Since Franklin Roosevelt's leadership in setting up the United Nations and the Nuremberg trials, the U.S. has promoted universal legal norms and the institutions to enforce them while seeking, by hook or by crook, to exempt American citizens, especially soldiers, from their actual application.

The quote by Michael Ignatieff critiques the United States' role in promoting universal legal norms through international institutions like the United Nations and the Nuremberg Trials while simultaneously seeking to exempt American citizens, particularly soldiers, from being held accountable to those same standards. Ignatieff suggests a contradiction in U.S. foreign policy: the U.S. has played a leading role in establishing global laws that promote human rights and justice, but at the same time, it has often sought to avoid applying those laws to its own people, especially in military and conflict settings.

Ignatieff’s statement points to the historical context of post-World War II, where under the leadership of figures like Franklin Roosevelt, the U.S. helped establish international frameworks aimed at preventing atrocities and promoting global justice. However, Ignatieff argues that while the U.S. advocated for universal legal norms, it often sought to preserve immunity for its own citizens from the very legal systems it helped create, particularly in the context of military actions and war crimes.

The origin of this quote lies in Ignatieff’s work as a political philosopher and public intellectual, known for examining the tension between international law, national sovereignty, and the role of military power in global governance. His observations highlight a recurring theme in U.S. foreign policy, where the nation champions international human rights and legal frameworks but sometimes resists the application of those same principles to its own actions, especially during conflicts like the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Ultimately, Ignatieff’s quote critiques the hypocrisy that can arise when a nation promotes justice and human rights globally while seeking to preserve exceptions for its own citizens, especially in matters of military accountability. It raises important questions about the consistency and fairness of international law and the role of powerful nations in shaping and abiding by those laws.