With brutal wars unravelling in Ukraine and Gaza, and escalatory assaults between Iran and Israel, defending worldwide legislation has by no means been extra essential. Many have argued that the West’s help for Ukraine, usually couched by way of respect for worldwide legislation, has been undermined by the identical nations’ lacklustre help for Gaza. This has given rise to a bigger overseas coverage debate about alleged double requirements of the West. The declare is that Western nations are involved with violations of worldwide legislation solely when it serves their very own pursuits.
If I communicate for my very own nation, Norway, I can say that the accusation is off the mark. We now have been clear that an actual dedication to worldwide legislation calls for condemning Russia’s struggle of aggression towards Ukraine but in addition calling out Israeli violations of worldwide legislation in Gaza.
Avoiding double requirements in our overseas coverage has been a longstanding Norwegian precedence. Successive Norwegian governments have, as a matter of precept, come to the defence of worldwide legislation no matter who violates it. Whether or not it’s the ongoing struggle in Gaza, conflicts on the African continent, Israel’s unlawful occupation of the Palestinian territories, Britain’s violation of worldwide legislation within the Chagos Archipelago or Russia’s unlawful struggle of aggression towards Ukraine, Norway has been principled and clear. We now have not shirked from calling out any of those violations for what they’re, no matter who dedicated them.
Is that this the appropriate strategy? There are those that have been sceptical. It has been argued that nations ought to be cautious to not criticise allies and companions after they violate worldwide legislation. The argument is that the world is fraught with peril, and all states, maybe particularly smaller states corresponding to Norway, ought to be cautious to not alienate their allies and companions, even after they act inconsistently with worldwide legislation.
That is, nevertheless, a mistaken strategy. Actual safety relies upon finally on a peaceable worldwide neighborhood outfitted to resolve world challenges. That in flip requires that we work to make sure that worldwide legislation is revered. Until all nations are dedicated to worldwide legislation, the system will ultimately collapse. That may invariably result in much less safety and extra uncertainty for everybody.
A 100 years in the past, Francis Hagerup, a distinguished worldwide lawyer and Norwegian prime minister, noticed that the precept of sovereign equality of states was the Magna Carta of the world’s states. Nonetheless right now, any transfer away from something aside from an unwavering dedication to worldwide legislation could be disastrous for the worldwide neighborhood. It’s the very bulwark towards a state of affairs the place may is correct, towards what the Worldwide Courtroom of Justice referred to as, in its first ruling after the second world struggle, “the manifestation of a coverage of power”.
Might our constant defence of worldwide legislation, together with in relation to Western allies, be misconstrued as acceptance of the narrative propagated by Russia and China that the West is hypocritical? Provided that one intentionally tries to misconceive. It’s true that Western states, too, have dedicated violations of worldwide legislation. The invasion of Iraq by america and Britain in 2003 is one instance. Within the face of such a coverage of power, a rustic corresponding to Norway should, as we did 20 years in the past, have the braveness of its convictions. Solely then can we, with the good thing about actual credibility, criticise states that actually and systematically base themselves and their overseas coverage on double requirements.
It is just then that we will credibly punch holes in Russia’s narrative that it’s the valiant advocate of worldwide legislation on behalf of the World South. There’s apparently no restrict to how appalled Russia has been by the killing of civilians beneath bombardment in Gaza, whereas Russia on the identical time has been bombing faculties and hospitals in Ukraine. As our Western allies are coming to know, this cynical double commonplace will be countered successfully provided that one is principled. Norway’s constant stance as regards each Ukraine and Gaza permits us to level out such contradictions in a method that truly cuts by means of. The identical is the case now with the assaults on the Iranian consulate in Damascus and Iran’s retaliatory strikes towards Israel; having criticised Israel for the primary occasion, which not all states have been keen to do, Norway can, with the good thing about consistency and credibility, criticise Iran for the second.
Some have argued that it’s unrealistic to be equally involved about each violation of worldwide legislation all the time. But, Norway’s dedication to counteract conflicts and crises constantly doesn’t preclude us from implementing a overseas coverage based mostly on practical priorities. It’s intuitively comprehensible {that a} struggle in a neighbouring nation considerations folks greater than whether it is happening in a far-flung place on one other continent. It’s logical that it’s significantly alarming for Norway that Russia, a rustic with which we share a protracted border, is trying to annex Ukrainian territory by means of the unlawful use of power. A struggle in our personal neighbourhood inevitably has severe safety coverage implications more likely to outweigh these of a battle distant.
Norway can not, due to this fact, be accused of double requirements for offering materiel to the Ukrainian defence battle or for giving a traditionally massive assist package deal to Ukraine. We should, nevertheless, watch out to not create the impression that Russia is assessed in accordance with particular guidelines. Accordingly, now we have, in our criticism of Russia, as of different states, emphasised the violations of the United Nations Constitution and of different universally accepted guidelines of worldwide legislation.
Equally, Norway has not shied away from being important of Israel’s coverage of annexation of the occupied Palestinian territory. Norway made this clear in its submissions in February 2024 earlier than the Worldwide Courtroom of Justice within the ongoing advisory opinion continuing regarding Israel’s insurance policies within the occupied Palestinian territory. In our oral submissions earlier than the Courtroom, we have been clear that Israel’s actions in Gaza quantity to indiscriminate and disproportionate use of power. We at the moment are working to make sure that Palestine is granted full membership within the United Nations.
What’s essential for Norway – what underpins our overseas coverage throughout the board – is that we insist that related instances be handled equally, and that each one states be topic to the identical guidelines.
This can be a place that ought to encourage all states. Each state has a stake in upholding universally agreed guidelines on the usage of power, free and honest commerce, human rights and the makes use of of the oceans and their sources. Our widespread future relies on respect for worldwide legislation. This requires nations within the World North and the World South to have the ability to see worldwide legislation as a good algorithm; in flip, which means the foundations should be utilized constantly. All states should resist the temptation, based mostly on short-term nationwide curiosity, to violate the tenets of the worldwide authorized order.
If there was one widespread thread working by means of the works of Norway’s foremost playwright and poet, Henrik Ibsen, it was the insistent calling out of the double requirements of well mannered society. Ibsen’s insistence could, at instances, have irked those that felt referred to as out; it was however the appropriate place. For Norway, the place is evident. Our most necessary contribution to a peaceable and simply world order – and to our personal nationwide safety – is to keep away from double requirements in overseas coverage and to work to make sure that different states accomplish that too.
The views expressed on this article are the writer’s personal and don’t essentially mirror Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.