From Syria to Ukraine: How the U.S. plays by two sets of rules

We support our Publishers and Content Creators. You can view this story on their website by CLICKING HERE.

The U.S. supports Israel’s actions in the Golan Heights while condemning Russia’s actions in Ukraine, highlighting a clear double standard in its foreign policy.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared the 1974 Israel-Syria separation of forces agreement invalid, citing the collapse of Syria’s government, and seized control of the Golan Heights under the guise of national security.
The U.S. Department of State backed Israel’s actions as “necessary security measures,” despite concerns over escalating violence and regional instability in Syria.
Russia views the U.S. stance as hypocritical, noting that while Washington condemned Russia’s actions in Ukraine as “illegal annexation,” it supports Israel’s territorial expansion under similar justifications.
The so-called “rules-based international order” is selectively enforced to advance U.S. strategic interests, undermining its credibility on the global stage.

The United States appears to be following one set of rules when it comes to the Middle East, but sticks to another when it comes to Eastern Europe.

Political analyst Nadezha Romanenko highlighted this double standard in an op-ed for Russia Today (RT). She began with the recent declaration of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that the 1974 separation of forces agreement between Israel and Syria is no longer valid after the ouster of former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. The Israeli leader argued that since Syria’s internationally recognized government no longer exists, prior treaties with Damascus are no longer binding,

“I directed the IDF [Israel Defense Forces] … to seize the buffer zone and the commanding positions nearby,” Netanyahu said. “We will not allow any hostile force to establish itself on our border.” (Related: Israel continues to unleash hell on Earth, with 250 new airstrikes across Syria.)

Central to this issue is the Golan Heights, legally recognized as Syrian territory but occupied by Israel since 1967. Netanyahu pointed out that following the collapse of Assad’s government, Tel Aviv can now bomb Syrian airfields, seize ports and expand its territorial occupation under the guise of national security.

The U.S. Department of State quickly backed Israel’s position, labeling its actions as “necessary security measures” in a volatile region. But Romanenko pointed out that Netanyahu’s declaration sets a dangerous precedent, suggesting that international agreements can be discarded whenever a government changes due to force. She ultimately warned that Israel’s actions are likely to escalate violence in Syria and provoke further regional instability.

Russia in Ukraine is aggression, but Israel in the Golan Heights is security?

Washington’s endorsement of Tel Aviv’s action in the Golan Heights highlights a glaring double standard in U.S. foreign policy. When Moscow responded to the 2014 ouster of Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich by supporting Crimea’s reunification with Russia and autonomy for eastern regions, the U.S. vehemently condemned these actions as “illegal annexation” and “imperialist expansion.”

Despite the collapse of Ukraine’s legitimate government at the time, Washington insisted that Kyiv’s sovereignty and borders remained intact, and all pre-existing agreements still applied. But fast forward to 2024, and the U.S. now supports Israel’s seizure of Syrian territory under almost the same rationale.

Tel Aviv’s ambitions are framed as being driven by security and defensible by law, but Russia’s actions in Ukraine are dismissed as “imperial aggression.” While both Russia and Israel justified their actions based on national security concerns, Washington only accepted that of the Jewish nation – its close ally.

Romanenko pointed out in her RT op-ed that this selective enforcement exposes the hypocrisy of the so-called “rules-based international order,” which is truly based on advancing U.S. strategic interests. International law is applied strictly to adversaries while allies are given a free pass.

Russia will view this as confirmation that the West’s legal arguments against its role in Ukraine were always hollow, she wrote. Power, not law, defines the modern international order, and Washington’s selective enforcement of rules proves that the U.S. prioritizes its own interests over consistent principles or moral high ground. By endorsing Israel’s territorial seizures while condemning Russia’s moves in Ukraine, the U.S. has obliterated any remaining credibility on the international stage.

Watch this footage of Israeli tanks and armored vehicles being deployed to Lebanon and the Golan Heights following the ouster of Syria’s Bashar al-Assad.

This video is from The Prisoner channel on Brighteon.com.