The Hill Discovers 'Dangerous Precedent' When Israel Isn't the Victim
The mainstream narrative, as delivered by The Hill , frets over Israel's potential recognition of Somaliland, suggesting it would embolden secessionist movements and destabilize the region. This humanitarian concern over 'dangerous precedents' is truly touching, considering the same outlets rarely apply such rigorous moralizing to Israel's own historical actions. One might recall a certain 1948
event, or perhaps the post-1967 occupations, where 'self-determination' for one group conveniently meant displacement and subjugation for another. Instead, we are treated to hand-wringing about international law by pundits who consistently ignore it when Israel is the aggressor. How many 'dangerous precedents' has the geopolitical landscape absorbed from Israeli 'facts on the ground' over the
decades? Yet, now , the recognition of a self-declared state is deemed a perilous step. It appears 'dangerous precedents' are only dangerous when they don't serve a particular geopolitical agenda.