I have a simple question for you.
If a group of troublemakers and a group of decent people live in your neighborhood and a fight breaks out between them, whose side would you take?
I hope your inclination would be towards the decent people, because their high morals and exemplary conduct would have won your heart. It's something that no amount of effort from troublemakers can ever achieve.
On the other hand, the behavior of the troublemakers would leave you discontented in your heart, and you'd fear that only the law of the jungle would prevail in your neighborhood if they gain dominance. You'd fear that it'd be equivalent to eventually destroying the entire community. Therefore, supporting the troublemakers would be an undesirable act for you.
But even if the troublemakers forcibly gain your support, still, deep down, you'd remain with the decent people.
Exactly these same circumstances are faced daily by nations of the world in this anarchic global arena.
In conflicts between powerful countries, they too often have to take sides. And the same human nature that I revealed to you in the neighborhood example applies to nations as well.
Their top priority also tends to be that we support good, or at least seemingly good, countries, so that tomorrow no question is raised about their own reputation. After all, if you side with an oppressor, weaker nations, which are in the majority, will also regard you as oppressive.
This fundamental logic is being taken very seriously by many nations in today's era, where social media can turn any country into a villain or a hero overnight.
Just look at the examples of Saudi Arabia and Pakistan for a moment.
Saudi Arabia is often viewed as a backward-thinking, extremist country. Ideas like women not having freedom, public beheadings, etc., are what commonly come to mind when its name is mentioned.
And because of this, some very critical countries are reluctant to sincerely support it. Therefore, Saudi Arabia has decided to change this very image so that other nations would stand with it rather than run away.
And today, the result is that it is rapidly adopting a progressive, technology-lover, and AI hub image. Why wouldn't the world favor a country with such recognition?
Similarly, Pakistan has always been known as a poor country and a hub for militants. Whenever Pakistan is mentioned, the IMF and the Taliban are often the first things that come to mind.
Because of this, only a handful of select countries in the world would openly step forward in its support.
But Pakistan has also now decided to change this image.
It is introducing its new face as a security guarantor within the Muslim Ummah. And by relying on this identity, it aims to strengthen its defense industry, sell its weapons worldwide, and is now aspiring to eliminate its poverty this way.
Last year, together with Saudi Arabia, it laid the foundation for a Muslim NATO and has so far signed agreements with various countries to export a record $12.5 billion worth of defense equipment. Under these circumstances, its support is now almost certain at least among Muslim nations if not elsewhere in the world.
These are fundamental realities that the West likely understood long ago, but never took seriously.
And this lack of seriousness has now reached such an extent that it has started losing even the few hearts it had won.
There was a time when former American presidents wanted to build it into a "shining city upon a hill." The ultimate goal was that everyone would see that gleaming city as gold, view it as the ultimate hero, follow its leadership, and even aspire to become part of it.
The West's charm was working. The world began to see it as the "group of decent people."
Roosevelt's Four Freedoms echoed across Europe. It rapidly gained popularity after World War II.
An incredible incident occurred in Tiananmen Square, China, when Chinese protesters lifted a replica of the Statue of Liberty.
West of the Iron Wall, the most credible news in the eyes of European youth came only from American sources.
And then, all hearts were lost.
The West's charm couldn't even last a full century. Soon it became clear to the world that the one we considered "decent," in reality, its decency was only to fulfill its own geopolitical ambitions.
The West, or America, may not have become the "Shining City," but its latest hypocrisies have certainly proven the saying "not everything that glitters is gold" true.
Today, the time has come when a clear majority of the West's own younger generation is openly expressing doubts and skepticism about Western values. And in such a situation, what can the West really expect from the rest of the world?
In short, the West appears to be failing miserably in winning the hearts of its own younger generation and is emerging as a "villain" or "troublemaker" in their eyes instead of a "group of decent people."
To tackle this issue, the West has adopted a smart strategy. It has abandoned the effort to change hearts and, instead, is now focused on changing minds.
Obviously, winning hearts would require abandoning hypocritical policies, and doing so would render years of work in the geopolitical domain futile. So, the easy solution is to just tell people enough to make the West appear as a "bastion of decency." Put the brakes wherever it begins to look like a "troublemaker."
Criticism of Western policies by Gen Z appeared to reach its peak when these young people did something unbelievable. That was the widespread sharing and endorsement of Osama bin Laden's infamous "Letter to America" on the internet.
That was the letter that bin Laden addressed to the American people after the brutal 9/11 attacks on America. He justified his attack and presented arguments in its favor.
The most basic and important argument was that Israel, from day one, has been cutting down people in occupied Palestine like carrots and radishes. And all this would not happen if America would stop supporting Israel.
And it was to force an end to this support, according to bin Laden, that this attack was carried out.
Gen Z's endorsement of this letter was nothing short of a warning bell. After all, it was the parents of this same Gen Z who had been targeted in the 9/11 attacks.
The reason was that in this social media era, this generation that's the most connected to social media genuinely saw Palestinians being cut down like carrots and radishes after October 2023.
Before them, their ancestors had heard news of such massacres, but they had not witnessed the horrific scenes that could shatter one's heart. The remaining gap was apparently filled by pro-Palestine content creators, whose words carried more weight for them.
The result is that every poll today indicates that Gen Z is absolutely not blindly supportive of Israel like their ancestors were. Rather, their hearts hold a soft corner for Palestine.
This was almost similar to the moment during the American Civil War when a few photographs of slaughter, once made public, caused war supporters to see the horrors of the battlefield overnight, melt their hearts, and openly come out against the war.
After all, the impact of seeing visual evidence of destruction with one's own eyes is far greater than hearing second-hand reports.
And today, Gen Z has been forced to think that what kind of "Shining City" is this that punishes an entire nation for its own limited casualties?
What kind of "Shining City" is this that rescues donkeys from Gaza but feels not the slightest concern while shattering human children to pieces?
What kind of "Shining City" is this that tramples underfoot its own established international laws for the sake of geopolitical gains in the Middle East?
What kind of "Shining City" is this where a country's leader openly supports plans to invade at least seven neighboring countries, and his words are echoed, even to the extent of saying, "Israel is very small. It should be expanded"?
What kind of "Shining City" is this that uses the United Nations to the fullest to support Israel, but when the same United Nations' reports scream that what is happening in Gaza is not war but genocide, it turns its back on the very same United Nations?
What kind of "Shining City" is this which fought against Nazi powers in the last century, but in the fire of this age, stands shoulder to shoulder with those who harbor Nazi ideologies?
From within this very generation, the future leaders of America and the entire Western world will emerge. And if they assume power with an anti-Israel mindset, it could reverse over a century's worth of work done for Israel in just a few years.
And even if it makes no difference to the West's own generation, the majority of the world now sees Israel as a "troublemaker." If support for Israel continues under such circumstances, what little credibility the West has left will also be completely destroyed.
Directly or indirectly, the West is now forced to fight a battle of perception.
Therefore, in the age of AI, which will play the most crucial role in the future dissemination of information, the West has found an easy solution within AI itself.
Why not feed GPT models, like ChatGPT, as much information as possible that favors Israel and present Israel's war crimes as justified to the world, just as Osama bin Laden justified 9/11?
Why not ensure that whenever AI models are asked about the Palestine-Israel conflict, they always present Israel as the "decent" one and occupied Palestine as the "troublemaker"?
If that happens, problem solved.
Slightly manipulate minds, and hearts will change on their own.
In this regard, Israel has recently contracted with an American tech company to produce massive amounts of pro-Israel content, which will be used by AI models like ChatGPT to provide answers to people about the Palestine-Israel conflict. Keep in mind, AI models respond based on content available on the internet, and if that content is overwhelmingly pro-Israel, the AI models' responses will also be pro-Israel.
Most notably in this is the fact that, according to reports, this content will be specially designed to target Gen Z.
And if all this goes according to plan, you will soon see a transformed, pro-Israel Gen Z not only in America but all over the world.
Here, I have another question for you.
If a group of decent people and a group of troublemakers live in your neighborhood, and the troublemakers have put on the cloak of decency and, wearing this cloak, come into conflict with the decent people, will you be able to distinguish between their cloak and their reality?
Let me also offer a brief answer to this.
Regardless of who is the troublemaker and who is decent, I would perhaps emphasize following the laws that the majority of the neighborhood residents agree upon.
I'm available for freelance work. If you need SEO-optimized, high-ranking content on geopolitics, international affairs, or political analysis, connect with me via email or Upwork.
📬 Email: hamzafcontent@gmail.com 🔗R Upork: View my profile & portfolio
On my YouTube channel, I decode real-world geopolitics in video format. My latest video examines Israel's recent recognition of Somaliland through a geo-economic lens in under a minute.
📺 Watch the full breakdown:
If you appreciate this content, subscribe to my channel, like the video, and share with friends who would find it valuable. Your support makes a difference!
Have a look at some other stories: