To have a world order based on international law, which The Economist and the West abstractly favour in this context, these advocates should be prepared to live by a similar set of rules and agreements in other situations. Putin referred to the precedent of Kosovo declaring independence from Serbia as a quasi-legal justification for seizing Crimea - and this has some plausibility, although there was a strong argument that Serbia had forfeited its sovereign rights in Kosovo by committing crimes against humanity in the course of resisting the breakup of the former Yugoslavia.
When done by Russia, such behaviour is criticised as disruptive. But when done by the US, the use of force is benignly described as "the aggressive pursuit of American values". Such a pattern, it seems to me, sets a worse precedent than Putin's worldview in regard to Ukraine.
The new world order? Part 2 - Opinion - Al Jazeera English
No comments:
Post a Comment