text: We are facing two major and historic global transformations, while the fate of both transformations remains uncertain.
  First: The global order that emerged after World War II is on the verge of collapse, and a new global order is beginning to take shape.
  Second: The Middle Eastern order that emerged after World War II has collapsed, or is on the verge of collapse, and global and regional powers are competing to establish a new order in the Middle East.
  There are many reasons and several root causes for the collapse of the traditional global order and the order in the Middle East after the WWII, but I mention just two major reasons.
  A: The US False Policies (the US Failed Policies)
  Just a few years after World War II, the US established a new world order in which almost every international institution was dominated by the US. Since WWII, the US has been involved in 80% of all the global conflicts and wars, carried out over 80 overt and covert interventions in foreign elections, and engaged in 70% of covert and overt attempts at regime change during the Cold War.
  According to studies by Brown University, the wars the US waged in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, and Pakistan from September 11, 2001 to 2023, caused at least 4.5 million deaths and 7.6 million children starving and the displacement of 49–60 million people in the Middle East, rivaling the displacements in World War II.
  In 2023, the Foreign Policy magazine published a very documented reported, stating that a total of 6 countries are under comprehensive US sanctions, 17 countries are under targeted sanctions, and another 7 countries, under specific export controls. By 2021, the US had sanctions on more than 10,000 individuals, companies, and sectors of targeted country economies. Countries subject to some form of US sanctions collectively account for a little more than one-fifth of the global GDP. And as a result, in response to the US’ sanctions, a growing coalition of governments is seeking to rewrite the rules of the global financial system.
  Whether we like it or not, America’s global hegemonic mission has become increasingly unviable over time. After World War II, the US accounted for half of the global economy. Today, America accounts for about a fifth of the global economy. But now, it is the world’s greatest creditor, with $35 trillion in gross federal debt (over 120 percent of its GDP, nearly 20 percent higher than amid World War II).
  B: The Failed UN Role
  Based on the Word Order after WWII, the United Nations and the UN Security Council are the highest authorities for ensuring global peace and security. This body has become completely ineffective, irrelevant, discredited, and it has been proven that they do not have the power to ensure peace, stability, and international security. Moreover, the ineffectiveness of the UN in conflicts, such as those in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Ukraine, Gaza, Lebanon and the current military confrontation between Israel and Iran, leaves no doubt that this organization is only capable of issuing resolutions, statements, and some humanitarian assistance.
  Today, the Israeli war on Gaza, and in addition, the conflict in Lebanon, is the primary international issue, but it is also a matter that lasts already for 80 years. United Nations General Assembly has adopted about 197 Resolutions from 1947 to October 2023. United Nations Security Council has adopted about 191 Resolutions from 1948 to 2024. Resolution 181 on the 2-state solution, adopted in 1947, is 77 years old. Resolution 242 regarding the withdrawal of Israel from the occupied territories issued in 1967 is 55 years old. Also, 145 states have recognized Palestine as a sovereign, independent state. And more than two thirds of the UN member states recognize Israel as an independent state. (Also, in 1972, the US has vetoed a resolution instructing Israel to stop any aggression on Lebanon.)
  However, publicly, the Israeli authorities (PM and Parliament) have declined any recognition of the sovereign Palestinian State. Recently, in September 2023, the Israeli PM presented a map for a New Middle East, where Gaza and West Bank were part of the Israeli territories. A month after, the war in Gaza has started. For the last time, Netanyahu denied the rights of Palestinians for a sovereign state.
  In addition, the US has vetoed about 90 UNSC resolutions since 1945, over half of them critical of Israel, with 33 pertained to the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories or the country’s treatment of the Palestinian people. Nevertheless, Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister, has continuously opposed a Palestinian sovereign state and, even in 2024, the Knesset passed a legislation denying a sovereign Palestinian state. Moreover, in April 2024, the US vetoed a UN resolution for full United Nations membership for Palestine.
  Looking at the role of the ICJ, recently, the International Court of Justice ruled Israel’s occupation of West Bank, Jerusalem, Gaza is illegal and all countries around the world have an obligation to prevent it and make sure that Israel does not get away with it. The ruling required Israel to prevent genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. At the end and after about eight decades, Israel and the US have declined the UN resolutions and the ICJ ruling. There is no action regarding their implementation, while the highest body of the international community, meant to keep peace and security, has been unable to manage any major wars and crises from the end of the WWII and at present, the Palestinian issue.
  Israel’s Gaza War is a game-changer
  Over 42,000 Palestinians killed, over 120,000 injured, over 2 million displaced, and in Lebanon around 1.5 million displaced and around 10,000 killed or injured. There was a Middle East prior to the Gaza War and there will be one after it. But it is a different, more uncertain and darker Middle East. There is no regional or world dialogue about the world order or the new order in the Middle East. Not even regional countries, such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iran, or Türkiye, do not have an open dialogue regarding the order needed in the Middle East. Also, there is no serious international negotiation about the elements of the new world order between the super powers, but they are fighting each other, the reality is that they are the source of the crisis.
  Still, the world and regional powers have their own strategy for a New Middle East. I just mention the Israel’s and Iran’s strategy, which illustrate the large gap between the two visions.
  Israel’s Strategy for a New Middle East:
  - Only one Jewish State, no Palestine.
  - Eradication of the “Axis of Resistance” and Iran.
  - Normalization of relations with Arab States by expanding the Abraham Accords.
  - Building strategic regional alliances with Arab countries to confront Iran and its regional allies.
  - Preventing Iranian nuclear capability.
  - Maintaining nuclear bomb supremacy and exclusivity in the Middle East.
  - The leadership of the Middle East through the creation of the Greater Israel military, economic, political and technological superiority.
  - Positioning itself as a key energy player.
  - Engagement with Global Powers, while maintaining strategic alliance with the US.
  - Shaping global perception through public diplomacy and soft power.
  Iran’s Strategy for a New Middle East:
  - Reduce or eliminate the US hegemony in the region and Israeli dominance, through supporting the “Axis of Resistance”, rather than investing in diplomacy.
  - Increase the deterrent power, since they have been under attack and sanctions from 1979, through strengthening military and defense capabilities.
  - Improve relations with regional and neighboring countries through “A Regional Cooperation and Security System in the Persian Gulf” (Hurmuz Initiative) and strengthening the Economic Cooperation Organization (Türkiye, Pakistan, Central Asian and Caucasus Countries) (but there is no serious diplomacy, neither by the UN, nor the regional countries).
  - Establishing strategic relations with the Eastern powers – China, Russia and India.
  - Promoting a “resistance economy” doctrine, focusing on self-sufficiency in critical sectors to weather US sanctions.
  - Preserving the status of “Nuclear Threshold State”, as a Strategic Deterrent.
  However, Prof. Mousavian believes a sustainable model for a New Middle East should be based on the following principles:
  - The Two-State Solution to end Israeli-Palestinian conflict, based on the UN resolutions (there will be no peace as long as the Palestinian issue is not resolved, this is and will remain the “mother of the crises” in the region, a reality which cannot be eradicated by Israel).
  Although this is the main problem between the Israel and the rest of the region, a rapprochement between Iran and the Arab countries is a necessity.
  - A New Security & Cooperation System in the Persian Gulf (the corner stone of this cooperation system is between the Iranians and the Arabs).
  - US-Iran (the two major key players in the Middle East) comprehensive and direct negotiations to end 44 years of animosity, including the regional issues.
  - Reviving JCPOA (it is the most comprehensive agreement during the history of the non-proliferation, and Israel should not be able to eradicate this big asset for the non-proliferation within the international community), while regionalizing the principles of the JCPOA as the major step towards a nuclear-free zone in the Middle East.
  - A Non-Aggression Pact among countries in the Middle East.
  - The necessity of a weapons of mass-destruction free zone in the Middle East.
  - A conventional arms arrangement in the Middle East (there is a large debate about the usage of missiles by the Iranians, but Iran has its own concerns about this matter; therefore, there is a need for this kind of arrangements, including chemical and biological weapons).
  The New World Order
  - Decline of US global leadership, the end of unipolar dominance and the rise of multipolarity.
  - Rise of China. While the world is increasingly multipolar, there are areas where a bipolar dynamic between the US and China will emerge. This is especially true in technology, trade, and geopolitics.
  - Resurgence of Russia.
  - India’s ascendancy.
  - Middle Powers.
  - Fragmentation of globalization. Globalization will be more fragmented, with regional blocs, (EU), ASEAN / African Union, African Continental Free Trade Area.
  - Emergence of Non-Western Global Institutions, like BRICS.
  - Rise of centralized, authoritarian governance models and erosion of liberal democracy.
  - Global democratic backsliding. The rise of populism, driven by economic inequality and social polarization, threatens the global liberal democratic order.
  - Surveillance and control. Advances in technology, particularly artificial intelligence, facial recognition, and big data analytics, are giving authoritarian regimes unprecedented tools for surveillance and social control. This trend may further entrench authoritarianism in countries where democratic institutions are weak.
  - Climate change and resource competition. As the world faces the consequences of climate change, the new world order will see increased competition over dwindling natural resources like water, arable land, and energy sources. This competition is likely to intensify geopolitical rivalries and could lead to conflict, particularly in regions already prone to instability.
  - Evolving role of international institutions. International institutions, like the UN, WTO, IMF, which have long been dominated by Western powers, will face increased pressure to reform. Countries in the **Global South** are likely to demand a greater voice in these institutions, reflecting the shift in global power dynamics.
  Ultimately, the emerging world order will require new forms of diplomacy, multilateralism, and governance to address global challenges. Countries will need to balance cooperation and competition in areas like climate change, technology, and global security, while managing the rise of new powers and the decline of traditional hegemonies.
  The US’ strategy for a New Middle East:
  - Reducing military footprint but maintaining security presence, focusing on the Eastern Bloc.
  - Regime change in Iran through sanctions, increasing internal and external pressures, isolating Iran regionally and internationally.
  - Establishing a strategic partnership between Israel and the Arab countries of the region against Iran.
  - Containing Iran’s nuclear program.
  - Realizing Israeli supremacy in the Middle East.
  - Shaping a new system for energy in the Middle East, eliminating Iran from the oil and gas energy equations, to give a central role to Israel and its allied Arab countries.
  China’s strategy for a New Middle East:
  - Securing energy supplies, diversifying energy sources, long-term energy agreements, investing in energy infrastructure.
  - Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and infrastructure development.
  - Economic partnerships and trade expansion with all countries.
  - Strategic diplomacy and political neutrality.
  - Balancing relations with rival powers.
  - Expanding military and security cooperation and arms sales.
  - Engaging in multilateral and regional initiatives, such as SCO, or BRICS.
  GCC’s New Middle East Strategy:
  - Economic diversification and post-oil future.
  - Energy transition and leadership in renewables.
  - Geopolitical realignment and regional diplomacy; a shift towards a more independent and pragmatic approach to foreign policy, balancing relations with global powers, Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), SCO, BRICS; engagement with Iran; normalization with Israel.
  - Soft power and global influence, diplomacy and mediation.
   O’Rourke, Lindsey A. (November 29, 2019). “The Strategic Logic of Covert Regime Change: US-Backed Regime Change Campaigns during the Cold War”. Security Studies. 29: 92–127. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09636412.2020.1693620
   ICJ ruling: Key takeaways from the court decision in Israel genocide case | Reuters; ICJ Rules Israel’s Occupation of West Bank, Jerusalem, Gaza Is Illegal: Attorney Diana Buttu Explains | Democracy Now!
  The speech was delivered at MEPEI – Annual International Conference 2024 – The 10th Forum held on Thursday, 10 October 2024.
  Disclaimer. The views and opinions expressed in this analysis are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of MEPEI. Any content provided by our author is of his opinion and is not intended to malign any religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, individual, or anyone or anything.
  About the author:
  Prof. Seyed Hossein Mousavian is Middle East Security and Nuclear Policy Specialist at Princeton University