Mutual defense agreements play a crucial role in international relations, shaping alliances and ensuring the security of states. These agreements—also known as collective defense or security pacts—are formal commitments in which states pledge to assist one another in the event of an armed attack. The primary objective of such agreements is to deter potential aggressors by demonstrating a unified front and a collective resolve to defend against any form of aggression. They provide a framework for states to cooperate, share intelligence, and coordinate military efforts to counter common threats. By committing to a collective response, states not only bolster their own security but also contribute to the overall stability of the international community. Shifts in the structure of international relations have given rise to new patterns of conflict—most notably "preventive" or "preemptive" war, which represents a modern evolution in the concept of legitimate defense. This involves taking preemptive military action against an adversary’s forces that show clear intent to launch an attack, with the aim of thwarting the assault before it actually occurs. However, the legitimacy of resorting to force as a preventive measure is not recognized under international legal standards, nor does it find support in legal scholarship or international practice. Some legal scholars argue that expanding the scope for the use of force through concepts like preventive defense effectively nullifies the prohibition against the use of force, paving the way for a "law of the jungle."