“Under all circumstances, the principles of international law and the UN Charter must be respected. We call for restraint,” she wrote.

Her comments were echoed by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and European Council President António Costa, with Commission Vice-President Teresa Ribera adding that “we need a rules-based world.”

France went a step further with its foreign minister condemning the American operation on social media. According to Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot, Maduro “gravely violated” the rights of Venezuelans, but the military operation that led to him being grabbed “contravenes the principle of non-use of force, which underpins international law.”

  • DandomRude@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    25 days ago

    A rule-based world would require that breaking the rules has the same consequences for everyone.

    However, since the same politicians who are now spouting their empty rhetoric are letting the US and Israel get away with their crimes without any consequences at all, the “rule-based” world they talk about is nothing more than hot air and hypocrisy.

    • plyth@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      24 days ago

      Rules are not laws. When they say rule-based order they imply that they are not bound by international law but only by rules that they can change at any moment.

    • Melchior@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      24 days ago

      That is just insulting. They have send a sternly worded letter! The EU is not that slow…

  • Havatra@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    25 days ago

    Unfortunately, considering the basic human psychology that world leaders are subject to, there is a need for a deterrent with greater power than the temptation. There is always a calculation of “is it worth it”, and it is up to us civilized to ensure the answer is “no” in situations like this. By what means we create this deterrence however, I fear it is always either way too little (just talk) or way too much (military force, aka. war).

    We live in trying times…

  • reddit_sux@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    24 days ago

    There has never been a rules based order, if there was there would never have been:

    1. Vietnam
    2. Afghanistan
    3. Gaza
    4. Venezuela
    5. Iran

    A list of places where US has been involved directly, places where US has been indirectly spreading terror will be miles long.

    Edit:

    1. Iraq