The Resurgence of Conquest: From Historical Empires to Modern Conflicts
Published: June 28, 2025
A Legacy of Domination: Historical Roots of Modern Warfare
Throughout history, the pursuit of territorial dominance has often been justified through a complex web of legal, religious, and ideological narratives. From the Spanish conquest of the Americas to contemporary military campaigns, the underlying logic remains strikingly similar: the belief that certain groups possess an inherent right to subjugate others under the guise of legality or divine sanction.
In the 16th century, Spanish conquistadors justified their brutal campaigns across the New World by claiming a divine right to “civilize” and “protect” their interests, often describing indigenous populations as subhuman or barbaric. Hernán Cortés, for example, referred to Aztec temples as mosques, symbolically equating their destruction with a form of cultural and spiritual conquest. These acts of violence, which claimed millions of lives, were rationalized through a doctrine of conquest that persisted for centuries.
Fast forward to the 20th century, the United States adopted similar justifications to expand westward, invoking the doctrine of discovery and conquest to legitimize the seizure of Native American lands and Mexican territories. Legal scholars of the era, such as James Kent, argued that the U.S. was founded on the principles of discovery and conquest, a stance that remained influential well into the 20th century. Latin American independence leaders, however, vehemently rejected this doctrine, advocating for sovereignty and non-aggression, principles that eventually gained international recognition.
The Evolution and Decline of Conquest-Based International Law
Historically, the doctrine of conquest was accepted as a legitimate means of territorial acquisition. Roman law, medieval doctrines, and later European colonial policies all endorsed the idea that victory in war conferred the right to annex territory. This legal framework underpinned countless acts of imperial expansion, often accompanied by atrocities and justified through notions of superiority and divine right.
However, the moral and legal opposition to conquest grew over time. Latin American nations, inspired by Enlightenment ideals and Catholic critiques of colonialism, championed the principles of sovereignty and non-aggression. The 19th and early 20th centuries saw efforts to codify these principles into international law, culminating in treaties and declarations that explicitly outlawed aggressive war and conquest.
Despite these developments, the doctrine persisted in practice. Many nations, including the U.S., continued to justify military interventions and territorial acquisitions through claims of legality rooted in conquest. The post-World War II era marked a turning point, with the establishment of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which aimed to promote peace and respect for sovereignty. Yet, even then, powerful states often found ways to circumvent these norms, engaging in covert interventions and supporting coups to maintain influence.
The Resurgence of Conquest in the 21st Century
In recent years, the veneer of international legality has been increasingly eroded by a new wave of assertive nationalism and imperial ambitions. The rhetoric of leaders like Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin, and others exemplifies a revival of conquest-driven policies, often cloaked in claims of national interest or security.
For instance, Trump’s overt declarations about acquiring Greenland or annexing parts of Canada reflect a blatant disregard for established international norms. Similarly, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and Israel’s ongoing military operations in Gaza are driven by a similar logic: the belief that force and territorial control are legitimate tools to achieve national objectives.
The conflict in Gaza, in particular, underscores how the old doctrines of conquest continue to influence modern warfare. The Israeli military’s actions, justified by claims of self-defense and the need to eliminate threats, echo historical narratives of racial and cultural superiority. The destruction of hospitals, homes, and entire neighborhoods, along with the displacement of millions, mirrors the brutal tactics of colonial conquerors, albeit in a contemporary context.
Media and Technology: Modern Tools of Conquest
The advent of social media and instant communication has transformed how conflicts are narrated and perceived. In the 16th century, Spanish conquistadors used printed pamphlets and eyewitness accounts to glorify their campaigns, often exaggerating or fabricating atrocities to justify their actions. Today, digital platforms like TikTok and Twitter serve a similar purpose, with soldiers and civilians alike sharing videos that depict the horrors of war-sometimes sensationalized, sometimes censored.
The proliferation of images and videos of violence, such as children injured or killed in Gaza, has created a new battlefield of moral and political influence. While some content is too graphic for mainstream media, the internet ensures that atrocities are widely visible, fueling global outrage or apathy depending on the audience.
Ethical and Legal Challenges: From Justification to Accountability
Throughout history, moral opposition to conquest has often been voiced by theologians, jurists, and philosophers. Figures like Francisco Vitoria and Bartolomé de las Casas challenged the legality and morality of colonial violence, advocating for the inherent dignity and equality of all peoples. Their efforts laid the groundwork for modern international law, which seeks to prohibit aggressive war and uphold sovereignty.
Yet, despite these legal and moral frameworks, conquest persists. Contemporary conflicts often involve complex justifications-self-defense, liberation, or anti-terrorism-that obscure the underlying motives of territorial expansion. The ongoing Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories, justified by claims of security and self-defense, exemplifies this contradiction.
The Future of Conquest: A Diminishing Humanity?
As conflicts intensify and the rhetoric of domination resurges, the moral fabric that once condemned conquest appears to be fraying. The brutal realities of modern warfare-indiscriminate bombings, displacement, and starvation-are reminiscent of the worst atrocities of the colonial era.
The global community faces a critical question: can the principles of sovereignty, human rights, and international law withstand the resurgence of conquest-driven policies? Or are we witnessing the beginning of a new, darker chapter where the old doctrines of domination are reasserted under new guises?
The ongoing crises in Gaza, Ukraine, and elsewhere serve as stark reminders that the age of conquest, long thought to be over, is perhaps only dormant-ready to resurface whenever the political winds favor it. Humanity’s challenge is to uphold the moral and legal standards that prevent history from repeating itself in the guise of modern warfare.
Author: Greg Grandin, Yale University Professor and Pulitzer Prize-winning historian, explores the enduring legacy of conquest and its implications for contemporary geopolitics.
