By Qais Aljoan — August 2025

I. Introduction

The expression Global North often conjures an image of unity: the wealthy, industrialized states of Europe, North America, and their allies in the Asia-Pacific, commanding disproportionate influence over world finance, technology, and security. Yet this shorthand is dangerously deceptive. The Global North is not a monolith. Within it, two powerful currents collide.

On one side stands what may be called the Eurocide North — a dominant policy current among many governments, ruling coalitions, and corporate–security elites. It is “Eurocidal” not because it literally kills Europe, but because it erodes Europe’s conscience: privileging impunity over accountability, domination over dignity, and alignment with power over fidelity to universal law.

On the other side emerges the North of Justice — a civic and ethical current rooted in peoples, youth, minorities, unions, and faith communities, and also embodied by courageous leaders, jurists, and institutions who uphold international law, equality, and human dignity. These two forces, one entrenched in policy and the other rising from conscience, define the fracture line of our age.

II. Defining the Two Currents

1) Eurocide North (policy current).
This current runs through many of the Global North’s institutions of power: cabinets, parliaments, security bureaucracies, media conglomerates, and multinational boardrooms. Its features are recognizable:

Eurocide North is not a formal organization but a constellation of interests and ideologies that converge on a common policy line: prioritizing state security and geopolitical alignment over the rights and dignity of individuals, especially those deemed “other” — whether Palestinians, migrants, or minorities. It is a current that thrives on the erosion of ethical standards, where the ends justify the means and where the language of “realism” is used to justify complicity in grave violations.

2) North of Justice (ethical current).
This current lives in the ethical conscience of societies and within principled institutions. It flows through civic movements, youth activism, and courageous leadership, but also finds expression in courts, unions, and faith communities. Its anchors are:

In this current, the language of justice is not rhetoric but commitment: the rights of one are the rights of all, the suffering of one is the suffering of all. It insists that true security cannot be built on the backs of the oppressed, and that lasting peace rests only on justice and reconciliation.

This reflection does not replace legal indictment with rhetoric; it examines Europe’s silences and the selective application of law as matters of conscience and civic responsibility.

III. Measuring the Asymmetry

To speak of asymmetry requires more than rhetoric. Indicative ranges help map the imbalance:

The result is a structural gap: a ruling minority sets policy, while a majority conscience carries the demand for justice.

IV. Case Illustrations: Policy versus Conscience

Palestine as clarity test. While Eurocide North shields Israel diplomatically and sustains arms cooperation, the North of Justice fills streets, campuses, and courts with calls for accountability, ceasefire, and recognition of Palestinian rights. The same governments that invoke a “rules-based order” redraw its boundaries the moment allies stand accused.

Housing and inequality. Market-first governance tolerates speculation and rent inflation; the civic current organizes for rent control, social housing, and equal access to opportunity — arguing that true security begins with a home, not with market indices or military budgets.

Climate justice. Incumbent industries lobby to delay regulation; youth movements demand transition and protection of the most vulnerable. Here too, the North of Justice moves faster than the policy machinery designed to protect incumbents.

Across these domains, one pattern repeats: a ruling current of impunity versus a popular current of conscience. Yet these currents are not sealed off from each other; they clash, overlap, and sometimes force realignment. It is this movement between currents that shapes the possibilities of change.

V. Movement Between Currents

The boundary between Eurocide North and the North of Justice is not absolute. Officials and institutions can cross it through acts that matter: suspending arms and spyware exports to violators, supporting international courts without double standards, protecting the right to protest rather than criminalizing it, enforcing rights clauses in trade agreements, and reporting civilian harm with transparency and accountability.

Civic movements gain strength when they connect causes: Palestine with housing, climate, labor rights, and digital freedoms. The more these struggles are interwoven, the stronger the current of justice becomes.

VI. Conclusion

The Global North is not a monolith but a fractured field. Eurocide North represents the habits of power: security first, law later. The North of Justice embodies the living conscience of societies and the courage of officials who act on principle.

The decisive terrain lies not in treating them as two irreconcilable worlds, but in building the bridge — pressing policy to realign with conscience.

history does not remember who preserved impunity;
it remembers who defended dignity.


Editorial Note: This essay is published in five languages. The ethical stance and the central argument are identical, though tone and length vary: some versions are more analytical, others more rhetorical or philosophical. This is a deliberate choice, reflecting how each culture receives discourse. The differences are in form, not in substance.