Greenland and western hypocrisy over the rules-based international order
Greenland and western hypocrisy over the rules-based international order
John Menadue

Greenland and western hypocrisy over the rules-based international order

Western leaders defend the rules-based international order when it suits them, but remain largely silent as those same rules are breached by the United States and Israel. The result is a system that shields the powerful and abandons the vulnerable – most starkly in Palestine.

The white men and a few women couldn’t hide their anger over Trump threatening to take over Greenland. NATO members joined in at the horror of Trump subverting the rules-based international order (RBIO).

They were appalled at this breach of the RBIO, that Richard Marles and all right-thinking people in the West keep talking about. But these very same people – including the Australian political elite – say precious little or nothing at all when the rules are broken by the US and Israel to attack the poor and vulnerable of this world.

Greenlanders are special, but not Palestinians.

The breaches of RBIO didn’t come with Trump. The West has been breaching the rules for decades. Trump’s rule-breaking is just more gross and explicit.

Not only are we very selective in our concerns, but we also tug the forelock in joining the US and Israel in numerous and wilful breaches of the RBIO, breaches that have brought death and misery to tens of millions of people.

With impunity the rich and powerful break the rules and punish the poor and vulnerable. Or as Mark Carney, the Prime Minister of Canada put it, “the strong can do what they can and the weak must suffer what they must."

And those that suffer are not white Christians or Jews but brown Muslims. No wonder our Muslim brothers and sisters believe that the system is loaded against them. They are right to feel aggrieved.

The cruellest example in the world today of breach of rules is the genocide which Israel, with the support of United States, is inflicting on the brave people of Palestine.

This is not to suggest that Mark Carney’s Davos speech is not to be welcomed and applauded. But the RBIO is selectively applied. Are Palestinians of less value than Greenlanders?

Just look at some instances of how the US has breached the RBIO.

1. Use of force without UN authorisation

Under the UN Charter, force is legal only in self-defence or with UN Security Council approval. The US has violated this rule multiple times.

Iraq (2003)

  • The invasion had no explicit UN Security Council authorisation.
  • Claims about weapons of mass destruction were false. It resulted in massive civilian casualties and long-term regional destabilisation.

Kosovo / Serbia (1999)

  • NATO bombing campaign (led by the US) proceeded without UN authorisation.

Panama (1989)

  • US invaded to arrest Manuel Noriega. It was condemned by the UN General Assembly as a violation of international law.

Syria (from 2014 onward)

  • US military presence and airstrikes occurred without Syrian consent or UN authorisation.

2. Undermining state sovereignty through regime change

The US has frequently violated the principle of non-intervention.

Latin America (1970s–1980s)

  • Chile (1973): Supported the overthrow of democratically elected President Allende
  • Nicaragua: Funded and armed the Contras, despite a ruling by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) condemning US actions.

Afghanistan (1980s)

  • Covertly armed insurgents to weaken the Soviet-backed government, contributing to decades of instability.

Libya (2011)

  • UN authorisation was for civilian protection, not regime change. NATO operations (led by the US) went far beyond the mandate, resulting in state collapse.

3. Ignoring or rejecting international courts and legal rulings

International Court of Justice (ICJ)

  • Nicaragua vs United States (1986): ICJ ruled the US violated international law by supporting Contra rebels. The US rejected the ruling, withdrew from ICJ compulsory jurisdiction, and refused to pay reparations.

International Criminal Court (ICC)

  • The US refuses to join the ICC and passed domestic laws authorising force to free US personnel if detained by the ICC.
  • The US sanctioned ICC officials investigating US actions in Afghanistan

4. Torture, detention, and human rights violations

‘War on Terror’ practices

  • Guantánamo Bay: Indefinite detention without trial, violating habeas corpus and Geneva Conventions.
  • CIA black sites: Secret prisons involving torture (waterboarding, sleep deprivation).
  • Extraordinary rendition: Transferring suspects to countries known to practice torture.

These actions directly contradict:

  • The UN Convention Against Torture (which the US ratified).
  • International humanitarian law.

5. Violations of international humanitarian law in warfare

Civilian casualties

  • Repeated airstrikes in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, and Syria caused high death tolls.

Use of controversial weapons

  • Cluster munitions: Used despite long-recognised humanitarian concerns (the US is not a signatory to the ban).
  • Depleted uranium munitions: Long-term health and environmental impacts.

6. Sanctions and economic coercion outside UN frameworks

The US increasingly uses unilateral sanctions, bypassing the UN.

Examples:

Iran, Venezuela, Cuba, Russia.

Sanctions often:

  • Lack UN approval and have severe humanitarian consequences.
  • Use extraterritorial enforcement, pressuring third-party states.

7. Selective application of ‘rules’

A core criticism isn’t just violations – but selectivity.

  • Condemning territorial conquest while supporting allies doing similar things.
  • Defending human rights rhetorically while shielding allies from accountability.
  • Promoting international law when convenient.

Israeli breaches of Rules Based International Order

1. Occupation and settlements in the West Bank

  • Under international humanitarian law (Fourth Geneva Convention), an occupying power is prohibited from transferring its civilian population into occupied territory.
  • Israel has built and expanded settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
  • These settlements are considered illegal under international law by the UN, the (ICJ).

2. Annexation of East Jerusalem

  • Israel annexed East Jerusalem after the 1967 war.
  • The UN Security Council has repeatedly declared this annexation null and void.
  • Unilateral annexation violates the principle that borders cannot be changed by force.

3. Use of force and civilian harm in Gaza

  • Israel’s military operations in Gaza have resulted in large civilian casualties and infrastructure destruction.
  • Human rights groups and UN bodies have accused Israel of disproportionate force and potential war crimes, including collective punishment (such as blockades affecting civilians).

4. Blockade of Gaza

  • Israel has maintained a land, sea, and air blockade on Gaza since 2007.
  • The UN and many legal scholars argue the blockade constitutes collective punishment, which is prohibited under international law.

5. Disregard for UN resolutions and international rulings

  • Israel has not complied with numerous UN General Assembly and Security Council resolutions, particularly on settlements and occupation.
  • It has rejected the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC) over alleged crimes in the occupied territories.

6. Unequal application of law (apartheid allegations)

  • Major human rights organisations (e.g., Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch) have accused Israel of practicing apartheid due to different legal systems for Israelis and Palestinians in the same territory.

The bigger picture Israel benefits from political protection, especially from the US, which shields it from sanctions or enforcement – creating a perception that the rules-based order is selective rather than universal. The RBIO was designed to help protect the weak but is selectively applied by the strong. The US and Israel regularly breach the RBIO.I have been assisted by WeChat for breaches by the US and Israel of the RBIO. I have edited to shorten.

The views expressed in this article may or may not reflect those of Pearls and Irritations.

John Menadue

Please support Pearls and Irritations

This year, Pearls and Irritations has again proven that independent media has never been more essential.
The integrity of our media matters - please support Pearls and Irritations.
click here to donate.