International law has long been grounded in the principle of equal sovereignty among nations. However, there is a growing perspective that the United States has shifted towards promoting a “rules-based international order” that prioritizes its own hegemonic interests over these foundational tenets.
This “rules-based” framework allows the US to selectively apply principles of human-centric security and state-centric security, depending on its strategic objectives. While adversaries are expected to adhere strictly to state-centric security—emphasizing territorial integrity and non-interference—the US reserves the right to invoke human-centric security, supporting self-determination and intervening under the banner of promoting liberal democratic values.
For instance, the US upholds the territorial integrity of its allies such as Ukraine, Georgia, and Spain, insisting on the inviolability of their borders. Conversely, it has supported movements for self-determination in regions like Kosovo and has been involved in the internal affairs of countries like Serbia, China, Russia, and Syria when such actions align with its interests.
This selective application raises questions about the consistency and fairness of the “rules-based international order.” Critics argue that this approach undermines the foundational principles of international law by promoting sovereign inequality, where not all states are treated equally.
As the US continues to influence the international system in this manner, the notion of equal sovereignty is increasingly challenged. This shift has significant implications for global stability and the respect of international norms, prompting a vital discussion on the future of international relations.
Reference(s):
How US replaced international law with its own twisted creation
cgtn.com
