Law and Order.

Real life can often be summarised in fiction. I think a true example is Aesop's story of the grumbling frogs who decided they needed a king. At first their wish was granted by sending them a log of wood that turned out to be too placid. Then the frogs sounding somewhat ungrateful but insistent, had a new king as the log of wood was replaced by a hungry heron. Needless to say, there is a point to this tale and you should be careful about what you wish.

Mankind has striven to find a social system that protects and gives a chance for individual opinion, a chance to be heard over how life is governed. At first history records a lot of small bands commanded by leaders that eventually, after conquest or negotiation, became larger and the idea of kings became the fashion.

Some kings were good but others were very bad. To rectify the situation representatives of the population were given power to administer the laws of the area. In some cases the position of king became the figurehead to ensure the constitution and stability within society. Other societies dispensed with kings and opted for election of a leader with absolute administration power.

My point is that a governing system of society will often only be as good as the people operating it. Absolute power in one person runs the risk of returning the system back to the good and bad kings model of the past. Individual decisions of authority in leaders can influence international relations, it can either work to strengthen the bonds of unilateral participation or destabilise the working relationship and cause disparity.