Liberal Universalism and Multipolarity

Abridged video by Nicolai Petro and Neutrality Studies.
Basically says countries should be sovereign, and independent.
Realistically no country is an 'island'. So they consider their neighbours encase they get beaten up.

It argues that wars are a result of intolerance, and lack of respect. But more recently is exacerbated by the prevalance of universal values e.g. of "human values/rights" needing to be accepted everywhere. Acceptance is voluntary, but those not accepting them are cast as evil. Often it is argued that there is a need for war, or subtle means to overthrow a non-conforming government.
Although evil rulers do exist, are we obliged to go to war with them? Is peace best served by talking to your enemy, and not trying to force them into submission?
But although dialog and respect helps, this is unlikely to be successful persuading countries to drop universal values. It is unlikely to be successful due to the dogmatic religious flavour of these supposedly secular "human values", even if it results in war and oppression of the population to achieve their utopian dreams.
Russian academics are in my opinion too optimistic, and slightly impractical. One of the primary things they overlook is that in this world, many countries want war, they don't hate it. Also traditional causes of war over money, control of territory, or security still remain.
World peace is unachievable, but as an aspiration world peace is good, and peaceful relations between nations can be achieved better than today.

Full video here:

https://tinyurl.com/4b34zzt2