“Gaza is a test by the ultra-wealthy to show the world how they will respond to humanity’s uprising. They intend to bombard us all.”
Kabul 24: These are the words of Colombian President Gustavo Petro at The Hague summit. A statement from the leader of a Latin American country, thousands of kilometers away from Gaza, where no rockets have been fired, no sirens heard, and no ideological conflict with Israel exists.One might ask: Why should Colombia be concerned about the bombing of Gaza?
This statement is not merely a political stance; it is a structural interpretation of the emerging global order. Petro believes that Gaza is not just a Palestinian-Israeli conflict zone but a “laboratory experiment” to reveal how the global order will respond to the uprising of the powerless. In other words, Gaza is a metaphor for the world of tomorrow.
For some, what is happening in Gaza is seen as Israel’s natural response to the October 7 attack. This perspective has taken hold in parts of Iranian public opinion and Western media, particularly among conservative liberal currents.In Iran, the reasons differ slightly.
The postponement of public demands and widespread dissatisfaction has led some to view the Gaza issue and the condemnation of Israel as merely an ideological conflict, evoking the consequences of tension-driven policies. As a result, public opinion suffers from moral fatigue, reducing a humanitarian issue to a political or governmental one.If this is merely a “border conflict” or a “fight against terrorism,” why then do hundreds of thousands of people—political figures, academics, athletes, and artists—take to the streets in the heart of Paris, London, Sydney, and New York, waving Palestinian flags and chanting “Ceasefire Now”?For many observers, this level of reaction cannot be explained solely by human empathy or the humanitarian catastrophe.
It seems a new global consciousness is emerging—one that views Gaza not just as a tragedy but as a sign of the dawn of a new era.In the post-1945 international order, despite structural inequalities, principles such as respect for national sovereignty, the distinction between civilians and combatants in armed conflicts, human rights, and the legal frameworks of the United Nations served as a regulatory foundation.
However, over the past decade, these frameworks have faced unprecedented erosion.Under Donald Trump’s presidency, the United States withdrew from international agreements without global consensus, imposed unilateral tariffs, and openly prioritized national interests over multilateral principles.
Russia, through its invasion of Ukraine, violated the principle of territorial sovereignty, demonstrating that the use of force remains possible, even in Europe.
Israel, in its response to Gaza, has crossed the boundaries of proportional retaliation, engaging in actions that many human rights organizations argue require independent international investigation.
From the perspective of political sociologists, these events signal the world’s entry into an order where “exception” becomes the “rule.” This phenomenon, termed the “state of exception” by Giorgio Agamben, reflects a shift in global dynamics.
The common thread in these cases goes beyond aggressive foreign policy. What is emerging is a new model where power can impose costs without accountability.
This model, as Manuel Castells describes, is based on “networks of power without a center of accountability.”In this new paradigm: international institutions have been weakened; global public opinion lacks sufficient tools for direct influence; and official narratives have been replaced by platforms and media with pre-determined algorithms, without necessarily leading to greater accountability of power structures.
In this emerging landscape, a form of existential anxiety has arisen among societies:If global rules are no longer enforced, what guarantees the security of our future? It is within this context that Gaza transforms from a local issue into a global symbol.
Thus, protests against Israel in many parts of the world are not merely opposition to a specific government or even outrage over famine and genocide. They are a reaction to the broader mechanism of power taking shape in the 21st century.Ultimately, the global protests over Gaza are less about ideological loyalties and more a reflection of a pervasive moral consciousness. This consciousness seeks to offer a symbolic response to the decline of global rules, the powerlessness of international institutions, and the growing dominance of raw force.
