With brutal wars unravelling in Ukraine and Gaza, and escalatory assaults between Iran and Israel, defending worldwide regulation has by no means been extra mandatory. Many have argued that the West’s assist for Ukraine, typically couched when it comes to respect for worldwide regulation, has been undermined by the identical nations’ lacklustre assist for Gaza. This has given rise to a bigger international coverage debate about alleged double requirements of the West. The declare is that Western nations are involved with violations of worldwide regulation solely when it serves their very own pursuits.
If I converse for my very own nation, Norway, I can say that the accusation is off the mark. We’ve been clear that an actual dedication to worldwide regulation calls for condemning Russia’s struggle of aggression in opposition to Ukraine but in addition calling out Israeli violations of worldwide regulation in Gaza.
Avoiding double requirements in our international coverage has been a longstanding Norwegian precedence. Successive Norwegian governments have, as a matter of precept, come to the defence of worldwide regulation 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 regulation within the Chagos Archipelago or Russia’s unlawful struggle of aggression in opposition to Ukraine, Norway has been principled and clear. We’ve not shirked from calling out any of those violations for what they’re, no matter who dedicated them.
Is that this the suitable strategy? There are those that have been sceptical. It has been argued that nations ought to be cautious to not criticise allies and companions once they violate worldwide regulation. 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 once they act inconsistently with worldwide regulation.
That is, nonetheless, a mistaken strategy. Actual safety relies upon in the end on a peaceable worldwide neighborhood geared up to resolve international challenges. That in flip requires that we work to make sure that worldwide regulation is revered. Except all nations are dedicated to worldwide regulation, the system will finally collapse. That might 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 this moment, any transfer away from something aside from an unwavering dedication to worldwide regulation can be disastrous for the worldwide neighborhood. It’s the very bulwark in opposition to a scenario the place may is true, in opposition to what the Worldwide Court docket of Justice known as, in its first ruling after the second world struggle, “the manifestation of a coverage of pressure”.
May our constant defence of worldwide regulation, 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 regulation. The invasion of Iraq by the USA and Britain in 2003 is one instance. Within the face of such a coverage of pressure, 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 international 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 regulation on behalf of the World South. There may be apparently no restrict to how appalled Russia has been by the killing of civilians below bombardment in Gaza, whereas Russia on the identical time has been bombing colleges and hospitals in Ukraine. As our Western allies are coming to grasp, this cynical double commonplace may 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 via. The identical is the case now with the assaults on the Iranian consulate in Damascus and Iran’s retaliatory strikes in opposition to Israel; having criticised Israel for the primary occasion, which not all states have been prepared 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 regulation the entire time. But, Norway’s dedication to counteract conflicts and crises constantly doesn’t preclude us from implementing a international coverage primarily based on reasonable priorities. It’s intuitively comprehensible {that a} struggle in a neighbouring nation considerations folks greater than whether it is going down in a far-flung place on one other continent. It’s logical that it’s notably alarming for Norway that Russia, a rustic with which we share an extended border, is making an attempt to annex Ukrainian territory via the unlawful use of pressure. A struggle in our personal neighbourhood inevitably has severe safety coverage implications more likely to outweigh these of a battle far-off.
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 giant help package deal to Ukraine. We should, nonetheless, watch out to not create the impression that Russia is assessed in keeping with particular guidelines. Accordingly, we have now, 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 regulation.
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 Court docket 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 Court docket, we have been clear that Israel’s actions in Gaza quantity to indiscriminate and disproportionate use of pressure. 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 international coverage throughout the board – is that we insist that comparable circumstances be handled equally, and that every one states be topic to the identical guidelines.
It is a place that ought to encourage all states. Each state has a stake in upholding universally agreed guidelines on the usage of pressure, free and honest commerce, human rights and the makes use of of the oceans and their assets. Our widespread future is determined by respect for worldwide regulation. This requires nations within the World North and the World South to have the ability to see worldwide regulation as a good algorithm; in flip, which means the principles have to be utilized constantly. All states should resist the temptation, primarily based on short-term nationwide curiosity, to violate the tenets of the worldwide authorized order.
If there was one widespread thread working via 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 might, at occasions, have irked those that felt known as out; it was nonetheless the suitable place. For Norway, the place is obvious. 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 international 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.
