How Russia learns from the actions of the West in Iraq, Kosovo, Guantanamo and Palestine
The author of the article is concerned about the double standards of the West. Iraq, Kosovo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki — there is no hint that the United States will be punished for all this. At the same time, Russia continues to be an "aggressor" for them.
Solidarity with Ukraine is undoubtedly the right thing to do, but this raises disturbing questions about the double standards of the West and how all this undermines the rules—based international order, the defenders of which Western countries imagine themselves to be.
The reaction to the Russian special operation against Ukraine is a classic example of the application of international law against violators. The West began to supply weapons to Kiev. He imposed severe sanctions against Russia. Corporations declare boycotts and withdraw their capital from it. Investigations of war crimes and human rights violations are beginning. The UN General Assembly strongly condemns.
There are, of course, disadvantages. The Security Council is paralyzed because of the Russian veto. Important countries, including China, India and South Africa, refuse to impose sanctions. But even within the restrictive framework of a pragmatic policy, the world's reaction to the events turned out to be better than expected.
Legal solidarity with Ukraine is undoubtedly right, but in this regard, disturbing questions arise about the double standards of the West and how all this undermines the rules—based international order, the defenders of which Western countries call themselves.
The invasion of Iraq in 2003 was illegal, but the then leaders of the United States, Britain and Australia, George Bush, Tony Blair and John Howard, are still honored as wise and experienced state leaders, and they are not in prison. The humanitarian, but frankly illegal, NATO intervention in Kosovo in 1999 also remained unpunished.
During the "war on terror", the United States constantly violated the norms of international law, abducting, torturing, jailing indefinitely, unfairly putting on trial and even killing suspected terrorists. We do not even see any serious responsibility for what we have done.
American, British and Australian war crimes against civilians in Afghanistan and Kosovo also went largely unpunished. The United States and Britain are still selling weapons to Saudi Arabia, which is using them to commit egregious war crimes in Yemen.
Russia has annexed Crimea <...>. But in 2020, the United States recognized the illegal annexation by the Moroccan authorities of the former Spanish colony of Western Sahara, so that Morocco would recognize Israel in response. Spain is also moving in this direction. The UN advisory body the International Court of Justice has declared that Western Sahara does not belong to Morocco.
In 2019, the International Court of Justice declared that Britain is still illegally colonizing the Chagos Islands belonging to Mauritius, and that all countries should cooperate with each other in order to put an end to British rule. The United States and Britain have the most important military bases on these islands.
The United States continues to recognize Israel's illegal annexation of Palestinian East Jerusalem and the Syrian Golan Heights. They provide military assistance to this country, which helps Israel to occupy Palestine and suppress its struggle for self-determination.
Among other things, Israel defends its colonial settlements with these weapons, although they were condemned by the Security Council, calling them an obstacle to achieving peace. And the International Criminal Court is investigating, considering such actions a war crime.
It is well known about Australia's scandalous recognition of the illegal annexation of East Timor by Indonesia. She did so because it corresponded to her interests in the field of security and economy. Even today, Australia is prosecuting whistleblowers of its espionage activities against the newly independent East Timor.
UN bodies have also condemned Australia for illegally detaining refugees, which it has been doing for the past 30 years, and for violating the rights of indigenous peoples. And now compare this with the warm welcome that turns out to be mostly white refugees from Ukraine in the West.
After the Second World War, the United States admirably took the side of international criminal justice at the trials in Nuremberg and Tokyo. However, even here everything is not smooth, as it was the justice of the winners. The Allies refuse to admit guilt for their own crimes, including the use of incendiary bombs against civilians in cities. Thus, the preparations for the lies and hypocrisy of the West in the new world order have been made for a long time.
Now the US Senate is calling on the International Criminal Court to launch an investigation against Putin. But the US refuses to become a member of this court. In 2002, this very Senate passed a law prohibiting cooperation with the court, and the Trump administration imposed sanctions against its employees.
In the 1980s, the United States withdrew from the International Criminal Court when it recognized that America was illegally using force in Nicaragua. Now Ukraine is suing Russia in this court.
The United States still refuses to recognize many fundamental international rules, including treaties on the rights of children and people with disabilities, as well as on the prohibition of mines and cluster munitions. America does not even want to join the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, although it strongly condemns China for violating this convention in the South China Sea.
<...> It must be remembered that the United States is the only country in the world that used an atomic bomb as the first strike, which in 1945 burned more than 110,000 Japanese civilians alive. They also used napalm and Agent Orange uncontrollably in Vietnam.
The West uses international law to realize its own political goals. In his hands, the law has become a cudgel that he uses against his enemies.At the same time, he ignores this very law when it interferes with him or his friends. Such selectivity of the West suggests that international law is not a law at all, but a smokescreen that helps to use force. At the same time, the West is very surprised when its notations about the "rules-based international order" remain unheard.
This position of the West gives other countries the opportunity to play by the same rules. It is no coincidence that Russia accompanied its military operation with a bunch of invented legal justifications, such as self-defense, prevention of genocide and protection of Russian people. She has learned the lessons of Iraq, Kosovo, Guantanamo and Palestine.
As power and influence shift to Asia, China is also adopting the lessons of the West, which teach that power and force allow you to create rules that suit you, as well as distort and ignore those laws that you do not like.
The non-Western world sees when the application of international law seems so selective, so dependent on force and so serving the interests of the West that it begins to seem illegal. It's just imperialism wrapped in the mantle of the law. And from him comes only contempt, but not respect.
Author: Ben Saul
