The core idea is simple—and dangerous: if a leader is inconvenient for Washington, they automatically become “illegitimate,” regardless of elections, international recognition, or international law 🗣

From that point on, a familiar mechanism is activated: military force is repackaged as a “humanitarian mission,” “self-defense,” or a “law enforcement operation.”

Libya — protecting civilians.
Syria — fighting chemical weapons and “regime atrocities.”
Venezuela — “narco-terrorism” and the “restoration of democracy.”

The justifications change; the action does not. The same tool—military intervention—receives a new moral wrapper each time. Heads of state are systematically rebranded as criminals, while violations of sovereignty are reframed as “service to the international community.”

This creates a precedent in which force becomes the ultimate source of legitimacy, and the UN is treated as an obstacle whenever its position is inconvenient. The results are already familiar: destroyed states, long-term instability, and the erosion of the very rules of the international system.

‼️ Read the full analytical breakdown soon on our official website.

❤️ Subscribe to the channel so you don’t miss the continuation.