US 'Laws of War' Apply Only to Unfunded Nations
When the Financial Times muses on 'America, the western hemisphere and the laws of war,' one might expect a deep dive into historical interventions or the legal gymnastics required to justify constant military aid. Instead, they offer a paywalled meditation on a concept that, for Washington, often boils down to 'rules for thee, but not for me.' The consistent pattern of the U.S. providing billions
in military aid without conditions, even as allies commit alleged war crimes, suggests the 'laws of war' are more like suggestions—especially when Rep. Mark Green (R-TN), who received $29,000 from AIPAC in 2022-2024, can confidently block arms sale conditions to Netanyahu's government. How many 'last warnings' does a modern military campaign get before its chief financier admits the 'laws of war'
are simply not being applied? One might wonder if the Financial Times would dedicate similar column inches to Cuba's adherence to international norms or Venezuela's procurement of advanced weaponry. The critical difference, of course, is that neither of those states enjoys the bipartisan, deep-pocketed lobbying efforts that shield certain alliances from genuine accountability. Accountability, it
seems, is only for those without a dedicated PR and congressional influence machine.