• @Badass_panda@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      32 years ago

      That’s how it normally works, yes… particularly if the country in question is not a signatory to the ‘international law’ in question.

          • @zephyreks@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            12 years ago

            That domestic policy supercedes international law? That’s literally been the entire argument for sanctions against China: that their domestic policy violates international law and that under the rules-based international order someone needs to do something about it.

            • @Badass_panda@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              12 years ago

              Sorry I am finding it very difficult to follow your argument.

              Can you explain what “international law” you believe US sanctions to have broken?

              • @zephyreks@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                12 years ago

                Other way around: the US is projecting international law on domestic issues that, as we’ve already established, should be governed by domestic policy before falling to international law.

                As we’ve already established, condemnation and punitive actions against a country for unilateral domestic policy decisions doesn’t make sense, even if they are in violation of international law.