As I write this blog, Russia is several days into a military invasion of the Ukraine. Battlefront reports vary, but it appears that Putin’s troops have run into surprisingly strong resistance from Ukrainian forces. What is no surprise is that casualties — both military and civilian — are rising rapidly and thousands of people have fled their homes and become refugees.  At the same time, the U.S. along with most European nations have imposed sanctions on Russia, causing widespread disruption to its economy and isolation from the rest of the world.

Inevitably, this latest armed conflict has generated outcries about the injustice of war in general, its cruelty, its stupidity, etc. Rather than join this chorus, I’d like to offer a simple idea that — if enacted — would make it very difficult for war to be waged, at least on a nation-against-nation scale.  Here’s the idea — make it mandatory for every leader to fight in any war he or she initiates.  And by “fight,” I don’t mean sitting in a bunker or tent, miles away from the action, pushing little figures around on a map. I mean meeting the enemy face-to-face on the battlefield and enduring all the hazards and horrors that other front-line soldiers endure.

If this sounds far-fetched, keep in mind that in past centuries, kings and noblemen often led their troops in battle. King Henry V of England fought side-by-side with his soldiers at the Battle of Agincourt and numerous other engagements of the Hundred Years’ War. So, too, did Edward, Duke of York, and Baron Thomas Camoys.  Several kings lost their lives in combat most notably Richard III at Bosworth Field and Sweden’s Gustavus Adolphus at the Battle of Lutzen during the Thirty Years’ War. The most-recent monarch to take to the trenches with his soldiers was Belgium’s King Albert I. At the outset of World War I, he refused to allow Germany to march through his country to attack France.  When the Germans responded by invading Belgium, Albert took command of his army and led them in a multitude of engagements against the Kaiser’s troops. For four years, he shared his soldiers’ hardships and dangers while his wife, Queen Elisabeth, served as a frontline nurse.

It may be fanciful, if not downright foolish, to imagine today’s leaders as battlefield commanders, but then again consider these questions. Would Vladimir Putin have invaded the Ukraine if he’d been required by international law to be at the head of a tank column heading toward Kiev? Reflecting on past wars, how long would the U.S. have been in Vietnam, if LBJ or Nixon had been required to slog with U.S. infantrymen through rice patties or dodge SAMs over Hanoi in a B-52? How long would Russia have stayed in Afghanistan if Brezhnev, Andropov, and the Soviet leaders who followed them had to climb into the mountains around Kabul and fight the mujahideen with an AK-47?

Granted, it’s highly unlikely today’s leaders would agree to have such a provision added to the U.N. Charter or to some other component of international law. But I suspect that as long as world leaders are spared the pain, the fear, the grief, and the loss that go along with war, they will find it all too easy to choose that option over more peaceful alternatives to conflict resolution.