The war that set West Asia aflame after the Feb 28 air strikes on Iran by Israel and the United States has revealed a disturbing “new norm”: Peace has lost its substance, tweets are the preferred form of communication, and diplomacy has devolved into a digital-age wayang kulit, a shadow play.
We are living in a world of diplomatic cognitive dissonance, a season of paper peace. A peace that exists only in televised speeches. A peace that is a stranger to the cry of a child or the grief of a widow rummaging through ruins for remains of a loved one.
To understand the gravity of this shift, we must recall the old norm of the 20th-century Cold War era, which offered stability even in a crisis.
Older Malaysians will remember the era of the Hotline – the high-stakes, private communication channel established in 1963 between Washington and Moscow to ensure that no error would lead to a nuclear catastrophe.
They will also remember that a nation had to be neutral and possess moral capital to be a mediator. The mediator was like a referee who provided a safe space where enemies could talk without fear of being ambushed by the host’s own agenda or bias.
Switzerland, Norway, and the International Red Cross played this role in that era, with Oslo and Geneva almost always being the chosen venues.
But that anchor has been cut.
In the new norm, the Hotline has been replaced by social media and the neutral referee by the active combatant.
We have entered an era of digital-age shadow play, where “peace” is no longer the absence of war, but a rhetorical tool used to manage the perception of war.
At the centre of this digital-age wayang kulit is US President Donald Trump.
We are learning that in the new norm, leaders don’t call each other to prevent or end wars; rather, like Trump, they tweet or issue statements on social media.
Trump has used his favourite communication tool – his Truth Social platform – to issue threats and updates on the war with Iran. For instance, on March 18, he posted a warning to Iran that if it continued to retaliate against energy infrastructure in West Asia, the US would “massively blow up” its South Pars gas field, the largest in the world.
Iranian leaders too are posting statements and videos – including rebuttals and warnings – on X, Instagram and Bluesky.
Trump, who was upset at not being given the Nobel Peace Prize, has often called himself the “President of Peace”. On Feb 24, the White House issued a press statement in which it branded him the “President of Peace” before boasting that he had successfully “concluded” eight long-standing conflicts.
Yet, only four days later, working with Israel, he ordered the bombing of Iran to “eliminate imminent threats” and ensure “regional stability”.
Surely this is the ultimate dissonance: bombing a nation and later threatening to pummel it into the “stone age” while claiming the mantle of a peacemaker.
But the more we look, the more shadows appear on the screen; the would-be peacemakers, the “referees,” are actually players on the field.
Russian President Vladimir Putin was among the first to offer to mediate, calling regional leaders to “restore peace”. Laudable as it is, it rings hollow when we note that he has been unable to resolve the tragedy in his own backyard, with the Russia-Ukraine war entering its fourth year.
The man whose country invaded another wants to be a peace mediator.
Similarly, Pakistan has stepped onto the stage, offering Islamabad as a “neutral” venue for peace negotiations. Yet, even as Pakistani officials shuttle between Beijing and Washington and the Gulf, Pakistan remains entangled in an “open war” – in its own words – with Afghanistan.
Shehbaz Sharif, the prime minister of Pakistan, touted Muslim unity in seeking to be seen as a credible mediator, while bombing Muslim neighbour Afghanistan.
It may seem strange, even laughable if not for the tragedy unfolding, that Russian and Pakistani leaders have positioned themselves as rational arbiters of West Asian stability while fighting wars with their own neighbours.
Welcome to the new norm, where it is all right for a nation to rain shells on a neighbour while offering to host peace talks elsewhere. In the new norm, the “arsonist” and the “fireman” may not be very different – they may just be acting differently in different theatres.
In the new norm, neutrality appears to be less important than influence, for both Russia and Pakistan have the ear of Iran – the former through military and economic ties and the latter through religious identity.
In addition, Pakistan has won the friendship of Trump. Reports say the improved US-Pakistan ties are due to “a mix of high-stakes business deals and strategic flattery” of Trump, including a deal with a crypto business linked to Trump’s family. That’s wayang too.
Which makes me wonder: Are the figures we see moving on the screen – the mediators and the officials – merely puppets? Is the puppeteer – uncertain how to draw down the curtain – simply changing the scene to keep the global audience watching while he figures out how to end the war? Or is there – as many believe – another puppeteer behind this puppeteer who will only accept peace when its rival collapses?
In the meantime, the theatre burns. And the world suffers.
The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of FMT.