"Whataboutism" #3: Historical wrongdoings
Trudeau letting in an unlimited number of Ukrainian refugees begs the “what about” question, why isn't he doing the same for Afghans, Syrians, etc., refugees? Draw your own conclusions!
"What about" questions are far from ambivalent. Moral clarity requires disruptive conversations—uncomfortable ones. Here's an example -- the virtues of U.S. force projection. Based on their actions Democrat and Republican presidents seem to have a fondness for bombing poor people in distant lands. Pundits love it. Western foreign policy establishments love it. Western mainstream media love it.
Yet it's utter insanity. If bombing Americans is wrong, then bombing the people of Yemen is wrong. No one disagrees with condemning Russia's invasion of Ukraine. However, ignoring that the U.S. has been violating other nations' sovereignty—Chile, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Argentina, Iraq, Iran, Brazil, Angola, Zaire, Cuba, Libya, Afghanistan, China -- to name a few— is hypocritical.
Ethical standards must be universal. The Ukrainian resistance and its civilian victims are given very sympathetic coverage by Western media. This raises the "what about" question of why there hasn't been a comparable response when the victims aren't white, Christian Europeans -- or when the aggressor is the U.S. or a U.S. ally? The double standards and resulting hypocrisy coming out of Washington, and the West, is obvious!
A recent example: President Biden asserted that "nations have a right to sovereignty and territorial integrity." He is 100% on point! However, the U.S. is also the only government to formally recognize Israel's illegal occupation of Syria's Golan Heights and Morocco's annexation of the entire nation of Western Sahara, both seized by force in defiance of the United Nations. See any hypocrisy?
Another example: Despite Biden's decree on October 7, 2021, Washington didn't condemn Turkey's attacks on Syrian civilians sheltering in Rojava. Blatant hypocrisy, or what? Self-interest, all dressed up?