• Badass_panda@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      That they can issue court orders to companies that do business in their territory?

      They … they know…

      • zephyreks@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That domestic policy supercedes international law? That’s literally been the entire argument for sanctions against China: that their domestic policy violates international law and that under the rules-based international order someone needs to do something about it.

        • Badass_panda@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Sorry I am finding it very difficult to follow your argument.

          Can you explain what “international law” you believe US sanctions to have broken?

          • zephyreks@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Other way around: the US is projecting international law on domestic issues that, as we’ve already established, should be governed by domestic policy before falling to international law.

            As we’ve already established, condemnation and punitive actions against a country for unilateral domestic policy decisions doesn’t make sense, even if they are in violation of international law.