Rupture in governance-oriented global system under US leadership

The international response to the conflict in Ukraine and Gaza reflects a profound and long-term trend in global politics. It exposes a rupture in the governance-based global system established under the leadership of the United States. The influence of China and the repercussions of the conflict in Ukraine are reshaping international relations in unexpected ways.

Many analysts are explaining that a multipolar world is emerging. Indonesia and Turkey, both countries with significant Muslim populations, are strongly criticizing the Israeli bombardment in Gaza. Indonesia and Turkey have taken a firm stance on this issue along with Brazil, South Africa, and other countries in the global south.

Brazil's President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has referred to Israel's actions in Gaza as 'genocide.' On November 6, 2023, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa made a similar statement. South Africa withdraws its ambassador from Israel. Meanwhile, tensions between the United States and Israel are now evident.

President Joe Biden has cautioned that Israel is losing international support in its campaign against Hamas. On the other hand, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has publicly rejected the post-war Gaza plans of the United States.

The news of this division has been shrouded in a kind of veil for so long. Occasionally, reports indicated that the strong bond between two friends had strained due to the extensive loss of civilian lives in Gaza. Those who are invested in democracy held a conference. In that conference, Biden criticized the hardline Israeli government and stated that Netanyahu needs to change his behavior.

Otherwise, relations with the current Israeli government are gradually becoming strained. UN Secretary-General António Guterres cannot be described as a revolutionary. However, this 73-year-old former Portuguese Prime Minister seems to have taken on a mission to overturn the global order under American leadership like a revolutionary Che Guevara.

In his inaugural speech at the Doha Forum last week, Guterres did not mention the name of the American President, but he strongly criticized the U.S. decision to veto the proposal for a ceasefire in the UN Security Council. During that event in Doha, Guterres stated, "I had requested the Security Council to exert pressure to avert a humanitarian disaster, and I had reiterated my appeal for a declaration of a human war cease-fire. What Guterres said there means that if there is a massacre in Gaza, Joe Biden is responsible.

Certainly, some have already begun to label President Joe as a perpetrator of genocide in Gaza, where nearly 18,000 Palestinian civilians have already lost their lives. This number is twice the number of people killed in the genocide in Srebrenica 28 years ago. Therefore, it is indeed a matter of grave concern.

Over 800 experts on the Gaza conflict have warned with concern that Israeli forces could engage in genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. These experts highlighted the potential severity and danger of an Israeli attack and presented strong evidence of the Israeli leaders' incitement to violence in various statements. However, they expressed that the current situation is even more alarming than anticipated, with the present circumstances being much more terrifying than they had initially assessed.

If an international court impartially judges the incident and determines its temporary verdict, then President Biden will undoubtedly be held accountable for aiding and abetting in the genocide. Such a verdict would label Biden as a more heinous offender than Donald Trump in terms of the appalling crime. There is no reason to be surprised, as Biden has faced intense criticism in recent weeks.

Despite delays, he has cautiously signaled to Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu about the loss of public support due to the Gaza war and mentioned the indiscriminate bombing in Israel as indefensible.

The use of indiscriminate bombs is a direct act of war crime. And it is evident, like daylight, that the Gaza bombardment with indiscriminate bombs has taken place with full-fledged American support and the use of American military equipment.

The palpable disdain towards the United States at the Doha Forum was so evident that bypassing it seemed entirely impossible. Even a traditionally allied nation like Jordan expressed dissatisfaction. Jordan's Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi openly commented on the disappointment caused by the U.S. veto at the United Nations.

Safadi stated that Israel believes it can easily get away with violence and destruction. A country is disregarding the entire world and the entire world seems powerless to stop that country. He further commented that the United States is the country that, rather than holding Israel accountable for its continuous misconduct, is providing it with impunity. In Doha, a majority of people seem to be unanimous in not trusting the Americans to play a mediating role in peace discussions.

Although the United States has not been formally designated as an intermediary in international peace, China has begun to extend its hand in this matter. In a panel discussion, Dr. Huwai Wang, former Counselor of the State Council of China, emphasized the importance of China's involvement in the United Nations peacekeeping forces, specifically regarding the Gaza issue.

A resonance has been heard at the Doha Forum, suggesting the end of the era of American dominance. The term 'multi-polar,' signaling the conclusion of U.S. hegemony, may resonate strongly with both Russia and Iran. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir Abdollahian have made significant statements online in that forum. In the context of intervention in the Gaza situation, the failure of international community consensus has become a major topic of debate in the Doha Forum.

In his remarks, United Nations Secretary-General Guterres has stated that the horrific events in Gaza have demonstrated the failure of the global community, proving the breakdown of the world order articulated by the United States in the post-Second World War era.

Guterres has underscored the urgency of reforming the security architecture in the post-Second World War era. He expressed the significance of addressing the vulnerabilities and antiquated nature of the current system. According to him, this system, initiated nearly 80 years ago, is proving to be ineffective and outdated.

In a tone of disappointment, the United Nations Secretary-General has stated that the Security Council has completely broken down in terms of geopolitical divisions. In a remarkable twist of history, the United States, the European Union, and Britain have disrespected the inclusive global order by empowering Netanyahu to act as he pleases.

The Gaza War will create opportunities for groups such as Hayat Tahrir al-Sham in Syria, similar to the Kurdish-controlled Syrian Democratic Forces. We may witness a decline in the power of national forces against the rise of armed groups like these. The emergence of non-state and semi-state entities will be unfortunate for the Arab League if such organizations gain prominence. The outcome could be catastrophic.

This will lead to the resurgence of various groups based on national, religious, and sectarian ideologies. The division and fragmentation of the all-encompassing states in the Middle East will occur. Changes in regional dynamics will be inevitable, with an increase in Iran's regional influence. We can expect a shift in the nature of regional conflicts, with urban warfare intensifying. Additionally, we may witness different forms of conflicts such as proxy wars, psychological warfare, and the proliferation of propaganda and disinformation. Simultaneously, the Gaza War will bring about a fresh discussion on the strategic and policy significance of the Middle East in the context of international politics.

In recent years, China and Russia have been building their influence in the Middle East, while the United States has been distancing itself. The Gaza conflict could be a result of this policy shift, as the United States considers reevaluating its involvement. In a recent interview with The Jerusalem Post, former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger stated, "We were committed from the beginning to prevent the victory of the Arabs."

Similar to Kissinger, the current U.S. Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, has stated on the first day of the ongoing conflict that "whatever we can do to ensure Israel's security, we will do." Much like the anti-Palestinian coalition formed by Germany, France, and the United Kingdom in 1948, which marked the beginning of widespread opposition to Palestine, there is now a similar support for Israeli settlers establishing settlements. On the other hand, Germans are chanting slogans in support of Jewish leaders who advocate for Israel's superiority, saying, "Berlin is with you." Similar echoes of this slogan can be heard in France and the United Kingdom as well.

It is no coincidence that white supremacists have united against Palestine. They have established a united front in various places, including Namibia, Tanganyika, Rhodesia, South Africa, Algeria, Tunisia, Kenya, and other locations where white supremacists have gained prominence. The reason behind their unity is their strong adherence to extreme racial ideologies.

As Israel is a supremacist state, they will naturally align with those who share similar ideologies. Therefore, it can be argued that There is a rift in the US-led world order which is accountable for the world's instability. However, the post-war global situation can take unexpected turns, and only time will reveal the outcome.

Author: Researcher and Columnist.