The second transformation is the erosion and paralysis of the European project, by which I mean Jean Monnet and Robert Schuman’s dream that the heterogeneous European nation-states would steadily come together, first through commercial and fiscal integration, and then by serious and irreversible commitments to a politically united continent. The institutions for realizing that dream — the European Parliament, the European Commission, the Court of Justice — are already in place, but the political will to breathe real life into them is gone, sadly undermined by the simple fact that wildly divergent national fiscal policies are incompatible with a common European currency.

Bluntly put, Germany and Greece, with their separate budgetary records, cannot march together toward a United States of Europe; but no one appears to have an answer to this dichotomy, except to paper over the cracks with further tranches of Euro-bonds and I.M.F. loans.

The Europeans, in other words, have neither the time nor the energy nor the resources to focus on things other than their own problems. This means that there are very few observers across that continent who have studied what might be the third great transformation of our times: namely, the enormous arms race that is occurring in most parts of East Asia and South Asia.

While European militaries become more like local gendarmeries, Asian governments are purposefully developing deep-water navies, building new military bases, acquiring ever more sophisticated aircraft, and testing missiles with ever longer ranges. What discussion has occurred focuses on China’s military buildup, and rather little on the fact that Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, India and even Australia are following suit.

What do Asian nations apprehend about the future of the world that European governments are now oblivious to? If slower economic growth, environmental damage and a fraying social fabric in China lead its future leaders toward muscle-flexing abroad — right now, it is fair to say, China’s leaders are quite cautious — its neighbors are planning a firm response. Does anyone in Brussels know, or care, that after 500 years of history, the world of 1500 is at an end? Asia advances to center stage, while Europe becomes a distant chorus. Won’t future historians regard this phenomenon also as an amazing watershed in international affairs?

The fourth change is, alas, the slow, steady and growing decrepitude of the United Nations, and especially of its most critical organ, the Security Council. The U.N. Charter was carefully crafted to help the family of nations enjoy peace and prosperity after the horrendous evils of 1937-1945. But the charter itself was a calculated risk: recognizing that the Great Powers of 1945 would have to be given a disproportionate role (like a permanent Security Council seat and the veto), the drafters nonetheless hoped that those five governments might work together to realize the world body’s high ideals.

The Cold War killed such hopes, the collapse of the Soviet Union revived them, but now they are fading again due to the cynical abuse of the veto power. When China and Russia veto any measure to stop the Syrian regime of Hafez al-Assad from killing its own citizens, and when the United States vetoes any resolution to stop Israel from advancing into Palestinian lands, the world organization is made redundant. And Moscow, Beijing and Washington seem to like it that way.