Resolution
efforts to the
Palestinian-Israeli conflict had traditionally featured a
limited number of external state actors, mainly the likes of Jordan and the
United States. This is no longer the case. The current war in Gaza has reshaped
the conflict into a global one, effectively inviting more actors than ever
before, including global powers.
اضافة اعلان
Of those,
Russia and China stand out. Considering their increasing, yet careful
involvement in the Palestine-Israel conflict and in the region, a scramble for
support is underway. This competition takes different shapes, involving push
and pull factors to compete against the United States for increased influence.
For its part,
the West is attempting to hold onto its key regional partners in the Middle
East and prevent Russia and China from increased infiltration in the region.
The United States, for instance, is enhancing its military support and
presence, and it continues to invest in political and economic development. But
its recent veto to the proposed
UN resolution that would have demanded an
immediate ceasefire in Gaza is destabilizing its appeal among its Arab
partners.
On the other
side, Russia aims to dethrone the United States as the “guarantor” of
international laws, relying heavily on propaganda to eclipse its own troubled
track record in the Middle East. As for China, its investments in mega
projects, such as the Belt and Road Initiative, is driving its increased appeal
in the region, albeit debt diplomacy remains a legitimate criticism.
It would not be an overstatement to say that local and regional conflicts are now global by necessity, especially considering the breadth of strategic interests at stake.
The scramble
for increased influence is not limited to the Middle East, nor is the
globalization of regional conflict exclusive to the current iteration of the
Palestinian-Israeli conflict. The events taking place in
Nagorno-Karabakh,
Niger, Mali, and Taiwan – to name a few, demonstrate similar patterns. It would
not be an overstatement to say that local and regional conflicts are now global
by necessity, especially considering the breadth of strategic interests at
stake.
De-regionalization and convergence of value
systems
There are
some similarities between the globalization of regional conflict and Robert
Gilpin’s fourth law of capitalism. As power matures, as appeal increases, and
as the perceived benefits begin to decrease, global powers are compelled to
compete for frontiers elsewhere in the world.
Meaning, just
as the most advanced economies need more avenues to maintain healthy returns,
the most influential states need more avenues to exert their influence. Thus,
the West and East camps are competing for regional support, offering political,
economic, and security assistance to forge their lines of influence.
Here, it is
important to ask how these lines are drawn. Are they formed organically, or are
there elements of forced demarcation? When considering how support is provided
along with the factors contributing to its preservation, this competition
appears calamitous.
One of the
dangers of this competition lies in promoting perceived differences in societal
value systems. This particular danger becomes more disconcerting when
considering the globalization of regional conflict and the de-regionalization
and convergence of value systems.
Social media
platforms play a pivotal role in the convergence of values. The constant flow
of information contributes to shifting attitudes, even in complex contexts,
such as the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. A report by Makana 360 finds a
noticeable shift in global opinion, moving from a 54.6 percent pro-Israeli
sentiment in the first week of the conflict to a 67.5 percent pro-Palestinian
sentiment by the end of the first month.
This shift
was also quite visible among Western societies.
Americans and Western Europeans
demonstrated the biggest shift, with nearly 20 percent. The US alone was
responsible for nearly one third of the 615 million posts throughout the first
month of the conflict, taking an increasingly pro-Palestine tone as the weeks
went by. It did not take long for this shift to materialize on the ground.
During the conflict’s fifth week, over 1.1 million people marched in solidarity
protests in major cities like Washington, London, Paris, Brussels, Berlin, and
Barcelona.
Data from the
World Values Survey offer further insights on the convergence of values. When
exploring a set of emancipative and postmaterialist values among states allied
with the West camp in comparison with others allied with the East camp, the
analysis shows, on average, a mere 0.048-point differential in between these
societies.
Meaning, just as the most advanced economies need more avenues to maintain healthy returns, the most influential states need more avenues to exert their influence. Thus, the West and East camps are competing for regional support, offering political, economic, and security assistance to forge their lines of influence.
The largest
differential noted, however, involved religion-related values. Interestingly,
such values tend to be hijacked to offset the increasing convergence and to
focalize their implications on the blurred lines of support. But is religion
alone sufficient to smoothly carve out lines of support? The short answer is
no. It is, however, a hook that is used to acquire attention.
For instance,
while Arab societies’ interest in
Russian President Vladimir Putin and his
Middle East policy peaked with the ongoing conflict in Gaza, according to data
from Google Trends, they had generally become more interested following his
response to the burning of the Quran incident in late June. In addition to
videos disseminated online, billboards were seen around Beirut with pictures of
him holding a Quran with a tagline that translates into “the protector and
defender of religions”.
As
religion-related sentiments grab attention, the provision of political,
economic, and military support vindicates the hook. However, this type of
support provision forges clientelist relations. Such relations are based, by
and large, on the band-wagoning of state and parastate actors with the
benefactors, and by extension, on acquiring societal support in a similar
fashion.
But none of
that is sustainable. For an approach that amplifies perceived differences in
societal value systems and leverages a two-level, support-dependent,
clientelist measures, what happens when values conflux and support provision
decreases? The potential ramifications of these probable conditions, especially
in the context of globalized conflict, are grim at best.
Mohammed Abu Dalhoum is the president of MENAACTION and a senior research analyst at NAMA Strategic Intelligence Solutions.
Disclaimer:
Views expressed by writers in this section are their own and do not necessarily reflect Jordan News' point of view.
Read more Opinion and Analysis
Jordan News
.jpg)
.jpg)
