Western Hypocrisy

The Russian invasion of Ukraine has triggered a humanitarian crisis. Thousands of Ukrainians are fleeing from their towns and cities as urban warfare is massively damaging critical civilian infrastructure. With government institutions unable to function properly, the risk of starvation, infection, and physical and mental health issues for the Ukrainian population has increased manifold. Response from Washington, London, Berlin, Paris, Brussels, and other European capitals was quick. They condemned Russian aggression and enforced economic sanctions on Moscow. Since the beginning of the crisis, the West provided military and financial aid as well as political backing to Ukraine. Moreover, Western media continues to broadcast unprecedented praise for the Ukrainian resistance and highlighting the sufferings of Ukrainians. Neighbouring countries are accommodating/hosting refugees and making all-out efforts to scuttle the Russian advance.

While witnessing such a swift response to the sufferings and human rights violations of Ukrainians, one wonders why the Kashmiri and Palestinian cause has not elicited the same favourable and supportive response from Western governments and media. For the last 70 years, people of Illegally Indian Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJ&K) have been resisting forced occupation. And yet, those calling for the immediate halt of Russian advancement in Ukraine and deeply concerned about the gross human rights violations and alleged atrocities committed by Russian troops, are tight-lipped when asked about the atrocities committed by India in IIOJ&K. For the last 67 years, every day, the state of Palestine has been shrinking, its territory is being encroached by the Israeli government and illegal Jewish settlers, but those, whose eyes flared with anger and outrage over Russian annexation of Crimea and the recent advances in Ukraine, have been indifferent or complicit in this brutal occupation.

In 1947, when the United Nations called for the partitioning of Palestine, Palestinians outrightly rejected the proposal. However, in 1948, the Jewish community of Palestine unilaterally declared the state of Israel by forcefully consolidating occupation of Palestinian territory and massacring unarmed men, women, and children, destroying more than 500 villages, and vigorously deporting 700,000 Palestinians from their homes. This was illegal, but the claimants of human rights imposed no sanctions on the illegal state of Israel, nor was anyone threatened with a military response to this grave violation of international law. Similarly, the powerful West ignored the unlawful annexation of East Jerusalem and Golan Heights by Israel in 1967 and 1981, respectively. To date, Israel continues its illegal annexation of Palestinian territory, with Zionist organisations like the Jewish National Fund (JNF) supporting this annexation and illegal settlements. Interestingly, JNF fund collection is exempted from tax in countries like the US, UK, Australia, and Canada.

Kashmir is another classic example of the West’s duplicity and inhuman indifference to the miseries of Kashmiris who are struggling for their inalienable right to self-determination, which was guaranteed to them by the comity of nations (United Nations) in 1948. While referring to the issue of Jammu and Kashmir, Western leaders elusively restrict themselves to the ‘hope of an end to violence in the region’ and nothing more, with no condemnation of state-sponsored brutalities and human-rights violations.

Although the history of Indian atrocities in IIOJ&K, including forced disappearances, staged encounters, extended curfews, limited access to the outside world, use of pellet guns etc., is long enough for the world to open its eyes, yet there is no meaningful response from Western capitals and the self-proclaimed champions of human rights. The revocation of Articles 370 and 35A of the Indian constitution which granted special status to the IIOJ&K is analogous to the annexation of the disputed territory. Article 35A barred all outsiders, including Indian nationals from other states, from settling and claiming government jobs to maintain demographic balance in the region. However, since its revocation in August 2019, many non-Kashmiri Indians have been granted domicile to increase the Hindu population in the Valley and snatch the demographic advantage from the Muslim community. This is again a blatant violation of international law and universal human rights in an internationally acknowledged disputed territory. But since the people of IIOJ&K are held captive by a country that is a large market for exports and considered a ‘strategic ally’ for curtailing China’s rise; therefore, the powerful West continues to tolerate its atrocious activities.

The overt but illegal annexation of Kashmiri and Palestinian territories by India and Israel, respectively, and the muted Western response vis-Ă -vis their hullabaloo in case of the Ukraine war highlights the contradictory standards of the sanctimonious West towards upholding international law. This proves that when international law aligns with Western interests, upholding so-called ‘international law and human rights’ in their true spirit becomes necessary, otherwise, it is business as usual.

The writer is a Researcher at the Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies (CASS), Islamabad, Pakistan. He can be reached at [email protected].

Image Source: Social media users draw parallels to expose West’s hypocrisy. Kashmir Media Service. (2022). Retrieved 13 June 2022, from https://www.kmsnews.org/kms/2022/03/03/social-media-users-draw-parallels-to-expose-wests-hypocrisy.html.


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

Debunking the S-400 Shield: Lessons from the India-Pakistan Conflict

Air defense has always been a central aspect of warfare. In South Asia, the phenomenon carries immense significance due to compressed reaction times. In this context, one of the most-hyped systems is the Russian-made S-400, touted by New Delhi as a one-stop solution to counter aerial threats from both Pakistan and China.
The 2025 conflict between India and Pakistan marked an important chapter in testing the S-400 technology. The conflict began on May 7, when India attacked what it alleged were terrorist targets in both Pakistani-held Kashmir and Pakistan proper, using drone and missile strikes. The conflict lasted for four days, culminating in a U.S-facilitated ceasefire. However, the brief conflict debunked a lot of the myths regarding the S-400 technology.
First, India claimed that the mobile S-400 would be able to control Pakistan’s airspace. In contrast, Pakistani aircraft continued to operate freely, according to official briefings by the Pakistani military. Although the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) aircraft were in their own airspace, they were still within the air defense range.

Read More »

The Air War of May 2025: Every Kill Verified

On 7 May 2025, 114 combat aircraft clashed in what has been described as one of the largest beyond visual range (BVR) air engagements since WWII During the 52-minute aerial battle triggered by India’s Operation Sindoor, traditional visual confirmation of kills became difficult. Missile impacts occurred at unprecedented ranges from 160 km to 190 km, often beyond the horizon, while claims and counter-claims continued to spread rapidly across social media platforms, amplified by unverified facts and AI-produced imageries. Amid this torrent of conflicting claims, determining what actually happened was as disputed as the battle itself.
Amidst this fog of confusion, Pakistan’s clear and unambiguous claims backed by published evidence as well as openness to independent verification provided a welcome breath of clarity. As the prevalence of BVR battles increases and the spread of disinformation continues to outpace verified data in shaping both domestic opinion and international perceptions

Read More »

May 2025: The Largest BVR Engagement in South Asian Air Warfare

The tale of how the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) and the Indian Air Force (IAF) entered the era of Beyond Visual Range (BVR) air combat spanned decades before it came to its culmination on the night of 7 May 2025. For almost 50 years after partition, the PAF and IAF engaged each other in close-distance dogfights. Pilots would often recognize the tail markings on the fighter aircraft they were attempting to shoot down with their short-range guns and heat-seeking missiles. As such, all aerial engagements during the wars of 1965 and 1971 were conducted within visual range. The technological enablers for BVR engagements and corresponding doctrines did not develop in South Asia until the 2000s.
In BVR air combat, the first one to see, lock on, and fire their missiles wins the engagement. Initially, the IAF had the ‘First Look, First Shot’ advantage. PAF’s fighter aircraft were capable but carried missiles with limited range, hindering effective long-range engagements

Read More »