ON 3 January 2026, at around 2 am local time, the United States conducted extraterritorial military operations under the codename ‘Absolute Resolve’, across northern Venezuela and captured incumbent Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores on the charges of ‘narcoterrorism’.
Earlier: on 06/07 May 2025, Indian air strikes against Pakistan; on 13 June 2025, Israeli attack on Iran that was later on joined by the USA; on 24 February 2022, Russian special military operations against Ukraine (termed as invasion by the USA led NATO); on 26 February 2019, Indian air strikes on Pakistan; on 20 March 2003, the USA’s invasion against Iraq and on 07 June 1981, Israel’s air strikes against Iraq are some of the examples of non-UNO sanctioned military strikes against the sovereign countries on one pretext or the other.
According to the data from Uppsala University in Sweden, since World War-II and inception of the UNO, there have been over 100 major military conflicts (like the Korean, Vietnam, Falklands, Pakistan, India, Israel, Europe, Gulf, Iraq, Syrian and Ukraine etc) and 285 armed conflicts while, 56 conflicts are still active, the highest number in one given time since 1945. Critical analysis of this data reveals some very interesting trends. First and foremost, it indicates almost continued absence of peace throughout the last 80 years. Secondly, it exhibits hegemonic nature of almost all the major and global powers especially against the middle and smaller countries. Thirdly, it reflects collapse of the pillars of the San Francisco Conference (the United Nations Conference on International Organization) convened from 25-26 April 1945, that promised grant of veto power to the “Big Five” (USA, UK, USSR, China and France) only on the condition of maintaining peace and security in the world through the Military Staff Committee under Article-47 of the UNO charter. Fourthly, it inculcates rather consolidates presence of security-insecurity paradox amongst the smaller and middle power countries. And lastly, it ironically, echoes limitations and overall failure of the UNO charter to cope up with the geopolitical and geostrategic realities of multipolar world.
Focusing on the presence of security-insecurity paradox reveals some thought-provoking but striking facts. Irrespective of the size of any country, amongst all the elements of national power, possession of sound military and economic power goes in tandem and precedes all the other tenants. Particularly, the historic events in Iraq, Ukraine, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, Libya and Venezuela etc have inculcated a renewed sense of insecurity amongst the countries of similar size and strength. They are being circumstantially encouraged to either develop their indigenous military strength both in conventional and unconventional domains or enter into a security pact, alliance or an agreement with powerful and bigger military powers. The phenomena have started a new arms race which is quite evident in the recent and potential sale/purchase agreements of military hardware around the Globe. Alongside, such countries are likely to seriously contemplate the indigenization of potent military hardware, despite the fact that possession of such a status would be a long and expensive route.
Conversely, countries like Pakistan, Iran and Israel showcase opposite trends. Possession of stronger military capabilities and a national resolve to effectively use such capabilities even against the bigger and stronger countries, as and when required, not only ensures maintenance of sovereignty of a country but also facilitates geopolitical and geostrategic relevance amongst the comity of nations. Additionally, another national security aspect has surfaced very vividly in their case. Particularly, Pakistan has exhibited a renewed security paradigm in the form of Full Spectrum Deterrence (FSD) which is the combined function of conventional and unconventional military capabilities. Although possession of nuclear military capability installs deterrence regime against the existential threat posed by the bigger neighbour how-ever, it might still encourage the belligerent to wage a limited war. In order to discourage such misadventures, possession of compatible or even superior military capabilities in conventional domain has been the viable ploy. Pakistan’s superior response to the Indian misadventures within the conventional military domain in February 2019 and May 2025, are testament to such realities which encourage the middle military powers to develop their military strength accordingly.
Another significant aspect that has surfaced out of the security paradigm is that military vic-tory against a bigger and stronger adversary re-defined parameters of power politics and un-folded newer diplomatic avenues. Since May 2025, Pakistan has resurged in regional and global settings as the relevant player and reliable regional security stabilizer in South Asia which is evident from the Mutual Strategic Defence Agreement with KSA (reportedly Turkiye likely to join) and increased global sale of the made in Pakistan JF-17 Thunder multirole fighter aircraft.
Conducting non-UNO sanctioned unilateral military action by the bigger countries against the smaller countries is a dangerous trend which not only undermines the UNO’s charter but also inculcates insecurity and encourages alliances. Though alliances are made to deter aggression however, history is testament to the fact that, military alliances have been more prone to spiralling the conflicts beyond control rather than controlling them. Moreover, prevalence of such geopolitical environment for a longer period of time also has the potential to seriously undermine the global arms control and non-proliferation regimes. Therefore, it can be concluded that it is about time that Global Powers feel responsible, exercise restraint and act in accordance with Article-47 of the UNO charter to ensure peace and security in the world, be-fore it is too late.
—The writer is a retired Air Officer from the PAF and currently serving at the DHA Suffa University (DSU), Karachi.
