US Reaction to Wars in Ukraine and Gaza in Comparative Perspective

Abstract

The article undertakes a comparative examination of how the United States has responded to the wars in Ukraine and Gaza, situating these reactions within broader debates on international law, humanitarian principles, and the contested legitimacy of the “rules-based international order.” Both conflicts are marked by occupation, widespread civilian suffering, and repeated breaches of humanitarian law, yet Washington’s stance has diverged sharply. In Ukraine, Russia’s invasion has been cast as a direct assault on global stability, prompting sweeping sanctions, unprecedented military aid, diplomatic mobilization, and strong moral condemnation. In Gaza, however, U.S. policy has consistently shielded Israel from accountability, employing vetoes or dilutions of United Nations resolutions and sustaining arms transfers despite mounting evidence of humanitarian catastrophe.

Drawing on realist, liberal internationalist, and constructivist perspectives, the study argues that these differences are not accidental but reveal a selective application of norms shaped by strategic interests, alliance commitments, identity narratives, and media framing. By foregrounding civilian suffering and ethical concerns while maintaining scholarly rigor through verifiable sources, the article highlights how such double standards undermine international law, erode trust in global institutions, and intensify the divide between Western states and the Global South.