Afrasianet -  Sobhi Ghandour - I wondered, while I was following the news of the Russian military operations in Ukraine, how the Western countries, and the United States in particular, want the peoples of the Arab countries to view this dangerous development that the world is witnessing now?!

That is, is it based on international legitimacy that rejects the military invasion of any country by another country! But where was this international legitimacy when the United States and Britain invaded Iraq! Or when the military intervention of NATO took place in Libya!

Or when Israel invaded and occupied southern Lebanon in 1978 and then invaded and occupied its capital in 1982, and there was no international condemnation of Israel nor the imposition of any international sanctions on it!

Then what has this international legitimacy done since 1948 in support of the Palestinian people who were expelled from their land and have been subjected to a lot of displacement, killing and massacres, and even this international legitimacy does not allow the exercise of the right of resistance in the texts of its reference against the Israeli occupier of the land and all the Palestinian homeland!

Why is there a “halal invasion” and “a forbidden invasion”?! All kinds of military invasions of other countries are condemned, regardless of the justifications and excuses for them, but this global political and media mobilization against the Russian invasion of Ukraine has not been witnessed before against “Atlantic” or Israeli invasions.

Terms that have been used for decades in the Arab region for "big budget" and "double standards" are now reviving at the global level as a whole.

Why was it also a “legitimate right” for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to invade Yemen and to be supported by Washington in that, under the pretext of Saudi national security on the border with Yemen, while Russia had no right to do so on its border with Ukraine?!

And why does Turkey, a member of NATO, have the right to invade the lands of Syria and Iraq and bomb and occupy some of them, and Russia does not have the right to interfere in neighboring Ukraine, which NATO plans to annex to it and put a “missile shield” in it directed against Russia, as happened with other countries Close to the Russian border in Eastern Europe!

And why was the world at the beginning of the sixties of the last century on the brink of a global war between the communist and capitalist camps because of Moscow’s placement of missiles on the island of Cuba near the American border, and where this dangerous international crisis ended with the withdrawal of these Russian missiles and the continued presence of the American military base “Guantánamo” on Cuban soil Although there is a communist regime in it, and it continues now for more than 60 years! Why did Washington have the right to object to Russian missiles on its borders, while Moscow does not have the right now to object to the deployment of missiles and "NATO" on its borders!

The world was and will remain as the example of the jungle, the strong eat the weak, and the strongest prevail in the struggle of the lions of the jungle!

And now the Arab region is once again divided against itself between supporters of this international party or that, without realizing that the outcome of the “struggle of the powerful” always ends at the expense of the weak, and that freedom from dependence on any foreign party is the criterion for true independence and the extent of freedom of national and national decision.

Was this not the justification for the establishment of the “non-alignment and positive neutrality bloc” during the “cold war” era between the “NATO” and “Warsaw” alliances, when the two poles of the world at that time struggled in the arenas of the “third world countries” and there were no direct confrontations between them for half a century, Under the umbrella of the "Yalta Agreement", which set the red lines for each pole and was respected by both parties despite the sharp differences and contradictions between them at various levels!

Will the Ukraine crisis end with the victory of one pole over another through a direct military confrontation between them?

I do not see that this is possible to happen now, nor is it what is required or desired from Moscow or Washington. But will the world bear an open-ended crisis that will reflect economic and commercial woes on both the West and the East?

I doubt this in a world that is currently economically exhausted by the repercussions of the Corona epidemic and its sisters. Perhaps the only way out of this crisis, after the end of the Russian military operations, is a joint European/Chinese mediation that saves Washington and Moscow’s “face” and lays the foundations for a new international order based on the “Quartet”, deals with many international crises, preserves the interests of the poles and respects Their red lines.

As for Ukraine, it is possible to agree on a new confederal constitutional formula for it, similar to the case of Germany after World War II: “Eastern” with Moscow and “Western” with Washington! God knows