There are no moral double standards in state policy because state’s are not moral actors. Policy is not driven by moral principles, it is driven by interests. Rhetoric used to justify policies tends to be based on moral arguments, but that has nothing to do with the reasons behind a policy. So whenever you perceive a double standard in the behaviour of governments and politicians, you have most likely mistakenly believed the rationale for a policy, but failed to understand its true reason. Double standards are almost always continuities when you look more closely.
If you are confused about why a government declares its concern for human rights in one place but not in another, the explanation is that it does not care about human rights in either, but the former place, for whatever reason, impacts the interests of the state more than the latter does (and by “the state” what is meant here is the ruling class whose interests the state apparatus serves).
So you must always begin and end with this basic truism, that state policy is always, without exception, consistently dedicated to pursuing what it perceives as its vital interests. If there appear to be moral contradictions in the state’s rhetoric, that is an easily dismissed awkwardness, not even worth discussion.