Some Non-Western people accuse us of double standards. I believe they are right.
I won't touch the double standard debate centering on the west's attitude to the conflict around Israel. It's already summer and too hot without burning myself on this topic.
A much more recent and probably more harmful double standard centers on Iran/Iraq.
We have seen in the past months several accusations that Iran is involved in the Iraqi insurgency (at least the Shi'ite part). Well, some of them were not true as the obviously untrue claims about Austrian heavy sniper rifles. Overall, I have absolutely no doubts about Iranian involvement, but such an involvement does not threaten our national security even remotely as much as the west's reaction to it threatens Iran's national security.
So where's the double standard?
Well, obviously we wouldn't tolerate if Iran invaded a Christian country close to us, installing a puppet theocracy and having over 100,000 troops in the country. We would certainly not support an insurgency against that for the simple reason that we would have stepped in with much more violent means than that, and much earlier.
Claims that Iran supports insurgents are OK if they are based on good information, but it's problematic if it's done as accusation. Any Iranian involvement is absolutely predictable, understandable, justified and natural by western policy standards.
If a nation decides to invade another one voluntarily, then it's simply in its own responsibility if shit surrounding that action happens.
You cannot knock someone down and expect that all others around treat you as if nothing happens. If some bystander pushes you a bit back afterwards it would be plain stupid to accuse him of a violation ... all neutral observers would have a good reason to believe you were nuts and blind towards your own behavior.
The really dangerous thing about this double standard is that it might be exploited to build up extremely questionable justifications for a war of aggression against Iran.
Sven Ortmann
I won't touch the double standard debate centering on the west's attitude to the conflict around Israel. It's already summer and too hot without burning myself on this topic.
A much more recent and probably more harmful double standard centers on Iran/Iraq.
We have seen in the past months several accusations that Iran is involved in the Iraqi insurgency (at least the Shi'ite part). Well, some of them were not true as the obviously untrue claims about Austrian heavy sniper rifles. Overall, I have absolutely no doubts about Iranian involvement, but such an involvement does not threaten our national security even remotely as much as the west's reaction to it threatens Iran's national security.
So where's the double standard?
Well, obviously we wouldn't tolerate if Iran invaded a Christian country close to us, installing a puppet theocracy and having over 100,000 troops in the country. We would certainly not support an insurgency against that for the simple reason that we would have stepped in with much more violent means than that, and much earlier.
Claims that Iran supports insurgents are OK if they are based on good information, but it's problematic if it's done as accusation. Any Iranian involvement is absolutely predictable, understandable, justified and natural by western policy standards.
If a nation decides to invade another one voluntarily, then it's simply in its own responsibility if shit surrounding that action happens.
You cannot knock someone down and expect that all others around treat you as if nothing happens. If some bystander pushes you a bit back afterwards it would be plain stupid to accuse him of a violation ... all neutral observers would have a good reason to believe you were nuts and blind towards your own behavior.
The really dangerous thing about this double standard is that it might be exploited to build up extremely questionable justifications for a war of aggression against Iran.
Sven Ortmann
No comments:
Post a Comment