Double Standards

219

October 12, 2014

Published in Die Welt
(Germany) on 4 October 2014
by Clemens Wergin (link to original link to original)

Translated from by Maxi Benndorf-Brown. Edited by Helaine Schweitzer.

The U.S. does not practice in Syria what it preached to Israel during its war against Hamas.

Washington significantly criticized Israel’s approach against Hamas in Gaza not so long ago. “The suspicion that militants are operating nearby does not justify strikes that put at risk the lives of so many innocent civilians,” said a spokesperson for the State Department back then. Now, it is the United States’ turn to lead a war in Iraq and Syria against a terrorist organization — and civilians are dying because Islamic State fighters mingle with civilians; just like their Hamas colleagues did. Things can change very quickly.

Indeed, the U.S. has admitted to having decreased its tolerance level for civilian deaths. President Obama introduced a rule last year that civilian casualties need to be ruled out with significant certainty for any airstrikes against terrorists. This rule has now been suspended for the Islamic State group. The U.S. will instead only be bound by the usual ethical standards of warfare.

The U.S. and its allies like France and the U.K. face the same dilemma as Israel in its fight against Hamas: How can a democratic society lead a war and conform to international law against terrorists who disregard international law and hide behind civilians? There are only two choices: Either you let the other side win, or you have to accept that civilians inevitably die in wars, even when you are heavily invested in trying to prevent that from happening. Western nations just learned that lesson in Afghanistan. That's why it is even more astonishing that whenever Israel faces the same dilemma, [the West] immediately assumes that dead civilians are inherent proof of unethical warfare. It is also striking that the Western public is far less interested in civilians that are killed by U.S. airstrikes in Syria than those killed in Gaza, as if there were a certain standard, which the Western world only applies to Israel — and then forgets about fairly quickly once one's own country joins the war against terror. One could call that hypocrisy.

Zweierlei Maßstäbe

USA halten in Syrien nicht ein, was sie Israel im Krieg gegen die Hamas predigten.

Noch vor Kurzem übte Washington heftige Kritik an Israels Vorgehen gegen die Hamas in Gaza. "Der Verdacht, dass Extremisten in der Gegend operieren, rechtfertigt keine Angriffe, die das Leben so vieler unschuldiger Zivilisten gefährden", sagte ein Sprecher des Außenministeriums damals. Nun führt Amerika im Irak und in Syrien selbst Krieg gegen eine Terrororganisation, und Zivilisten kommen dabei um – weil die IS-Kämpfer sich wie ihre Hamas-Kollegen unter die Zivilbevölkerung mischen. So schnell kann das gehen.

Tatsächlich haben die USA zugegeben, ihre Toleranzschwelle für zivile Tote abgesenkt zu haben. US-Präsident Barack Obama hatte im vergangenen Jahr die Regel eingeführt, dass bei Luftschlägen gegen Terroristen der Tod von Zivilisten mit großer Sicherheit ausgeschlossen werden müsse. Diese Regel wurde nun gegen den IS ausgesetzt. Dort sehe man sich nur an die üblichen ethischen Standards der Kriegsführung gebunden.

Die USA und Verbündete wie Frankreich und Großbritannien stehen vor demselben Dilemma wie Israel im Kampf gegen die Hamas: Wie kann eine demokratische Gesellschaft einen völkerrechtskonformen Krieg führen gegen Terroristen, die jegliches Völkerrecht missachten und sich unter Zivilisten verstecken? Da gibt es nur zwei Möglichkeiten: Entweder man lässt die andere Seite gewinnen, oder man akzeptiert, dass in Kriegen unweigerlich Zivilisten sterben, selbst wenn man viel investiert, um das zu verhindern. Westliche Nationen haben das gerade erst in Afghanistan erlebt. Deshalb ist es erstaunlich, dass sie jedes Mal wieder, wenn Israel vor demselben Dilemma steht, so tun, als seien getötete Zivilisten an sich schon ein Beweis für unethische Kriegsführung. Es ist auch bezeichnend, dass sich westliche Öffentlichkeiten für die nun durch US-Luftschläge getöteten Zivilisten in Syrien weit weniger interessieren als zuvor für die in Gaza. Als gäbe es einen Standard, den der Westen nur an Israel anlegt – und dann schnell vergisst, wenn das eigene Land im Kampf gegen Terror steht. Man könnte es Heuchelei nennen.

This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Block title

Cuba: Are Our Days Numbered?

February 14, 2026. Published in La Juventude Rebelde

[T]he media and social networks have deployed an offensive that relentlessly repeats expressions of anti-Cuban euphoria.

Israel: Donald Trump’s Intervention in the Netanyahu Trial Is Unacceptable

February 17, 2026. Published in Israel Hayom

Trump is grotesquely intervening against Israeli democracy and the rule of law.

Egypt: Iran and Washington: A deal Completed or A More Painful Strike?

February 21, 2026. Published in Ahram Online

Japan: Diplomacy between Major Nations and Japan: Create a Unified Core of Mid-Level Nations

February 16, 2026. Published in Nishinippon Shimbun

The greatest challenges to be faced are the relationship with the U.S., our ally, and the relationship with China, our neighbor.

Mexico: The Halftime Show That Enraged President Trump

February 16, 2026. Published in La Razón

Clearly, this year’s halftime show, which Bad Bunny headlined at Levi’s Stadium in California, was one of the most impactful in the event’s history.

Topics

India: How Trump’s Escalation Math Doesn’t Yet Add Up to War with Iran

February 21, 2026. Published in Firstpost

Under present conditions, Washington seeks leverage without entanglement. Restraint persists not from trust, but from calculation.

Egypt: Iran and Washington: A deal Completed or A More Painful Strike?

February 21, 2026. Published in Ahram Online

Germany: Rubio’s Charm Offensive Changes Nothing*

February 20, 2026. Published in Der Tagesspiegel

Rubio's speech assuredly did not signal that American foreign policy had shifted one inch away from its Euroskeptic, nearly anti-European, stance.

Iraq: From Noriega to Maduro: The Logic of Force in US Policy

February 19, 2026. Published in alsabaah

When political legitimacy becomes contingent on recognition by a superpower, populations lose their right to self-determination and democracy becomes a selective tool.

Mexico: The United States: Arms Supplier to Drug Traffickers

February 17, 2026. Published in La Jornada

[T]he U.S. government itself is a major supplier to the cartels that the White House claims to be pursuing with all its might.

India: What’s behind the Layoffs at The Washington Post?

February 17, 2026. Published in Amar Ujala

The Washington Post Guild, the staff union, questioned Bezos' commitment, saying that if he is no longer willing to invest in its mission, the institution needs a steward who understands it.