Full Breakdown
Shifts in International Law and Foreign Policy: The Cases of Germany and Australia
3/8/2026, 1:13:21 AM
The Erosion of the Rules-Based Order
Recent actions by the United States and Israel against Iran have prompted significant shifts in the foreign policies of Germany and Australia, raising questions about their commitment to international law. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz's recent visit to the White House highlighted a departure from traditional diplomatic norms, as he refrained from criticizing the legality of the US-Israeli strikes on Iran, which many experts argue violate international law. Merz expressed a sense of "dilemma" regarding the ineffectiveness of international legal measures against Iran, indicating a potential recalibration of Germany's foreign policy priorities.
Domestic Reactions in Germany
The response to Merz's approach has been mixed within Germany. Adis Ahmetovic, the foreign affairs spokesperson for the Social Democratic Party (SPD), emphasized that while preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons is crucial, it does not justify military action with unpredictable regional consequences. Conversely, opposition figures like Jürgen Trittin from the Green Party criticized Merz for undermining Germany's security interests by disregarding international law. The far-right Alternative for Germany party, represented by Tino Chrupalla, distanced itself from the US-Israeli actions while also critiquing Trump’s foreign policy.
International Implications and Criticism
Merz's alignment with the Trump administration has drawn criticism from European allies, particularly Spain and the UK, who felt abandoned during discussions about military cooperation against Iran. Spanish Foreign Minister José Manuel Albares labeled Merz's conduct a betrayal, contrasting it with the solidarity shown by Germany in past conflicts. This situation has led to accusations of double standards, as the German government appears to soften its commitment to international law in the context of Iran while maintaining a firm stance against other nations, such as Russia.
Australia's Position on International Law
In Australia, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese's government has similarly shifted its stance on international law following the US-Israeli strikes on Iran. Previously a strong advocate for a rules-based global order, the government has opted for a more passive approach, stating that the situation is primarily a matter for the US and Israel. This change reflects a broader trend within Australian politics, where support for military actions aligned with US interests has taken precedence over adherence to international legal standards.
Bipartisan Shift in Australia
The Australian government's decision to support the strikes on Iran has not faced significant dissent at senior levels, despite some voices, like backbencher Ed Husic, labeling the actions as outside international law. This bipartisan shift indicates a growing acceptance of a new global reality, where traditional norms may no longer hold sway. Andrew Hastie, a prominent Liberal voice, articulated this sentiment, suggesting that the post-World War II order is effectively "defunct."
Conclusion: Navigating a New World Order
Both Germany and Australia are grappling with the implications of their evolving foreign policies in the face of aggressive actions by the US and Israel. As these nations navigate a complex international landscape, the commitment to a rules-based order appears increasingly tenuous, raising concerns about the future of global diplomacy and the principles that have historically guided international relations.
