National organizations and many other organizations have documented human rights violations in Iran over the years. Now some countries and leaders, including ours, are condemning the violation of international law by the EU and Israel with their attacks on the Ayatollahs.
Again, the debate about legality versus legitimacy arises, as well as about cynicism, hypocrisy or double standards at the time of analyzing and concluding the given situation and negotiations.
In this sense, draw attention to those who now most easily demand the consistent fulfillment of international legality, It’s the same people who watch silently in relation to a country or regime with which it has ideological affinity or economic interests, it violates international conventions. Including the right sides of people.
In these cases there is actually silence or calls for dialogue and diplomacy.
I also state and explain that the Minnesota bills, for example, take up infinitely more information time, and I’d like to point out what happened in Iran or Venezuela. Also in the Western Sahara, the atrocities that occur in Nigeria, Cuba or China, or the rescue of Hezbollah or Hamas inside and outside Gaza.
A woman holds a picture of new Supreme Leader Mojtaba Jamenei alongside late Iranian leader Ali Jamenei, who was honored during a funeral ceremony for Iranian military commanders who died in attacks on the EU and Israel.
Reuters
For this reason, when Brussels discusses the European position before the agreements in the Persian Gulf, inconsistencies and differences in criteria are highlighted.
First, those close to the Iranian regime, the biggest anti-Americans and anti-Semites, even if they criticize only the Israeli or European government, condemn the non-compliance with international legality.
Too much dialogue and diplomacy, as in the last five decades. Yes, five decades.
Others, in turn, acknowledge the limitations and inconsistencies of their international law, as the Austrian recently did Reinhold Lopatkahe was aware of what he had to do with the Ayatollah regime.
Above all, when they have shown a deliberate will to exterminate a country like Israel and now also to attack all possible territories.
Also Matteo Renzithe former president of the Council of Ministers of Italy and in his time a great representative of the continental world, declared that he was happy that some people had finally managed to remove the ayatollahs.
It cannot be denied, there is clearly a dispute over the effectiveness and validity of international law. They are voices for those who pay less attention and are not broadcast.
I do not think it necessary to repeat or record the precedents or cases of those who intervened militarily without the cover or defense of an international front. There is so much to wrap up the international space is the carnival and do whatever you see fit.
Aware of this, the western world, especially the academic and university world, which supplies management with material, has recently coined the category of “shrimp states”.
“In recent years, some of the world’s most despised regimes have gained space, capacity and presence, largely thanks to defenders of international law”
The intention was to minimize the criminal acts of the governments and fine the leaders, thus rising dialectically when they had to face the demand for the atrocities of those regimes that openly or discreetly defend themselves.
Always have an understanding, theory or rationale with him. And all this with the goal of achieving immortality and without annoying results.
Let’s not forget that some of these states are shrimp, including the criminals themselves, they sit at the altar of international legality.
So neutralizing decisive actions that tend to stabilize, or at least attempt to, the most peaceful or least peaceful life possible in certain places, or even avoiding announced external actions, was as simple as blocking a possible decision in the Security Council by the affected party and its allies.
For a moment, everything in Europe seemed to coincide with the “eje del evil” that traveled from Caracas to Tehran, passing through Damascus, Beirut, Moscow and Pekin. This is not your case.
In recent years, some of the world’s most despised regimes were gaining space, capacity and presence among us, especially thanks to the current defenders of international legality. From Hispano-America to Africa and above all in this most veiled Europe.
The 7-O attacks and the change of government at Casa Blanca changed the course of the accounts. Don’t let us know the story, it’ll be as messy and fatal as we hope, or we’ll get reassuring news and a better script.
Sea that I am, I am ashamed to see the dismissed leaders and members of those who call us the “international community” proclaim legality. When many of them, in addition to not fulfilling their own, national, were so patient and understanding with so many criminal regimes. As with Iran’s violations of nuclear proliferation, human rights, support for armed groups, and regional destabilization.
And we know the argument that “it can’t be compared”. It blooms whenever settled humans, even in a bloody way, are near one.
*** Juan J. Gutiérrez Alonso is a professor of administrative law.
Leave a Reply