In recent days, the world has once again witnessed Israel’s blatant violation of the ceasefire and the assassination of several Hamas commanders. These attacks, while the United States and its Western allies consistently proclaim their commitment to peace and human rights, are yet another example of the double standards applied in international affairs. These contradictions raise fundamental questions about the political philosophy governing the global order.
John Locke, the renowned political philosopher, once wrote: “Freedom only makes sense when accompanied by justice.” But how can one speak of freedom and justice when the West remains silent in the face of Israel’s crimes? If the war in Ukraine is considered an attack on the “international order,” why are Israel’s relentless attacks on Palestinian civilians ignored?
The United States has long presented itself as a champion of democratic values, yet in practice, human rights only hold significance in its foreign policy when they align with American interests. Henry Kissinger once stated: “There are no permanent enemies and no permanent friends, only permanent interests.” This approach has fostered a dual policy in which some nations are subjected to sanctions and pressure under the pretext of “human rights violations,” while U.S. allies, even when committing blatant crimes, remain immune from any consequences.
This issue is not limited to Palestine but extends to many other regions. Military interventions in Libya and Iraq, support for armed groups in Syria, and the double standards in addressing humanitarian crises all exemplify a policy where ethical principles are ignored in favor of geopolitical interests. Noam Chomsky, the American intellectual, once noted: “Western moral standards have a strange flexibility; when enemies make mistakes, they are intolerable, but when friends do the same, they are overlooked.”
A New Global Order and the Decline of Western Hegemony
Meanwhile, Israel’s ongoing attacks and the West’s unwavering support not only escalate tensions in the Middle East but also undermine the United States’ position as a neutral mediator in international conflicts. Emerging powers such as China and Russia are seizing this opportunity to expand their influence among Arab and Islamic nations. The global order is shifting, and the West’s double standards are only accelerating its declining credibility on the international stage.
Many analysts argue that these contradictions are hastening the decline of Western influence. In recent years, independent-minded states in the region, including Iran, Turkey, and the Gulf Cooperation Council countries, have been reassessing their relations with Washington. Even Saudi Arabia, which was deeply dependent on the United States until recently, is now strengthening its ties with China and Russia. This shift in approach indicates that even America’s traditional allies are losing trust in its inconsistent policies.
Human Rights or a Political Pressure Tool?
Ultimately, the key question remains: Isn’t it time for genuine human rights standards to be defined based on justice and universal principles, rather than the interests of great powers?
How can a global system claim to uphold order and justice while selectively ignoring some crimes and imposing severe sanctions on others?
If the West is truly committed to democracy and human rights, it must apply these principles universally, rather than using them as a geopolitical tool. As long as these contradictions persist, global peace and security will remain increasingly fragile, and the West’s legitimacy in defending human rights will continue to be questioned.
Comments