A change is coming, a social shift, for
a young generation with a cynical perception of institutions fed daily by
social media and largely left out of the global conversation, politically and
economically. This moment with the International Court of Justice is likely
another tipping point moving this generation's world view away from the
current, post WWII, world order.
As the war on Gaza approaches 100 days, the death toll is
now reported to be over 22,000 - it drove
international attention to the historical ICJ proceedings. For
Jordan, this week and the consequences it holds could usher in a new era of
domestic, regional and international relations - not urgently but over the next
few years and lasting for a generation. The majority of Jordanian voters are
youth, and the war in Gaza and the international reaction could be their
politically formative moment, just as the Arab Spring and its aftermath was the
formative event for the generation prior.
Three Things You Should Know:
- Two Different Conversations: Since the onset of Israel’s bloody campaign against Gaza, there
has been a war to frame the narrative around Israel’s assault. Clearly Israel
has its own defensive and aggressive messaging.
The Biden White House has attempted its own, dancing around the divide of stating
‘too many have died’ while avoiding mention of a ceasefire. (More bellicose frames come
from media sources such as Breitbart, painting South Africa as an
apologist of terrorism). Needless to say, these narratives are not framed
the same way much of the Middle East, Africa, and Eurasia see the events.
اضافة اعلان
After Russia’s invasion of Ukraine began, an avalanche of
articles questioned why the Global South wasn’t
driven to Ukraine’s defense. Polling at the time showed 75% of Jordanians are neutral
to the conflict and will not choose a position. However, how many people in
Ukraine are following the events in Congo and have taken a position? And what
is the position of the people of Congo regarding the Rohingya of Myanmar? This
is not a lack of solidarity on their part but a focus on more local issues.
These states are often not part of the global conversation, let alone the
decision-making, for global conflict management. Yet they are expected to agree
when there is a consensus on intervention (such as Yemen now, but not a year
ago).
Biden’s recent op-ed comparing Hamas with
Russia was a messaging disaster - not only because of its preaching, pedantic
tone but because of its assumption that the Global South views events the same
way Washington does. For DC, Ukraine and Israel are united as pillars of
foreign policy goals (Kosovo and Taiwan are similarly linked in this group).
But for much of the world, nearby conflict and threats take the spotlight and
don’t have the same web of global order. An exception- from Istanbul to
Lahore to Johannesburg - is Palestine ,
There is a long, repeated note in history of rich vs poor,
colonizer vs colonized, and majority vs minority. Two populations having
different conversations is a well-worn idea, but these months produced two
unusual points: 1. The international criminal court trial where the ‘Start-Up
Nation’ of Israel is accused by South Africa, a prominent voice of the Global
South, of genocide. 2. The role of Iran and its proxies. Where Iran has
expanded its reach, chaos has ensued - Syria and Lebanon as prime examples. The
people of the Middle East are well aware of this, yet the perception of Iranian
hegemony has softened as I pointed out before. This has resulted in the
fusing of Iranian militancy with Arab resistance. This trend should not be
taken lightly and the consequences can be a dangerous pathway to the hearts and
minds of the ‘Arab street’.
- The ICJ and its outcomes:
The dramatic aspects of the case are the echoes of history -
South Africa with its legacy of apartheid, a judge who survived the Holocaust,
and the support of Namibia, itself a victim of an often-forgotten genocide at the hands of pre-war
Germany facing its colonial killer on the other side of the Court. Germany,
having carried out two genocides in the 20th century, now throws itself into
the conversation in what the Global South views as the ‘wrong side of history’.
Germany is clearly on the side of Israel at the Court. The states of MENA
already called Israel’s actions genocide a month ago. These positions will not
be swayed by the legal arguments or the decision. Rather, the action of the
international community will determine whether populations lean into global
activism or dissolve into localism.
The importance of the ICJ case - this symbol of a global system
- is as a ‘make-or-break moment’ for trust by the Global South in objective,
inclusive international institutions. This becomes a moment of prime importance
for small states like Jordan that rely on international institutions. The
threats are the following; at the end of the trial, Jordanians
could 1) Believe that international institutions like the ICJ do not
function 2) Believe that these institutions work but they are too feeble or 3)
Believe that these institutions only work for the West and not the rest.
The ICJ case is a pawn in a war of narratives. Each side is
looking for confirmation bias.
- The Need for a New Western Outreach
Recently, U.S diplomat Henry Kissinger died at the age of
100 - a life which framed the current world order - from the US Great
Depression, through World War II, the postwar construction of international
institutions, and the rise of US global power, with even a book titled ‘World
Order’. Kissinger was the architect of this system more than any other US
Secretary of State and a mentor to generations of diplomats and thinkers. Even
in his final years warning of an isolated Russia, a fight with China, and bemoaning
immigration in Europe, Kissinger looked through the same lens of great power
politics and Realpolitik while underestimating the power of individuals and
technology.
This is a very different India, China, UK, Russia, or US
than Kissinger knew. Millions of these citizens are on TikTok and Instagram
with thousands of followers. Individual ‘influencers’ have more sway than think
tanks and journalists. White House political briefings have fewer viewers than
the average Mr. Beast video on YouTube. Essentially, citizenry is a much larger
actor in international diplomacy than at any point in Kissinger’s life. Power
politics is not just about world leaders of states and industries - Davos and
the World Economic Forum - but also about Joe Rogan, Kim Kardashian, Jordan
Peterson, trending hashtags, and viral videos. Can the ‘rule based order’ keep
up? Imagine the 2003 invasion of Iraq if Iraqis had camera phones and TikTok.
Would it have changed the conversation around the conflict? Ironically,
governments such as in Canada and the US obsess over the optics of domestic
social media, for example inviting influencers to PR events, while the popular
trends in states like Mexico, Turkey, Indonesia, and Egypt don’t figure into
their diplomacy.
My Take: How does all the above affect Jordan? Jordan is an obvious case
study at the moment because of the impact of Gaza, Jordan’s political
modernizations, and the abundance of polling data. Essentially, there is a
generation of young people coming from inequality, unemployment, political
cynicism, and getting their news from social media (no doubt along with that
online mixture of envy, conspiracy, and schadenfreude that infects the world).
They are skeptical of governance institutions and increasingly skeptical of
global institutions. Rather than engage, the global community has not made
successful outreach to them, but still expresses shock that they simply don’t
fall in line.
The world is focused on the International Criminal Court case
because of the scale of violence against Gaza and the drama of the court fight.
While many are anxiously awaiting the decision and what results for Gaza, the
longer term consequence is what happens to that global audience. Will the ICJ
become another institution the youth of the Global South see as impotent,
controlled, or irrelevant?
I would argue that no one is making the case for these
institutions which means that in a decade when these youth are Members of
Parliament, Ministers, writers, mayors, business leaders, and professors they
will have a worldview that is more populist, isolationist, and nationalist than
the postwar order has seen.
Small states, like Jordan, have worked tirelessly to find
themselves a position and role in this global order - Jordan, since the days of
the late King Hussein, has adjusted itself in the region and the wider global
arena to the role of mediator, moderator and a voice for peace. We could say
that constructive engagement in the global order is part of Jordan’s identity.
This role can only be sustained within the frame of the current international
order - an international order that is perhaps also on trial at the
Hague.
However the war on Gaza ends - one thing is clear: Jordan will
have to face a new international stage, a more cynical generation towards the
international community but more active domestically. A clear shift that I see
- not only in Jordan but internationally - is the shift from global approaches
to more local approaches. This is true not just in the Global South, but the
MAGA movement, European populists, and the ‘left behind’ of globalization.
Jordan has to re-invent itself and its role under this new trend as this next
generation prepares for leadership in the future - and elections for new
political parties and a new, inclusive Parliament.
The pillars for Jordan’s positioning previously are the
international ‘rules based order’ and Jordan’s partners and allies that
contribute to Jordan’s development. It is difficult not to see these pillars as
like a dam that is leaking. Like all states Jordan has a social contact with
its citizens and these citizens passionately identify with what is happening in
Gaza and Palestine over all. If the domestic youth identify with Palestine but
feel the international order is resolutely not with them, how does Jordan move
forward?
A lot of blame gets put on youth and
social media. But how are these global institutions, this so-called
‘rules-based order’ reaching out to this young generation? How is it making the
case to globalization’s ‘left-behinds’? It is these institutions and their
defenders that have failed to include these youth who, again, will be our
future leaders. The battle of narratives here is a parallel trial of equal
importance.
Katrina Sammour was first published on Full Spectrum Jordan, a weekly newsletter on SubStack.
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)
