Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Abstract ‘Organized hypocrisy’ has been mainly explained in IR by the logic of consequentiality operating against the logic of appropriateness. The literature has largely ignored the role of a third logic, the logic of coloniality, which highlights that organized hypocrisy appears persistently in international relations due to omissions in the field of knowledge: It features a double absence of the ‘other’ on their own normative terms and as a rights‐bearing subject. Pursuing a comparative analysis of EU policies to ensure accountability in the face of grave violations of international law in Russia/Ukraine and Israel/Palestine, this research finds patterned discrepancies, particularly towards Palestine which are explained by imaginations in official EU discourse where Russia, Ukraine and Israel figure in a Eurocentric temporal–spatial relation to Europe, while Palestine is dispossessed of its history, not set into any relationship to Europe and figures as a partially rights‐less subject in official EU discourse.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Daniela Huber (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: