The Institutionalisation of Eurocentric Bias!
Ishtiaq Ahmed
Bradford: Many around the world are rightly asking: What proactive role have international institutions such as the United Nations, the Security Council, and NATO played in preventing Israel from carrying out what has widely been described as a relentless campaign of genocide in Gaza, along with its broader strategy to expand and entrench its Zionist ambitions in the region?
Countries like Iran, Lebanon, and now Qatar appear to be facing the consequences of this expansionist agenda, yet all of this has unfolded under the watch of institutions that were established to uphold global peace and security.
Where is the proportional intervention from these so-called guardians of international law?
Why such glaring indifference, especially when compared to the swift and coordinated global response seen in the context of Ukraine?
Yesterday, Mohammed Ajeeb CBE, a seasoned politician and sharp commentator on international affairs, shared the following reflection:
“The rogue state of Zionist Israel has mocked and shredded international law with brazen contempt and arrogance. Yet only last night in New York, the UN Security Council issued a belated condemnation after Israel struck a sovereign nation, Qatar, without provocation or warning.
This response highlights the growing impotence and irrelevance of institutions founded after World War II, primarily by Western powers, with the stated purpose of preventing future wars and protecting weaker nations from the aggression of stronger ones. Sadly, these institutions have been repurposed to legitimise illegal wars, sow destruction, and facilitate the plundering of resources, all while enriching the arms industry.
Read More: https://thepenpk.com/gazas-starving-children-a-genocide-world-watches-in-silence/
The decline of global economies and the emergence of new alliances, particularly those led by China, now pose a serious threat to the unipolar world order historically dominated by the United States. This shifting dynamic has created new global instabilities, pushing America and its allies into a state of desperation. In response, they appear increasingly willing to use their surrogate, Israel, as a frontline actor to dominate the Middle East and project influence further into South and Southeast Asia.
However, this ambition appears more wishful than realistic. The cracks in the edifice of the American empire are widening. In such uncertain times, the risk of rash decisions, especially under erratic leadership like that of Donald Trump, could lead to catastrophic confrontations with a fast-emerging multipolar world.
Until then, Zionist Israel and imperialist America will likely continue their strategy of demonising, dehumanising, and humiliating Arab and Muslim nations with impunity, so long as those nations remain divided and unable to mount a united defense of their sovereignty and dignity.”
I was genuinely moved by Mohammed Ajeeb’s post and felt that it required a substantial supplementary considered response of my own to unpack the inherent malaise that surrounds these institutions role vis-a-vis the developing world which does not naturally fit into the European -centric purpose the institution referenced above, in particular, the Muslim world .
It is important to recognise that these institutions were established in the aftermath of World War II, primarily to safeguard European interests, with the United States serving as the principal financier and power broker. This largely has not changed.
Read More: https://thepenpk.com/situational-france-vows-to-recognize-palestine/
The broader membership of the UN was designed to create an illusion of inclusivity, offering developing nations a false sense of security. In reality, their protection has always been a secondary concern, if considered at all.
The Security Council, in particular, was structured to wield military power in defense of its permanent members, who have often been the main instigators of global conflicts. It intervenes primarily when the interests of its members are directly threatened.
The Council perpetuates the illusion that its role is to de-escalate conflicts and protect weaker nations, yet historical evidence shows that it has acted decisively only when the strategic priorities of its members were at stake.
While the Western world has continued to build and strengthen institutions that serve its long-term geopolitical and economic agendas, many leaders in the Muslim world have remained preoccupied with personal power and luxury, often at the expense of their own nations. Vast sums, derived from public coffers and natural resources, have been siphoned off to fund lavish lifestyles in the very West whose dominance they claim to oppose.
As a consequence, the Muslim world has failed to develop equivalent institutions of its own and remains wholly dependent on Eurocentric structures, which are inherently biased against its interests.
We now have reached a time and place in the geopolitical scenarios created by the western powers , where the Muslim world is gasping for oxygen fully knowing that oxygen cylinders and the valves are fully controlled by the institutions that they look to for survival.
The author is a British citizen of Pakistani origin with a keen interest in Pakistani and international affairs.
The article is the writer’s opinion, it may or may not adhere to the organization’s editorial policy.
“Ishtiaq Ahmed’s analysis slices through the hypocrisy of Eurocentric institutions with precision — exposing how the UN and its sister bodies were never designed to protect the weak, only to safeguard Western dominance. His call-out of Muslim rulers’ complicity makes the piece even more powerful: until the Muslim world builds its own institutions, it will remain suffocated by the very structures that claim to protect it.”