanent Global Dialogue

    A sustained forum connecting governments, diplomats, military experts, academics and civil society.

  • A Global Research Network

    Researchers working across international law, security, economics, governance, climate and technology.

  • An Institutional Framework

    A detailed model for command, financing, deployment, civilian control and accountability.

  • A Diplomatic Roadmap

    A practical pathway toward progressive international security integration.

  • A Global Civil-Society Movement

    People and institutions around the world engaging seriously with the proposition.

  • A Pathway to Formal Negotiations

    The foundations for governments to begin negotiating the future architecture of unified global security.

2035 is not the end. It is the beginning.

We do not expect humanity to eliminate national armies by 2035. We expect humanity to have taken substantial steps toward creating institutions that could eventually make competing military systems unnecessary.

2035 and beyond:

  1. Integration
  2. Institutionalisation
  3. International authority
  4. Progressive transition
  5. Unified global security

The transformation may take decades. It may take generations. But civilisation-scale institutions have always emerged through long processes of political evolution.

The question is whether humanity begins that process before the risks become unmanageable.

The Earth Army Charter

A framework for collective global security.

The Earth Army Charter will establish principles for the development of a future unified security architecture. It will address:

  • Who commands a global force?
  • Who authorises deployment?
  • Who controls its budget?
  • Who appoints its leadership?
  • Which laws constrain it?
  • Which courts prosecute abuses?
  • How are smaller nations protected?
  • How are minorities protected?
  • How are nuclear weapons addressed?
  • How are national militaries progressively transformed?

How does humanity prevent the concentration of global military power from becoming global authoritarianism?

These questions are not secondary. They are the foundation.

Read the Charter

The safeguards

A United World Army would possess extraordinary power. Therefore, its safeguards must be extraordinary.

  • Civilian control

    Military authority remains subordinate to legitimate civilian institutions.

  • Democratic representation

    Those exercising authority must be accountable through representative institutions.

  • International law

    Military action must remain legally constrained.

  • Independent judiciary

    Abuses must remain prosecutable.

  • Financial transparency

    Global military expenditure must be independently audited.

  • Human rights

    Human dignity remains non-negotiable.

  • Institutional checks

    No individual, nation or institution should possess unchecked global military power.

  • Limited mandate

    The purpose of the force must be collective security, not political domination.

Collective security is a condition for civilisational longevity

Humanity's survival cannot be measured only by whether armies win wars. A civilisation is secure only when the conditions that sustain it remain secure.

This broader perspective is central to Civitology, the proposed interdisciplinary study of civilisational longevity. Its fundamental question is:

What conditions must humanity establish today so that civilisation remains capable of flourishing centuries and millennia from now?

Collective global security is therefore not the final objective. It is one of the conditions required for civilisation to have a future.

That includes
  • Peace
  • Climate stability
  • Biodiversity
  • Food systems
  • Water
  • Oceans
  • Natural resources
  • Economic resilience
  • Scientific progress
  • Democratic institutions
  • Human rights
  • Social stability

One Earth

For most of human history, distance separated civilizations. Today, technology has compressed the planet. An event in one region can affect millions elsewhere. A weapon developed in one country can threaten another continent.

  • Pollution crosses borders.

  • Viruses cross borders.

  • Capital crosses borders.

  • Climate systems cross borders.

Humanity has become deeply interconnected while its political and security institutions remain largely divided.

Our institutions must eventually evolve to match the scale of our interdependence.

One Humanity

We are divided by:

  • Nationality
  • Geography
  • Language
  • Political systems
  • Ideology
  • History

But beneath those divisions is a common biological reality. We share the same planet.

  • The same atmosphere
  • The same oceans
  • Interconnected ecosystems

And we ultimately share the consequences of the choices we make.

Our political borders may remain. Our security does not have to remain permanently divided.

The future is not predetermined

The international system that exists today was built by human beings. So were its borders. Its institutions. Its alliances. Its armies. Its treaties. Its political structures.

If humanity created these systems, humanity can examine whether they remain adequate for the future.

Earth Army does not ask humanity to abandon its existing institutions tomorrow. It asks humanity to begin designing the institutions that future generations may need.

  1. The first step is dialogue.
  2. The second is research.
  3. The third is diplomacy.
  4. The fourth is institutional design.
  5. The fifth is international agreement.

And, if humanity ultimately chooses this path, the final objective:

A world in which no nation needs to prepare to destroy another nation in order to feel secure.

Earth Army 2035

Ten years to begin building a different security architecture.

  1. 2019

    Inception.

  2. 2026

    The work begins.

  3. 2035

    The international process begins.

  4. Beyond 2035

    Humanity decides how far it is prepared to go.

The future of global security should not be determined solely by the structures inherited from the past. It should be consciously examined, debated and designed.

One Earth. One Humanity. Shared Security.

Join the Global Dialogue.

The first step is dialogue. Be part of it.

Read the Charter Join Earth Army Partner with us Support the research