The annals of recent history are marked significantly by three pivotal happenings. The twofold World Wars of the 20th century were harbingers of colossal human loss, blatant disregard for global norms, and a severe economonic downturn, eventually resulting in the foundation of the nuclear non-proliferation regime. A second event of momentous consequence was the heart-breaking 9/11 disaster, resulting in the demise of nearly three thousand Americans due to the hijacking of four airplanes. Lastly, a distinct change in regional geopolitics has been ushered in by two restricted aerial conflicts during the months of May and June.
As it stands, the world as we knew it before May 7 seems a distant memory. A deceptive move by India against Pakistan on this day brought Pakistan’s waning deterrence capabilities into the limelight. Contrarily, beyond reinstating its policy of credible minimum deterrence during the aerial faceoff from May 7 to 10, Pakistan has also shown commendable growth in multiple sectors, diplomacy being the primary one. This reckless endeavor by the BJP-headed Indian government invigorated a fresh wave of nationalism amongst the Pakistanis, presenting an opportunity for the country to utilize this spirit to progress further.
A similar scenario unfolded in the recent faceoff between Iran and Israel, an intense 12-day conflict known as the ‘Operation Rising Lion.’ Initiated with the intention of rolling back Iran’s nuclear ambitions through a regime change, it points towards several learnings. It is upon the wise and accountable to persistently work towards halting the propagation of hatred.
Despite the widely held belief that a regime change is required to permanently halt Iran’s nuclear program, it remains uncertain whether Reza Pahlavi might meet Muammar Qaddafi’s tragic fate post his country’s nuclear program’s dismantlement. From these recent military events, undeniably, a few critical lessons emerge, especially for the nations weaker in military terms than the few major powers or their allies.
A key observation that stands out in the sphere of power politics is the tendency of weaker nations to lean towards international laws, norms, and morals, while stronger nations often chase their objectives through any means necessary. Underlining this principle were the recent crises involving India and Pakistan in 2025. It was the strong deterrent defense by Pakistan that kept the nation from descending into an outright war and the region from a nuclear standoff. Had Pakistan not been conventionally armed or wielded nuclear capabilities, an Indian strike might have resulted in atrocities of a similar scale to the genocide Israel is committing in Gaza and other occupied Palestinian territories.
Again, it was Iran’s drone and missile fortitude that saved it from transforming into another Iraq or Afghanistan. There could have been internal division among Iran’s leadership regarding uranium enrichment for military purposes, guided by Ayatollah Khomeini’s fatwa of the Islamic Revolution; the ambiguity was likely abrogated by the unwarranted Israeli war against Iran. The US’s alliance with Israel heavily influenced its decision to join the aerial onslaught against Iran, given that the current Prime Minister’s entire political career rests upon the claim that Iran is close to producing nuclear weapons.
A shift is evident in the pledge of ‘Never Again,’ and the leadership once entrusted with it. Nuanced vulnerability patterns present weaker nations susceptible to nuclear powers either due to their lack of nuclear weaponry or the absence of a nuclear shelter. The notion of a nuclear umbrella is becoming increasingly obsolete.
Recent conflicts have underscored a shifting pattern: there’s a higher probability of a powerhouse like the US supporting a nuclear nation in a dispute between a non-nuclear state and a nuclear state. Contrarily, when two nuclear-empowered nations are pitted against each other, the same influencer refrains from direct involvement. The war between Ukraine and Russia underscores this trend. The US’s reluctance to risk direct confrontation with Moscow, in defense of Kyiv, illustrates its cautious stance.
Possibly, had Ukraine been a nuclear power, the Russian invasion might not have occurred, or at the very least, a limited conflict might have ensued, as often witnessed between the rivals in South Asia. Consequently, it’s now palpably evident that nations must primarily rely on themselves. The role of the United Nations and related bodies has been progressively diminishing during and after these wars, highlighting the relevance of self-sufficiency in guaranteeing survival.
In the prevailing volatile world, only those nations that ensure their own survival are deemed secure. Amidst such pandemonium, real concerns like technological progress, focusing on education and science, building a stable, tariff-free global economy are often neglected. We seem to have stumbled back into a prior era, identical to the period before World War I, when international relations were characterized by uncertainty and widespread fear, where any forthcoming year could potentially mirror 1914.
While these events might offer numerous insights, only a handful of crucial ones have been addressed above. It becomes more crucial for responsible entities to sustain their drive towards halting the spread of hatred. Nations should not depend solely on the so-called guardians of the New World Order. Instead, the international community needs to snap out of its complacency before it’s too late.
The post New Wave of Nationalism Surges Amidst Recent Conflicts appeared first on Real News Now.
About Author
