“…And feebling such as stand not in their liking Below their cobbled shoes.”

William Shakespeare

"The policy of double standards” is a phenomenon when judgment of the same actions taken by different subjects depends on the relations of each of the subjects with the judge. In so doing, actions of “friends”, loyal to the judge, are justified whereas the same actions of “foes” are blamed and considered inadmissible.

In international relations this policy takes the shape of accusation against unwanted persons for violation of principles, conventions, obligations, panhuman values, human rights and international law meanwhile absolutely analogous own violations and violations made by allies are ignored.

After the collapse of the USSR and disintegration of the Warsaw Treaty the USA and NATO endeavor to play the first fiddle in the world policy and take decisions to mount military strikes on those countries, which are not in liking of Washington. The death of thousands of people in Yugoslavia, Libya, Afghanistan and Iraq, suffering of millions are not taken into account. Criminal prosecution against an adherent of an exotic religion will provoke a storm of indignation in the USA while the public opinion there will be absolutely indifferent to the tears of those who lost their relatives in the houses exploded by Chechen combatants.

Due to the same reason the Western mass media call Iraqis and Afghanis attacking the US troops “terrorists” as distinct from separatists fighting against the government troops in the Russian Northern Caucasus called “rebels” or “freedom fighters”. International observers at elections usually recognize that the election complied with the international standards provided the ruling regime is pro-Western but find lots of violations provided the ruling regime or an election winner is not pro-Western. For example, the victory of M. Saakashvili at the election in Georgia was called a triumph of democracy (The Financial Times, 05.01.04) but the victory of A. Lukashenko in Belorussia – a result of ballot rigging (The Financial Times, 13.04.08). In so doing, in both bases “an extraordinary high” percentage of votes for the candidate was referred to as the proof.

After the USSR collapse the Western states demanded to abolish the practice of oil supplies to post-Soviet countries at lower (“non-market”) prices. After “the orange revolution” in Ukraine that changed its political vector towards rapprochement with the West the increase of oil prices for this country was called in the report of US Defense Secretary R. Cheney in 2006 “the policy of blackmail” and attempt to undermine the economy of the foreign country. .

The West European states welcomed the referendum on severance of Montenegro from Serbia and recognized its results however they are categorically against the conduct of similar referendums in Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic.

Highjackers who directed the plane to the World Trade Center have been recognized terrorists. Meanwhile the American militaries who bombarded Serbian hospitals (The Washington Post, 09.02.00) haven’t been recognized military criminals, and in a majority of cases were even supported by the world community.

The European Union and certain other international organizations supported dispersion of demonstrators standing for protection of the Bronze Soldier and even called this action an internal affair of Estonia (("Postimees", 03.05.07). However, at the same time these organizations repeatedly condemned the forceful measures applied to disperse “the Dissenters March” ("ANNews", 16.04.08).

These and many other examples are a clear proof of the “double standard” use in the Western policy. “The double standards” are visible in the war on terror when the terrorists are divided into “friends” and “foes”. The European community gave no one judgment of the act of terror that killed President of the Chechen Republic Akhmad Kadyrov. For example, certain Western media outlets expressly claimed that this act was not an act of terror. Such exculpatory policy creates an illusion of scott-free terror and provides for favorable conditions for terror escalation. The hypocrisy of the policy pursued by the USA and Western countries generates an environment of mistrust in the international arena. Moreover this policy is a serious obstacle to provision of overall response to the global treats such as the international terror.