A ray of hope overtakes me as I scroll through social media, seeing the global populace so politically active. With global conflicts at an all-time high, people are not hesitant to call out the decision-makers and call a spade a spade.

For decades, the West, specifically the US, had maintained its monopoly as the flag bearer of human rights, with the world looking up to them in anticipation of action during times of conflict.

However, this mask of “Mr Nice Guy” which the US had worn on the premise of its care for human rights has fallen off. The US has never been this badly exposed for its hypocrisy as it got exposed following October 7.

Both the streets and the social media platforms have been flooded with people voicing their concerns and protesting against the Israeli brutality against the Palestinians in Gaza. The majority of the people refused to buy into the narrative that was fed by the US government and media, with hundreds and thousands coming out for the streets.

Staunchly condemning Israel’s genocide of the Gazans, people of Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, Japan, Pakistan, and South Africa came out on the streets voicing their concerns. South Africa took a step further and went to the ICJ to file a lawsuit against Israel, accusing it of genocide. Surprisingly, the people of the Western states also showcased their support of Palestine, demanding an end to the atrocities being committed against the Palestinians. The UK even witnessed its largest-ever pro-Palestinian demonstration.

However, the champion of human rights opted to disregard the public voice and continue to support Israel openly. Their open support to Israel along with their failure to acknowledge the intensity of the situation cannot be called anything but vile.

With a record number of people left dead, injured, homeless, and starved, the US continued to provide Israel with thousands of military equipment, Intelligence support, and military aid.

The same US officials who had adopted a humanitarian stance on the Russia-Ukraine war deemed it best not to comment on the atrocities committed against the Palestinians. For example, former Secretary of State, Hilary Clinton advised the Russian leadership on Twitter to stop bombing hospitals if they did not wish to be accused of war crimes.

Now that only 12 of Gaza’s 36 hospitals are functional, that too partially, a blind eye has been turned. Actions do speak louder than words. Regardless of urging Israeli officers to minimize civilian casualties, the US has full involvement in the mass numbers of civilian deaths and displacements. It has also used its VETO three times to block the resolution calling for a ceasefire.

With its intentions quite apparent, the question now arises: What implications can this exposé have for the US and its policies? Known for its effective use of soft power, this exposé may cause a serious dent in the credibility of the US and tarnish its image amongst the general global populace. Hailed as the upholders of human rights since the mid-20th century, its stance of unwavering support of Israel can very well cause the International community to look up to some other state as a replacement for the US to mitigate the conflict. And, likely, the replacement option would not go well with the US.

With Americans enthusiastically taking to the streets more than ever and vigorously calling out the President, Senators, and corporations, this public tide can put immense pressure on the stakeholders and can also cause a rift within the domestic political realm of the US. The public pressure can be seen to have a certain level of impact since the US abstained from voting on the resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire. This can be regarded as progress since we vetoed the last three ceasefire resolutions.

It is highly possible that the outcome of the upcoming election in the US in November can be decided based on this public rage and the actions the politicians opt to take to make the people feel heard.

With the world transitioning towards a multipolar system, the last thing the US would want would be to enhance the mistrust between the state and the people. Nations have only prospered when the populace has prided on the state leadership. The bigger the gap between the people and the state leadership, the more instability can be predicted within.

It should be learned that in this age of globalization and social media, people have the power and means to see through the state narrative and form an opinion of their own. Being the champion of democracy that the US is, this view of the people should be respected and acknowledged.