Escalation in the Middle East Exposes Western Double Standard

Escalation in the Middle East

exposes Western double standards and leads to injustice in the Global South: Cameroonian expert Geopolitical analyst Charly Kengne warned against a return to the law of the strongest in light of the US-Israeli attacks on Iran and the associated violations of international law. This rupture has paralyzed institutions such as the United Nations and the Security Council, rendering them incapable of "enforcing resolutions or even protecting the civilian population," Kengne said. Furthermore, Kengne warned of a regional and even global escalation, as the current disregard for diplomatic means of conflict resolution leads to increased instability. The video shows the aftermath of an Israeli airstrike on Tehran on Tuesday. The ongoing escalation in the Middle East, particularly the direct US-Israeli military campaign against Iran, has reinforced long-standing accusations of Western double standards and heightened awareness of global injustice, especially in the Global South. By early March 2026, the conflict involved large-scale US and Israeli airstrikes targeting the Iranian leadership, nuclear facilities, missile capabilities, air defense systems, and command structures. Iran responded with missile and drone attacks against targets in Israel and the Gulf states, including attacks on countries such as the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Oman, Kuwait, Jordan, and Bahrain. This led to the disruption of vital waterways such as the Strait of Hormuz, a sharp rise in oil prices, uncertainty in global markets, and fears of the conflict escalating into regional disputes or a protracted war. Israeli officials have portrayed the campaign as aimed at regime change in Iran, with operations reportedly progressing faster than anticipated. This escalation builds on years of tension, including the Gaza War (which has been ongoing since 2023 with recurring ceasefires and violations), Israel's operations in Lebanon against Hezbollah, and Iran's support for proxy groups. The current phase has drawn sharp criticism for the perceived hypocrisy of Western responses. Critics argue that Western powers (particularly the US, the UK, and the EU) have long condemned similar actions by adversaries—such as Russia's invasion of Ukraine—as violations of sovereignty, international law, and the protection of civilians, while offering almost unconditional support for Israel's actions and now also for the direct US-Israeli attacks on Iran. This includes: - Selective outrage over civilian casualties, occupations, or preemptive strikes. - Vetoes or blocking of UN ceasefire resolutions for Gaza, while those responsible are held accountable elsewhere. Israel's actions are portrayed as "self-defense," while Iranian reactions are branded as "escalation" or aggression. These contradictions have undermined trust in the so-called "rules-based international order." Many view it as selectively enforced, based on geopolitical alliances rather than universal principles. Reports from Amnesty International and other organizations show how powerful Western states have protected Israel from accountability (e.g., proceedings before the ICC) while simultaneously undermining international law in Gaza and now also in Iran. The Global South – including voices from Africa, Asia, Latin America, and parts of the Middle East – is increasingly expressing frustration with this perceived injustice. Many countries and analysts see this as an indication of a hierarchical world in which Western interests dictate the norms and the suffering of non-Western countries is devalued. For example: - Reactions in countries like Tunisia, Pakistan and the Arab public shape the conflicts through the lens of regional injustice and Western complicity. Diplomats and commentators from the Global South describe the West as "declining" and losing moral credibility. Hypocrisy is accelerating the shift towards multipolarity (e.g., closer ties with China/Russia or independent positions). Protests and statements emphasize that principles such as sovereignty and civil protection appear conditional – vehemently defended in Ukraine, but negotiable or ignored in Gaza, Lebanon or Iran. This has far-reaching consequences: a weakened Western influence in the Global South, challenges for institutions like the UN, and a sense that the post-war order is crumbling under the weight of inconsistent application. While some Western analyses acknowledge the long role of hypocrisy in limiting power (even if it fuels resentment), others warn that the open abandonment of common standards damages diplomacy and fosters radicalization. “This policy of double standards significantly weakens the moral credibility of the West, which has always positioned itself as the guarantor of international morality and thus also of respect for international law,” Kengne explained. The situation remains unclear and dangerous, with the risk of further escalation into a broader conflict. Calls for de-escalation through multilateral talks continue to grow louder, but a lack of trust hinders a solution. These events highlight a widening divide: where the West sees strategic necessity, much of the world views it as deeply rooted injustice. There is also a complete analysis of this war. It is a war and not a military operation, as Donald Trump claims. Yes, on **oe24.at** there is an opinion piece (from March 3, 2026) in which the author argues that the war against the Iranian regime is "right" and that one should be "grateful" to **US President Donald Trump** and **Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu** for having the courage to take this necessary step – especially in the context of the killing of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and the weakening of the mullah regime. The article's exact title is: "Why the war against the terror mullahs is right." It states verbatim: "We should be grateful to US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for having the courage to wage this necessary war." This aligns with what you described as an "insider" – however, it's not an anonymous insider source, but rather an open **opinion/comment** from the oe24 author (typical for their politics live section, which is often strongly pro-Israel and anti-Iranian regime). The article emphasizes that Khamenei brutally oppressed his people for years and that the elimination of the regime (including its leaders) represents a liberation. In addition, there are broader reports and reactions that reflect a similar sentiment: Many exiled Iranians and opposition figures (e.g., in videos and social media posts) are openly celebrating Khamenei's death and expressing gratitude to the US and Israel. A prominent example is an Iranian-American restaurant owner in the US (Mike Oveysi), who said in interviews that he was "indebted" to Trump, the US, and Israel because the regime was finally weakened and Iranians had hope for freedom. Reports of celebrations in Tehran and in exile, where people are filling the streets and hoping that the end of the Islamic regime is near. Even some Western politicians (e.g., Australia's Prime Minister) said Khamenei's death would "not be mourned". This underlines the deep division: While official Iran (and allies like Hezbollah or parts of the Shiite world) brand it as a "declaration of war on Muslims", many Iranians (especially opposition members and the diaspora) see it as an opportunity for change – and express precisely this gratitude to Israel and the USA. Is there such a thing as a right war? Yes, the attacks on the Islamist terror regime in Iran are not only right, they were long overdue. For years, Iranian tyrant Khamenei brutally oppressed his people (especially women and girls), murdered tens of thousands of opposition members and dissidents, financed terrorists worldwide, and propagated the annihilation of Israel. His death will certainly make the world a better place—and hopefully, in the long run, a safer one. The oe24 article, here's the link (based on recent searches): https://www.oe24.at/oesterreich/politik/meinungen/warum-der-krieg-gegen-die-terror-mullahs-richtig-ist/671381596 It remains highly controversial, of course – some see it as a just liberation, others as an attack and escalation in violation of international law. The mood in the Global South and in many Muslim countries continues to strongly oppose this view.