In the midst of escalating tensions in Gaza, Palestinians are mourning the loss of their loved ones, particularly children, in recent bombings. The grief and devastation experienced in the region has raised poignant questions about the validity and fairness of the so-called “rules-based international order.”
Historian Vijay Prashad has pointed out what many perceive as a glaring double standard in international reactions to conflicts. “Had it been Ukraine,” he suggests, “the U.S. media would amplify the tragedy to condemn the aggression. But when it comes to Palestine, the response is notably subdued.” This disparity has led many to question whether Palestinian lives are valued less on the global stage.
The supposed “rules-based international order” often championed by Western powers is increasingly being viewed with skepticism. Critics argue that this order serves more as a tool for advancing certain geopolitical interests rather than upholding universal principles of justice and human rights.
In Gaza, the cries of mourning families seem to echo unheard in international corridors of power. The destruction and loss of innocent lives challenge the credibility of a global system that claims to protect the vulnerable and oppose aggression.
As the conflict continues, there’s a growing call for genuine impartiality and humanity in international responses to crises. Many are urging world leaders and media outlets to acknowledge and address the suffering in Gaza with the same urgency and empathy afforded to other conflicts.
The situation in Gaza serves as a stark reminder of the need for an international order that truly upholds the rights and dignity of all people, regardless of geopolitical interests. Until such an order is realized, the concept remains, as some suggest, more rhetoric than reality.
Reference(s):
Nobody believes in 'rules-based international order' anymore
cgtn.com
