The hypocrisy of the West has never been more glaring. Western European countries like France, Germany, the UK and Norway suddenly care about Greenland. They send troops, hold exercises, and make speeches about protecting sovereignty. Meanwhile, when the United States violently intervened in Venezuela, overthrew leaders, and seized resources, those same countries either stayed silent or applauded.
If invading Caracas is acceptable, why is Greenland untouchable? If sovereignty matters, why can America operate anywhere it wants, with no accountability, and the world barely notices? Greenland is suddenly important because it is rich, strategically located, and NATO-aligned. Venezuela is inconvenient, far away, and therefore dispensable. The principle has never been defending law or morality. It has always been defending territory that matters to the West. That is hypocrisy in its purest form.
Venezuela versus Greenland
The contrast is stark. When the United States acted in Venezuela, killed dozens, undermined the government, and imposed sanctions, Europe barely reacted. There were statements, maybe a press release, but no real action. Venezuela simply did not matter.
Then Greenland became the focus. Suddenly a NATO territory, technically under Denmark’s protection, demanded attention. Troops were sent, warnings were issued, and media coverage exploded. The West discovered concern for international law, sovereignty, and self-determination, but only for the territories that serve its interests. That is not principle. That is political convenience disguised as morality.
This selective outrage has consequences. It signals to the world that rules only apply when it suits the powerful. Territories of interest are defended. Others are expendable. Countries watching will understand that principle is relative and selective. That is a dangerous message for global stability.
Dangerous precedents
Greenland sets a dangerous precedent. If some countries can have their sovereignty violated with impunity while others are defended, international law loses all meaning. Smaller, resource- rich, or strategically inconvenient countries are disposable. Important allies suddenly become sacred.
Other nations are paying attention. Russia, China, Iran, and many others can see that intervention is tolerated when the target is weak or irrelevant. They also see that outrage is performative and selective. Countries will calculate carefully whether the world will act before assuming their borders are safe.
This is not abstract. Governments in Africa, Latin America, and Asia notice the hypocrisy. They see selective morality in action. They will act accordingly. Small nations now assume they are expendable unless their location or resources make them strategically important. Powerful nations get protection. That is the reality the West is normalizing.
America gets a pass
Meanwhile, the United States continues global interventions with near impunity. Overthrowing governments, occupying countries for decades, drone strikes, covert operations, all ignored by the European powers now panicking over Greenland. Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria. Little outrage. Greenland, peaceful, NATO-aligned, suddenly triggers moral panic.
Trump’s rhetoric about needing Greenland is absurd and dangerous. It normalizes the idea that superpowers can claim foreign territory under the guise of strategic necessity. America already has bases in Greenland with Danish consent. There is no threat. The West’s panic is purely performative. This is propaganda, not principle.
Europe’s hypocrisy is not accidental. It shows selective outrage is acceptable as long as it benefits allies. It is not about principle. It is about protecting their own interests while pretending to uphold law and order. That is the lesson smaller nations take away. That is why selective morality is destabilizing.
The lesson: hypocrisy as policy
The West enforces rules only when convenient. Sovereignty matters when it serves their interests. Small or inconvenient nations are disposable. Powerful allies are sacred. Every troop deployment, press statement, and NATO exercise around Greenland reinforces this. Law and principle exist only when convenient. Might makes right unless politically inconvenient to admit.
Applauding Venezuela while panicking over Greenland does more than expose double standards. It normalizes selective morality. It signals that intervention is acceptable when convenient and outrage is performative when it suits the powerful. That is the precedent the West is now setting.
Countries around the world are watching. Africa, Latin America, Asia, every government knows that selective outrage exists. They see hypocrisy as policy. They see double standards applied consistently. They will act accordingly. Greenland may seem absurd as a crisis, but it demonstrates the West’s moral inconsistency. Every government, analyst, and voter buying the line is complicit. Rules apply only when convenient. That is hypocrisy. That is selective morality. That is the world we live in today.
The West can lecture, they can issue statements, and they can posture, but the lesson is clear. If sovereignty is defended only when it suits strategic or political interests, then the rules of international order are meaningless. If countries can be punished or ignored depending on convenience, the global system becomes unstable. This is the world the West is constructing, whether it admits it or not. It is selective, self-serving, and dangerous.