A lawless world

Ukraine, Gaza, Iran—these invasions by Russia, the US, and Israel have violated the top priorities of international law, which are the prevention of war and crimes against humanity. There has been no legal justification for the transgressions.
States do not follow international law if it clashes with their national interests.

But how could anyone have imagined that aggression by so-called friendly states would affect the global economy and take the war into people’s homes? For instance, many Asian countries are affected as they have inadequate cooking gas supplies and petrol for their cars. With barely 60 days of petrol stock left, India is in a worse position than China (90-110 days).

Violators have included the American superpower and important regional military powers like Russia and Israel. When two members of the United Nations Security Council break international law, they show how excessive and unaccountable power makes the world a most dangerous place.

For example, Israel has used hunger as a weapon of war in Gaza, like Russia in Ukraine. Washington has threatened death and destruction all day long in Iran. Evidently, the US, Israel, and Russia have replaced the principle of the rule of law by “might is right” in the international system.

Apparently, these countries believe that international law is irrelevant to their conduct on the global stage when it comes to the use of military force. Their unchecked warfare shows that international law is struggling to restrain the powerful.

Retaliatory Iranian attacks on American embassies

Retaliatory Iranian attacks on American embassies in Gulf countries including Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates—which are not participating in the conflict—have also been transgressions, but they have not lessened American or Israeli wrongdoing.

By supporting or failing to condemn the violations because of their national interests—defined largely by dependence on the US or Islamophobia—some countries have corroded international law and have shielded the invaders from accountability.

When Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the international condemnation from Europe and most of Asia was loud and clear. But the double standards of most European countries who have sermonised about universal values are exposed by their muted response to US and Israeli aggression and the killing of civilians in Gaza and Iran.

Only France, Spain, and Norway have highlighted the US’ breach of international law in Iran. Every Russian, American, Israeli, or Iranian attack on civilians as well as energy and desalination plants has disproved the existence of international law as the indispensable framework for global conduct.

China and India abstained from condemning Russia’s invasion of Ukraine while preaching that “all countries deserve respect for their sovereignty and territorial integrity.”

Bejing and law of the jungle

Now, Beijing warns that “the law of the jungle” prevails and has blamed the US for attacking Iran without providing evidence of any threat posed by Tehran’s nuclear and missile programmes to US security. China has also highlighted illegal military actions by the US and Israel against Iran as the root cause of the Strait of Hormuz’s obstruction.

India, which is threatened by an expansionist China’s threats to its own turf, has done neither of these things—or come up with a peace plan, which Beijing is working on. At another level, the principle of sovereignty, implying a state’s control over its territory, has been violated by Russia in Ukraine and the US in Iran.

Moscow has justified its scorched-earth aggression in Ukraine in the name of reconquering a country that seceded in 1991 when the former Soviet Union collapsed, although post-Soviet Russia recognised its statehood. Donald Trump, meanwhile, continues to cast covetous eyes on Greenland and Cuba—while offensively declaring that Canada should be the 51st state of the US. Trump’s boast that his “own morality” is the only limit on his global powers frightens the world, given how destructive he appears to most countries.

Washington’s dismissal of the rules-based order as being “founded in naivete or gauzy abstractions” should warn Delhi that it couldn’t care less about the Indo-Pacific, where China is the main threat to the territorial sovereignty of many Asian countries. In fact, Trump wrote off India by calling for a meeting with China in a G-2 last November.

Delhi’s call to Tehran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz will not raise India’s stature in Trump’s eyes. India’s credibility as an economic partner of West Asian countries, where US embassies have been attacked by Iran, rested on its apparent respect for the upholding of international law. There is scant evidence of that respect at the moment.

India should note that energy-hungry Asian friends are facing economic crises as the US and Israel continue to infringe international law. The Philippines has declared an energy emergency. Neighbouring Sri Lanka has introduced a four-day work week. In Bangladesh, which imports 65% of gas from Qatar, some facilities have already shut down.

Additionally, India’s fertiliser sector could be heading for a production shortfall because it relies on West Asia and the Strait of Hormuz for fertiliser imports. A fertiliser shortage could further trigger a food crisis as seeds must be planted at a climatically favourable time.

A country’s credibility and reliability are indispensable for global security. India and other middle powers can only gain political and economic weight if they stand their ground on the necessity for international law instead of keeping mum as ‘false friends’ violate it and throw the world into severe economic and social crises.

A world without international law provides no mechanism for accountability. It endangers the sovereignty and survival of any state and portends harrowing political and socio-economic consequences. To prevent such tragedies, international law must survive.

The writer is a founding professor at the Centre for Peace and Conflict Resolution

Disclaimer: The views expressed are the author’s own and do not reflect the official policy or position of Financial Express.