“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.”
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.
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.
They are clearly in the denial phase. That rules-based world ceased to exist years ago, and in this new order, the EU is a target of major military powers. Do something, you idiots!
Uh, but they call us bellicists when we try to rearm…it hurts so much…
Do something, you idiots!
I wish that too.
But unsure what we/ they can do at this point. Especially since most big decisions are being blocked by a veto. They are reaarming,sort of implementing Draghi report, and preparing maybe for a new fourth tier majority led EU.
The Danish, Greenlanders & allies, are rightfully very worried about Trump’s next target, Greenland. That’s apart from the plans and meddling that The Heritage Foundation has for dismantling the EU.
Could be after the weekend “they” come with something better.
A unified army. It’s that simple. National armed forces can be retained to fulfill various constitutional requirements for logistical, support, and other tasks, and a unified army can be created, as was done with the euro or similar initiatives, by combining the armies of those who wish to join, with the rest gradually joining. It would have to include intelligence and counterintelligence services and French nuclear technology. If you think they’re worried about Denmark, read the German Chancellor’s statements about Venezuela.
EU Battle Groups existed up until 2021, now there is the EU Rapid Deployment Capacity — it has 5000 personnel on paper. First proposal in 1999 was 50k. Frontex is formally just a border patrol, but it has become more and more militaristic in the recent years. Take these two a make them the core of an European Army. But most importantly put them under political control from Brussels! They need to be accountable to the European Parliament.
All mayor EU armies operate with NATO standards. We have the so called Framework Nation Concept where smaller nations already operate under a „framework nation“ that has logistics and other infrastructure capabilities (e.g. NL uses DE tanks). These principles of „pooling and sharing“ should be adopted with the European core army as well.
Framework Nation Concept
Other examples of integration are: The German-Netherlands Corp, The UK Joint Expeditionary Force, The Nordic Defence Cooperation, Joint defense R&D, and common defense procurements.
Yes, iiuc, that’s what the four tier Europe is about…(You gov). Also many Nothern Armies are integrating, the south not so much.
Lemme guess, they’re gonna send a sternly worded letter?
That is just insulting. They have send a sternly worded letter! The EU is not that slow…
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…
There has never been a rules based order, if there was there would never have been:
- Vietnam
- Afghanistan
- Gaza
- Venezuela
- Iran
A list of places where US has been involved directly, places where US has been indirectly spreading terror will be miles long.
Edit:
- Iraq
I’d say Iraq is missing on the top of that list.
Removed by mod
This “rule-based world” doesn’t exist, and it never existed. An acceptable international order can only be guaranteed by an equilibrated balance of might between the different powers.
We truly live in starship troopers…
Removed by mod
They themselves don’t respect them
What is this supposed to mean?
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
