There are three major events that have significantly altered the course of history in the recent past. First, the two World Wars in the last century caused millions of casualties, gross violations of international norms, and a global economic depression, ultimately leading to the establishment of the nuclear proliferation regime. Second, the tragic incident of 9/11, in which four hijacked planes resulted in the deaths of nearly three thousand American citizens. Third, the two limited aerial wars that occurred in the last two months, May and June.
By now, it is clear that we no longer live in the world as it was before May 7. The Indian false-flag operation against Pakistan, which began on that day, tested the nation’s diluting deterrence. However, Pakistan not only effectively restored and upheld its credible minimum deterrence policy during the aerial conflict from May 7 to 10, but it is also continuing to perform well in various domains, with diplomacy being foremost among them. That mad venture by the BJP-led Indian government has injected a new spirit into the Pakistani nation, which can be effectively harnessed to help lift the country toward progress.
Something similar was witnessed during the recent 12-Day War between Iran and Israel, which took place from June 12 to June 23. The so-called “Operation Rising Lion” was initially aimed at rolling back Iran’s nuclear program by bringing about regime change in the country. Images of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his wife alongside Mohammad Reza Pahlavi and his wife— the son and daughter-in-law of the last ruler of the Pahlavi dynasty in Iran— surfaced during the 12-Day War. The meeting had taken place two years ago in April 2023 in Jerusalem. Reza Pahlavi was received at Tel Aviv’s Ben Gurion Airport by Israel’s Intelligence Minister, Gila Gamliel.
Though the number of lessons may be many, only a few key ones have been discussed here. The learned and responsible must continue their efforts to prevent the spread of hatred. States should not rely solely on the so-called guardians of the so-called New World Order, and the international community as a whole must wake up from its slumber before it is too late
Many analysts believe that regime change is the only way Iran’s nuclear programme can be rolled back once and for all. However, no one can say with certainty whether Reza Pahlavi would meet the same fate as Muammar Qaddafi of Libya, who faced a tragic end after dismantling his country’s nuclear programme.
There are a few urgent lessons to be drawn from these two recent military episodes for the nations that are militarily weaker than a few major powers or their allies.
First, in the realm of power politics, weaker states tend to rely on international law, norms, and morals, whereas stronger states often pursue their goals by any means necessary. In both recent cases, beginning with the Pakistan-India 2025 crisis, it was Pakistan’s strong and credible deterrent defence that prevented the country from plunging into a full-scale war and the region from descending into a nuclear standoff. Had Pakistan not been conventionally capable or a nuclear-armed state, India— with its larger armed forces— might have struck Pakistan as brutally as Israel is committing genocide in Gaza and other occupied Palestinian territories.
In the second case, it was again Iran’s drone and missile capabilities that prevented it from becoming another Iraq or Afghanistan. Even if there had been some internal debate among the Iranian leadership— under the fatwa of their Islamic Revolution leader, Ayatollah Khomeini— regarding uranium enrichment for military purposes, that ambiguity has likely been clarified by Israel’s unprovoked war against Iran. The USA joined the aerial assault simply because Israel is a key ally, and its current Prime Minister has built his entire political career on the claim that Iran is just weeks away from developing nuclear weapons— a claim he has been making since the mid-1990s and more loudly since 2009.
Second, the pledge of “Never Again” and the leadership that upheld it are long gone. Today, comparatively weaker states are vulnerable to nuclear-armed powers simply because they either lack nuclear weapons themselves or do not enjoy the protection of a nuclear umbrella. Even the very concept of a nuclear umbrella is fading. It has become increasingly evident that in conflicts involving a nuclear-armed state and a non-nuclear state— such as in the case of nuclear-armed Israel versus non-nuclear Iran— a major power like the USA is more likely to intervene in favor of the nuclear state. In contrast, when both states are nuclear-armed, as in the case of India and Pakistan, the same powerful state tends to avoid direct involvement.
This pattern is further illustrated by the war between Ukraine and Russia. The USA has refrained from directly intervening, as Washington is unwilling to risk a direct confrontation with Moscow for the sake of Kyiv. Had Ukraine possessed nuclear weapons, the Russian invasion might never have occurred— or, at the very least, would likely have remained limited, as has generally been the case between the South Asian rivals.
Therefore, it must be understood that the world we live in today compels nations to rely primarily on themselves. The United Nations and its various bodies have become increasingly irrelevant during and after these wars.
Third, Noam Chomsky is right when he says that future generations will remember us as irrational people who were busy spending billions of dollars on arms while poverty was rampant in many parts of the world. These two recent events must have compelled many nations—especially those without strong defense capabilities and traditionally focused on innovation, like Japan—to rethink their strategic approaches.
In today’s volatile world, only those who can guarantee their own survival are secure. In such anarchy, who cares about technological advancement, who cares about education and science, and who cares about building a better, liberal, stable, and tariff-free economy across the globe? Welcome to the pre–World War I era, where fear and mistrust dominate international relations, where everyone is afraid of everyone, and where any coming year could be the next 1914.
Though the number of lessons may be many, only a few key ones have been discussed here. The learned and responsible must continue their efforts to prevent the spread of hatred. States should not rely solely on the so-called guardians of the so-called New World Order, and the international community as a whole must wake up from its slumber before it is too late.
