The global order established by Zionist powers after the Second World War is, today, experiencing a deep fracture. The system shaped by the victors who divided the world at the Yalta Conferences functioned for decades through institutions, specifically the United Nations, NATO, and global financial mechanisms. Though covered in the language of “peace,” this structure is argued to have rested, in reality, on the extraction of nations’ natural resources and the exploitation of human capital. What appeared seamless until roughly 2010 began to fall apart with the upheavals of the Arab Spring.
Across the Arab world, so-called nationalist leaders had, for years, transferred the wealth they siphoned from their populations into Western banks. Questions of wealth distribution and elite privilege surfaced, exposing cracks within the global establishment itself. Britain’s departure from the European Union only deepened Europe’s internal fault lines, revealing a continent increasingly uncertain of its own cohesion.
Today, Europe is struggling with the Russia–Ukraine war, which remains its largest conflict since 1945. In Africa, states once under French influence are distancing themselves one after another. While nations appear to clash on the surface, speculations have it that the rivalries among powerful Jewish Zionist families are what really drive global disorder. Within this view, France is portrayed as a state shaped by Rockefeller-linked Masonic structures, while the Rothschilds—who rose to prominence after the eighteenth century through lending and financial speculation—are influential in central banks linked to the dollar system and closely cooperate with the United Kingdom due to shared financial interests. In the United States, Donald Trump’s arrival on the political stage is seen as the quake that began shaking this entrenched structure.
Trump and the New Imperialism: “Trumpism”
Donald Trump’s presidency is presented as one of the most disruptive episodes in the established order. Upon entering office, he openly challenged global institutions such as the UN and the WHO, labelling them slow, ineffective, and unaligned with American interests. He threatened European allies over Greenland, spoke provocatively about Canada, and directed his rhetoric at states long accused of benefiting from the existing global hierarchy.
Trump moved beyond criticism and attempted to replace the standing institutions, proposing a peace council to serve as a substitute for the UN and inviting fifty countries to participate. Thirty leaders responded positively, others hesitated, and some—France in particular—opposed the initiative outright, viewing it as a US-centric forum designed to marginalise Europe.
Trump is depicted as dismissing the UN for failing to act swiftly or protect his interests, instead conceiving a system that would remain under his command until his death—an arrangement critics describe as serving the United States and his corporate network primarily. The imperial model attributed to “Trumpism” is blunt rather than subtle: rapid decisions, unwavering US centrality, and personal loyalty to Trump himself.
The proposed “peace plan” for Gaza is the clearest illustration of this vision:
Hamas disarmed. Gaza is governed not by Palestinians but by a US-appointed administrator.
The coastline transformed into a “Dubai-style” tourism hub—complete, with Trump-branded hotels.
And yet the questions linger: What of Gaza’s people? The martyrs? The displaced millions? Securing the cooperation of certain Muslim leaders, Trump seeks to legitimise a new cycle of exploitation—one that now targets Gaza’s natural gas following earlier interests in Venezuela. Indeed, this cannot be peace but an overt colonisation project.
Before 7 October 2023, Mahmoud Abbas had reached agreements with China concerning offshore gas fields near Gaza. With the outbreak of war and the arrival of the US Navy in the Eastern Mediterranean, China withdrew. Within this interpretation, China is portrayed as an inflated power unwilling to confront the United States and as retreating from regions such as Venezuela and Sudan when challenged. In Gaza, once again, ordinary Palestinians bear the brunt.
With Gaza, Where Is the World Headed?
The world continues to find itself at the mercy of a figure burdened by legal controversies and thousands of lawsuits, yet facing little systemic resistance. Donald Trump is committed to building a new international framework for Gaza, in which he could remain president until death, with entry fees for countries reaching $1 billion. Within this circle stand figures such as Jared Kushner—credited here with proposing Gaza’s tourism transformation—Marco Rubio, associated with hard-line defence policies, and Tony Blair, remembered for the Iraq invasion.
At the Davos meetings, even established leaders acknowledged that the old system had collapsed and that a new protective order was urgently needed. We see Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney whining about this. Yet entrenched interests rarely surrender quietly. As Trump confronts what he portrays as the global system, domestic opposition grows: protests against immigration enforcement intensify, California signals cooperation with the WHO despite federal positions, and the dollar is said to be weakening. Some foresee difficult days for the United States—perhaps fragmentation, perhaps the fate of past leaders who challenged entrenched power. Trump is battling two immense “mafias”: the Templar Freemasons and Rockefeller-linked networks on one side, and the Rothschild financial dynasty on the other.
The Deeper Question
Why, then, does this oppressive order still stand?
The answer offered is stark: because the Islamic world remains divided, dependent, and passive—leaderless and fragmented. There is no doubt that the Muslim world possesses vast reserves of oil, gas, agriculture, gold, diamonds, solar and wind potential, and above all, human capital. If these resources were withheld, the exploitative system would collapse, for it produces little on its own and survives on what it extracts from others.
The Way Out
The proposed solution is direct, though costly: An Islamic United Nations, an Islamic common market, and economic and political independence. For indeed Allah says, “When truth comes, falsehood vanishes.” But truth does not arrive without the will to defend it.
*The views expressed in this content are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of İdrakpost.
0 Comment