By derimot*no-Spartakus-Terje Alnes- Sunday July 27, 2025

The threat from the rules-based world order. The US deliberately avoids talking about international law because it itself does not recognize large parts of it. It follows the "rules-based world order" that secures its own national interests.

Nothing illustrates the breakdown of international law more clearly than the atrocities we are witnessing in Gaza. There are no limits to the evil that the Israeli authorities are committing against the Palestinian civilian population.

This is happening without the so-called “ world community ” intervening; those who have the real power to stop the ongoing genocide are doing nothing. On the contrary, the USA, and major European NATO countries, continue to support Israel with weapons, so that the criminal state can continue its grotesque murders.

Where is NATO’s “ humanitarian intervention ” now when we really need it? The term is a bluff. It was first used when NATO, in violation of international law, attacked Yugoslavia in 1999. For the first time since World War II, Norway participated in regular hostilities, with 6 fighter jets.

During the “ humanitarian ” NATO bombing, the attacking alliance deliberately targeted targets such as factories, bridges and power supplies. Subsequently, Amnesty International issued a report that stated that NATO had violated the international law of war by deliberately targeting civilian targets.

In 2005, the UN endorsed the principle of “ Responsibility to Protect” (R2P), which gives the international community the obligation to intervene if the civilian population is subjected to abuse. It was this principle that the US and NATO abused when they falsely attacked Libya in 2011. Jens Stoltenberg placed Norway in the first rank of bombing nations. 6 Norwegian F-16 aircraft dropped almost 600 bombs over the country, most of them on random targets!

14 years later, the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs advises Norwegians against visiting the country , the security situation in Libya is still dangerous and unpredictable. Did we hear anyone talk about the responsibility to protect?

Both examples show how the West, with the US and NATO at the forefront, has made a decisive contribution to the destruction of international law. Israel participates in NATO's " Mediterranean Dialogue ", a partnership forum that is intended to contribute to security and stability in the entire Mediterranean region. Thus, they are protected from " humanitarian intervention ". We only recall Jens Stoltenberg's statement from October 12, 2023, when he, as NATO Secretary General, assured that " Israel does not stand alone ".

In the new anthology " Stop the Arms Race ", Sverre Lodgaard, Senior Researcher Emeritus at NUPI, has an enlightening chapter on international law. Lodgaard explains in an exemplary manner why the United States today no longer refers to international law, but instead consistently uses its own concept of " the rules-based world order " to legitimize its actions. " A rules-based order ", writes Lodgaard, is " an order that includes international law as the United States applies the rules, i.e. in a way that is consistent with its own national interests."

The US deliberately fails to talk about international law because it itself does not recognize large parts of it. The US cannot criticize China's actions in the South China Sea with reference to international law, because the US has not signed the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. The US also stands outside large parts of humanitarian law: the International Criminal Court, the protocols to the Geneva Convention on the International Law of War from 1977, the Landmine Convention, the Cluster Munitions Convention, etc.

Along with all other NATO states, the US has of course also not signed the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, which is a legally binding ban on nuclear weapons. Since NATO's military doctrine includes the first use of nuclear weapons, the very strategy of the NATO alliance is now incompatible with international law.

International bodies that attempt to enforce international law, such as the International Criminal Court (ICC), are subject to punitive actions by the US. The court's employees have their bank accounts frozen and their freedom of movement restricted. This is a direct attack on the enforcers of international law, carried out by “ our closest allies ”. The USA is simply a threat to international law.

Meanwhile, Norwegian authorities are quietly closing their doors to this rogue nation. At times, it seems as if Norwegian politicians themselves do not understand the difference between genuine international law and  a rules-based world order . “ Red is for a rules-based world order, built on international law and national sovereignty  … ”,  wrote Bjørnar Moxnes when he distanced himself from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022. SV’s Erik Solheim is said to have been the first to refer to the rules-based world order from the rostrum of the Storting, as early as 2010.

Jens Stoltenberg is someone who has frequently referred to this world order. At the NHO’s annual conference in 2023, he spoke to an enthusiastic Norwegian press corps (and a few hundred business leaders): “ The rules-based world order of democracies is being challenged by authoritarian forces that want a more power-driven world ”, he warned.

The reality is that the US  rules-based world order,  which Norway is increasingly endorsing, is a threat to genuine international law. If we are to warn against authoritarian forces, the warnings must also include states that refer to this false version. As it stands now, brute military force is the order of the day.

Terje Alnes

The post is shared from Spartakus

The text represents the author's opinion, not necessarily that of www.derimot.no.