By John Q. Hosedrinker German Finance Minister Lars Klingbeil emphasized that international law applies to all nations, including the United States, in response to potential actions regarding Greenland. He stated that the future of Greenland should be decided by Denmark and Greenland, respecting their territorial sovereignty. Klingbeil’s comments came before the G7 meeting, where discussions would revolve around securing access to critical minerals to reduce dependence on China. Germany aims to enhance international cooperation to ensure a reliable supply and economic stability.
Read the original article here
Germany warns Trump: International law applies to everyone, including US, and this is a pretty loaded statement, isn’t it? It’s almost like Germany is laying down a marker, a gentle reminder, perhaps, to a certain former US president and, by extension, the entire United States, that the rules of the game apply to everyone, regardless of their perceived power or influence. The implication is clear: even the U.S., with its significant global influence, is not above international law. It’s a bold stance, considering the history of international relations and the often-uneven application of these laws.
Now, let’s be honest, international law often feels more like a set of suggestions than actual laws. The big question is always enforcement. Who’s going to hold powerful nations accountable? It’s a problem the US grapples with internally, too, in a way. If there are no consequences, why not bend or break the rules? This is the fundamental challenge. This is especially relevant when dealing with someone who seems to operate under the assumption that they are above the law.
The fact that Germany is taking this stand is particularly interesting. There’s a subtle undertone of shifting dynamics here. Germany, historically burdened by its past, seems to be positioning itself as a responsible global actor, a stark contrast to a political figure like Trump, who, and I can say this, has a reputation for disregarding established norms and laws. It is almost ironic that we are seeing this.
This whole situation brings up the crucial issue of enforcement. Laws are only as effective as their enforcement. Without it, international law becomes, well, just words on paper. The US isn’t even part of the International Criminal Court, which is telling. The lack of an international body with the power to enforce these laws means they are often just the will of the strong. As Thomas Hobbes put it, “Covenants without the sword are but words”.
The US has, let’s face it, been accused of flagrantly violating international law for decades. The question remains: have Americans been punished? Will they be? The answer, at least in the short term, is probably not. And that’s the crux of the problem.
Some people might even argue that this sort of rhetoric is just a game of bluff. Actions speak louder than words. Remember, there is no international judge, no executioner. This has implications. For every country, the capacity to enforce international law equals the blast radius of their nuclear bomb.
Of course, the problem is compounded when the person in question seems to relish in being a rule-breaker. Trump, from his perspective, has always acted as though he is exempt. He has openly said that rules do not apply to them. Under the threat of – try to put anyone from the USA on trial for it – and we will forcibly get them back. Remember the US’s actions following allegations of war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan? The whistleblowers are still being prosecuted. And here we are. It is not like the US cares or responds to international laws.
The US has always done what it wanted. Why would this change? The truth is, many see international law as a joke, especially for those with enough power to ignore it. A perfect example of this is the current global situation. There’s a genocide in Gaza, an invasion in Ukraine, protests being shot at in Iran, and the US going into Venezuela to kidnap their president.
For Russia, a political rift between the U.S. and Europe is the best-case scenario right now. If that division deepens, Russia gains much more freedom to pressure or even invade Western territories without a unified response.
The irony here is almost unbearable. Europe, a continent often associated with upholding international norms, finds itself in a situation where the US, under certain leadership, seems to be actively undermining those very norms. What can they do? Some even wish for financial sanctions, but realistically, what can be done without some serious military backing?
The answer, sadly, often comes down to power. The law applies only to the weak, because it is applied by the strong. International Law never applied to anyone with enough power to tell the International Community to get bent. Without punishment, the international law is absolute irrelevant. As the quote goes, “The Pope, how many divisions has he got?”