By Desmond Nleya
By now, it should be clear to anyone who truly cares about global justice that most international and regional groupings have become little more than ceremonial clubs.
They exist largely for summits, speeches, handshakes, selfies, and carefully staged photo opportunities for presidents and world leaders because when crises erupt, blood is spilled, sovereignty violated, and civilians crushed under rubble, these institutions suddenly fall silent, paralysed, or selectively blind.
Ironically, even burial societies or small community religious unions often serve a more practical purpose than the so-called global guardians of peace and order such as the United Nations, the UN Security Council, the G7, G20, BRICS, and other multilateral forums.
These bodies repeatedly demonstrate that they are ineffective, selective, and, in many cases, outright useless when it matters most.
Time and again, the world has witnessed these groupings do absolutely nothing during moments of grave injustice.
Recent geopolitical developments only reinforce this reality.
Threats against sovereign states, military interventions justified through vague “security interests,” and open declarations that conflicts are about resources such as oil or strategic positioning expose the hypocrisy at the heart of the so-called international rules-based order.
The pattern is not new. Smaller and weaker nations have long been bullied with impunity, particularly by powerful Western states. Afghanistan was invaded and destroyed under the banner of security. Libya was reduced to chaos in the name of “humanitarian intervention.” Iran has lived under relentless sanctions and threats. Palestine continues to endure occupation, bombardment, and humanitarian catastrophe while endless UN meetings are held in air-conditioned boardrooms.
Resolutions are passed, statements are issued, and condemnations are “noted” and yet nothing changes on the ground.
Civilians, women, and children continue to die while diplomats debate wording.
What is most striking is the selective application of international law.
When Russia invaded Ukraine, Europe and its allies moved with remarkable speed and unity. Sanctions were imposed overnight. Russia was isolated economically, diplomatically, culturally, and even banned from international sporting events. Assets were frozen, travel restricted, and moral outrage dominated global headlines.
Yet when the United States or its close allies engage in military aggression, regime change, or coercive diplomacy, the same international and regional groupings suddenly lose their voice.
There are no sweeping sanctions. No expulsions. No isolation. Instead, there are just mild statements of “concern,” quickly buried under geopolitical convenience.
The contradiction is glaring. The same United States that has invaded countries, supported wars that destabilised entire regions, and openly prioritised strategic and economic interests over international law continues to be rewarded with global leadership roles, including hosting prestigious international events. This double standard exposes the myth that international institutions are neutral arbiters of justice.
This raises unavoidable questions:
What is the real role of the UN Security Council when its most powerful members are the chief violators of international norms?
What purpose do global alliances serve if they cannot protect weaker states from humiliation or aggression?
Where are Russia and China when their allies are threatened or undermined in broad daylight?
Where is collective action beyond carefully worded press releases?
All the world ever hears is that “Country X has condemned the actions of Country Y.” Condemnation without consequence has become the global currency of diplomacy. It costs nothing, changes nothing, and saves no lives.
Yesterday it was Afghanistan. Then Libya. Then Iran. Palestine remains trapped in perpetual crisis. Today it is Venezuela facing relentless pressure and threats. Tomorrow, it could be any other nation deemed inconvenient or strategically valuable. The message is brutally clear: no one is coming to save you. Every country is on its own.
Even European nations who for long convinced they stood shoulder to shoulder with the United States, are now experiencing anxiety as geopolitical threats inch closer to home. The illusion of permanent alliances is fading, replaced by the reality that power, not principle, governs global affairs.
In moments of crisis, international and regional groupings repeatedly reveal themselves as hollow institutions, loud in rhetoric, weak in action, and loyal only to power. Until these bodies are reformed to apply international law equally and decisively, they will remain exactly what they are today: ceremonial, toothless dogs barking selectively, while the strong do as they please and the weak suffer in silence.
Desmond Nleya is a News Editor and journalist at the Daily Times in the United Arab Emirates, as well as an investigative journalist who writes in his personal capacity. The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy or official position of the Daily Times.
