Examining International Reactions: Ukraine, Palestine, and Western Double Standards

Image Credit: Google

In the wake of the recent surprise attack by the Palestinian group Hamas on Israel, global leaders have expressed their condolences and opinions on the matter. While many have voiced support for Israel's right to self-defense, this event has once again brought to the forefront the debate surrounding Western double standards in international conflicts.

In this article, we will explore the reactions of world leaders, social media users, and activists, shedding light on the complexities of international diplomacy and public opinion.

World Leaders Extend Condolences and Support

After the attack by Hamas, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy took to social media to offer his condolences and emphasize Israel's unquestionable right to self-defense by saying, “condolences go out to everyone who lost relatives or close ones in the terrorist attack”. He also stated, “Israel’s right to self-defence is unquestionable.”

Similar sentiments were shared by US President Joe Biden, UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, who stood firm. She stated, “Israel has the right to defend itself – today and in the days to come. The European Union

Accusations of Double Standards Emerge

Despite the outpouring of support for Ukraine and Israel, accusations of Western double standards have arisen. Critics argue that while Ukraine's right to defend itself is praised, the same cannot be said about Israel's long-standing occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. This perceived disparity in treatment has sparked a vigorous debate.

Some social media users have criticised these statements, saying they highlight a double standard.

Aaron Bastani, a leftist British journalist, said on X that there’s a “clear double standard in endorsing terrorism against civilian targets in Ukraine … and condemning it by Palestinians”.

Many users said Western diplomats and media support the Ukrainians who defend their land, but label the Palestinians fighting against Israel as “terrorists”.

The Symbolism of a Divided Face

A symbol depicting a woman's face with one eye closed beside a Palestinian flag and the other open beside a Ukrainian flag has gained prominence on social media. It serves as a visual representation of the alleged double standards in Western perceptions of the two conflicts.

It is not the first time Western nations have been accused of double standards in their stance on the Ukraine war.

Rhetorical Questions and Interviews

Mustafa Barghouti, the general secretary of the Palestinian National Initiative, posed a crucial rhetorical question during a CNN interview: “Why does the United States support Ukraine in fighting occupation – while here they support the occupier, who continues to occupy us?” This question highlights the complexity of Western foreign policy.

History of Double Standards

This is not the first time Western nations have faced accusations of double standards in their foreign policy, particularly concerning the Ukraine war. Amnesty International emphasized the importance of addressing the Palestinian occupation and apartheid-like conditions, shedding light on the perceived hypocrisy in Western human rights advocacy.

Earlier in the year, Amnesty International published a report highlighting the West’s “double standards” on global human rights.

Agnes Callamard, Amnesty’s secretary-general, told Al Jazeera at the time that the occupation of the Palestinians was a “particularly important one”.

“Without making any comparison between Russia’s aggression and Israel … it is clear the Palestinian people are under a regime of oppression. A regime of occupation and a regime of apartheid,” Callamard told Al Jazeera.

Voices of Condemnation and Caution

Some voices, like that of Irish lawmaker Richard Boyd Barrett, have vehemently condemned what they perceive as Western leaders' shocking double standards in supporting Ukraine while condemning Palestinians. However, others have cautioned against drawing direct comparisons between different conflicts and the entities involved.

“You’re happy to use the most strong and robust language to describe the crimes against humanity of Vladimir Putin, but you will not use the same strength of language when it comes to describing Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians”. He added.

The Complexity of Public Opinion

The public's response to these issues varies widely. Ukrainian footballer Oleksandr Zinchenko, a vocal supporter of his home country, faced backlash for expressing solidarity with Israel. This incident underscores the nuanced nature of public opinion on international conflicts.

The recent events surrounding Ukraine, Palestine, and Western reactions highlight the intricate web of international diplomacy, public perception, and the ongoing debate about double standards. As the world continues to grapple with these complex issues, it is crucial to engage in open and informed discussions to foster a better understanding of the challenges faced by different regions and peoples.

(Courtesy: Al-Jazeera)