hen why bother with pre-nups or conventions and treaties if rules are (allegedly) meant to be broken, huh?
As one saying I've heard - 'The appearance of the law must be upheld, especially while it's being broken'
Not all treaties, contracts, etc are broken. Nonetheless, we see time and time again people, especially governments, breaking agreements. Recently I was discussed the fact that Ukraine was suppose to be helped if it was ever attacked since it gave up a significant nuclear stockpile. Well, as we know Ukraine was basically offered little to no military aid directly on the front lines. Governments and politicians especially break their promises in a far worse way than some a corp breaking some agreement or a consumer breaking a service agreement earlier than agreed too. As we see now, the EU is supposedly all pro-democracy and helping people yet they're clearly against the referendum in Catalonia and haven't criticized Spanish police for using excessive force.
So while yes, laws, treaties, agreements, contracts are constantly broken usually a person or corp at least go to court if they feel they've been wronged. It's more difficult when a government or government body breaks some agreement or treaty. Yet it happens all the time and depending who's doing it and the political climate determines the level of enforcement and punishment from breaking the treaty/law/rule/agreement/etc from sanctions, severe punishments, to a slap on the wrist, to basically no punishment at all or even condemnation.
Such is the world...