Western Double Standards: A Threat to Global Stability and Trust

Europe has consistently considered itself a supporter of international law. It has strived to present itself as an important element in this field globally. However, it seems that the Europeans have repeatedly held contradictory standards regarding international law. In one of the latest instances, the German Chancellor, Mr. Merz, stated that Israel is doing a dirty job for the West, which both implicitly agrees with the West's approach to the Zionist regime's attack on Iran and once again reveals these double standards.

These statements by Western officials are not merely simple slips of the tongue or verbal mistakes; rather, they indicate a long-term approach in the West where they are willing to use the tools of international law to advance geopolitics and strengthen their political position for their interests. The West's standards are defined based on its other needs, and it seems that human and ethical principles are not the main priority for Europe, with other matters taking precedence. The result of this approach will undoubtedly be the destruction of the West's position as one of the foundations of international law.

Alongside this, such dual actions in the statements of Western leaders lay the groundwork for international chaos that can serve as a destructive model for other countries to justify their illegal actions within the framework of the United Nations Charter. The basis for these actions can be the behavior and stance of Western leaders regarding the aggressions of Israel's regime against Iran. If the international system does not condemn such actions correctly and decisively, the consequences will undoubtedly affect the Western countries themselves. This issue could inflict irreparable damage on both the West and the international order, resulting from the Western leaders' appeasement of their allies' lawlessness.

However, the international system must stand firm against the excessive demands of some Western countries and Israel. This stance is not about supporting Iran but rather preserving the position of global values and related institutions. Today's world and its leaders are at a crucial crossroads where they must choose between supporting the principles of international law and global ethical standards or endorsing inhumane violence that has an unethical basis.

The actions and approaches of world leaders will remain a significant behavioral example in history and undoubtedly serve as a major experience for future generations. It will reveal whether the international institutions created by these leaders to prevent human catastrophes can fight and confront their supporters and allies or are merely tools and levers to legitimize illegal actions. If the latter scenario occurs, the international order will certainly undergo profound structural changes in the future, and we should anticipate a considerable shift in how governments interact with international institutions.

Moreover, it is crucial today for world leaders to view the events in the Southwest Asia region with an open and realistic perspective. What is happening here reflects global behavior, particularly that of the West, towards parties that do not quite align with them. In essence, the West seeks to maintain its dominance and control over this region by any means necessary and has enlisted the help of Israel's regime to achieve this goal, attempting to grant international legitimacy to its actions. Consequently, leaders of other countries are closely observing the West's dual behavior. They are likely to redefine their cooperation and activities with international institutions that are directly under Western influence.

This double standard of the West regarding the principles and foundations of international law may help them achieve economic and sometimes short-term goals. But in the long run, it sets the stage for accelerating structural changes in the world. These changes could challenge their dominance and even lead to larger, bloodier conflicts. Ultimately, this dual approach is destructive to both public trust and the confidence of other countries, which could finally be detrimental to the West.

*Translated by Ashraf Hemmati from the original Persian article written by Amin Mahdavi