The label “rogue state” is no longer the exclusive domain of the West’s adversaries, as it has been in American political discourse for decades. Today, this label haunts the very heart of the system that originally coined it. What we have witnessed in the last decade, particularly after the Gaza war, is not merely a circumstantial crisis, but a profound moral and political upheaval that reveals what MP Abdul Karim Al-Daghmi calls the “aging of democracy.”
اضافة اعلان
The idea presented in Al-Ghad newspaper a few days ago, under the title “The Rogue State Turns Against Itself,” does not stem from emotional rhetoric or a momentary stance, but rather from an accumulated international reality of selective wars, the politicized use of the veto, and double standards that have emptied international law of its substance. The United States, as the world’s superpower, can no longer convince large segments of the world that it is a neutral mediator or a guarantor of global peace. Indeed, in the eyes of many, it has become a direct party to the conflict, a political and military umbrella for the occupying power, even as it commits documented violations against civilians, hospitals, and places of worship.
In this context, MP Abdul Karim Daghmi's letter serves as a reminder of the importance of revisiting his series of intellectual articles published in Al-Ghad newspaper, titled "The Aging of Democracy." This profound critical reading intersects with Hedges's article on the "rogue state," but it goes beyond merely describing behavior to dismantle the system that produced it.
Daghmi does not simply condemn current Western policies; he returns to the philosophical roots of modern democracy in Jean-Jacques Rousseau's work to demonstrate that democracy, born as a revolution against tyranny, has been transformed—due to the dominance of money and large corporations—into a tool for empowering elites rather than protecting the people. Democracy has aged as a practice, not as a theory; elections have become hostage to massive funding, strategic decisions are formulated behind closed doors, and the public is presented with a mere facade in the name of the "democratic process." Al-Daghmi cites the spectacle of the US Congress repeatedly applauding a leader accused of war crimes more than sixty times, considering this not a mere slip of the tongue, but rather evidence of a moral and structural flaw in contemporary Western democracy. For him, what is happening in Palestine and Lebanon reveals that the crisis is not merely Palestinian, but a crisis of the entire Western democratic system.
When the International Criminal Court is threatened for applying the law, and when Security Council resolutions are paralyzed by the veto to protect one side, we are not witnessing a limited political failure, but rather a gradual collapse of the prestige of the rules-based international order. Here, the theories of the “rogue state” and the “aging of democracy” intersect: the first describes the behavior of the dominant power, and the second explains why this system has produced such behavior.
The state that once taught the world lessons in human rights has now become its greatest obstacle, and the democracy that promised justice has transformed into a mechanism for managing the interests of global capital and transnational corporations, not the interests of the people.
From a Jordanian perspective, as al-Daghmi suggests, these transformations are not merely an abstract intellectual debate; It is a matter of security and existence. The continuation of the war without a political horizon is putting pressure on Jordan's borders, exacerbating its economic and humanitarian burdens, and threatening the stability of the entire region. Hence the importance of the critical Jordanian voice—academic and parliamentary—in reminding the world that the collapse of international justice will not remain confined to a specific region, but will extend to everyone.
Al-Daghmi's questions here are fundamental: What remains of the United Nations if the decision of a single state can paralyze the will of the world? What is the value of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights if its application is selective? And how can threats against an international court be accepted simply because it is trying to uphold the law?
These questions stem from a harsh reality: arrest warrants met with political threats, UN resolutions buried by vetoes, and civilians killed under the watchful eyes of what is supposed to be a “committed international order.”
In contrast, Jordan remains a model of a state that adheres to international law despite the pressures. Amman's position supporting a ceasefire, the delivery of humanitarian aid, and the two-state solution is not merely moral rhetoric, but a national strategy to protect regional stability and prevent a comprehensive conflagration. The notion of a “rogue state turning on itself” is not a mere journalistic observation, but a historical alarm bell. If the West continues to justify brute force in the name of democracy, it will lose not only its moral credibility but also its global leadership position.
The world is indeed changing—as Al-Daghmi emphasizes—but it is heading toward the worse if the rule of law is not restored and democracy is not returned to its ethical core, free from the influence of money, weapons, and corporate power.
Today’s battle is not between East and West, but between law and chaos, values and interests, humanity and the arrogance of power. At this pivotal moment, the Jordanian voice—royal, governmental, academic, and parliamentary—becomes more crucial than ever, because it reminds us that justice is not a political luxury, but a prerequisite for the very survival of the international order.
