Middle East Tensions Global Diplomacy Iran Israel Conflict Peace and Stability International Relations By ASIF IQBAL Ramazan 2026 once again reminds us that decisions taken in the corridors of global power are never merely political. They often shape the destinies of nations and determine the course of history. Today, the Middle East appears to be standing once more at the edge of a potentially dangerous confrontation. On one side stands Iran, on the other Israel, with the United States positioned firmly in the background. At first glance, it may seem like a dispute among a few states. In reality, however, it reflects a deeper story one about the shifting balance of global power. History shows that when a superpower confronts a comparatively weaker state, it often imagines a short, swift and decisive conflict. The expectation is usually of a limited operation that forces the adversary into submission within days or weeks. In the early stages of the current tensions, a similar narrative appeared to dominate the political discourse in Washington: that pressure on Iran would remain contained and that the outcome would be achieved quickly. Yet wars rarely unfold according to the plans drawn on strategy tables. As time passes, the tone of official statements often begins to change. What is initially described as a brief operation gradually becomes a matter of weeks and sometimes evolves into the fear of a prolonged conflict. It is at this moment that the confidence of great powers begins to show signs of strain. The issue, in fact, is not merely about a potential war. It is about the structure of global power itself. After the Second World War, an international system emerged in which the United States occupied a dominant position. During the Cold War, ideals such as democracy, human rights and freedom became central to its political narrative. At the same time, however, the world witnessed episodes of covert interventions, regime changes and strategic maneuvering in different parts of the globe. In the 21st century, that global order is gradually evolving. The era when the world revolved around a single dominant power is slowly giving way to a more complex and multipolar system, where multiple actors compete for influence and strategic space. Iran must be understood within this broader context. Over the past few decades, it has built a political and security structure that does not rely solely on one individual or office. If a particular leader disappears from the scene, the system is capable of presenting another figure to maintain continuity. For this reason, strategies aimed at weakening Iran simply by targeting its leadership may not be as straightforward as they appear. In the United States itself, the question of who holds the authority to wage war has long been debated. Constitutionally, the power to declare war lies with Congress. Yet in practice, American presidents have often stretched those boundaries. From the Vietnam War to the invasion of Iraq, several conflicts began without a formal declaration of war. The War Powers Resolution of 1973 was introduced in an attempt to limit presidential authority, but in reality, its effectiveness has remained constrained by political circumstances. Another factor that constantly shapes Middle Eastern tensions is the status of Jerusalem and its sacred sites. The Al-Aqsa Mosque holds immense religious and historical significance for Muslims across the world. Any development connected to this sensitive location has the potential to trigger widespread international reaction. The pressing question today is whether the world can afford another major conflict. The Middle East has already endured decades of instability and confrontation. The region, burdened by unresolved political disputes and humanitarian crises, can scarcely bear another prolonged war. Wars often begin with slogans and promise of decisive outcomes, yet they usually end in devastation. Decisions made in distant halls of power may revolve around strategy and geography, but on the battlefield, there are cities, communities and human lives at stake. Wherever wars occur, their consequences are most severely felt by developing countries and ordinary people. The global economy too is rarely insulated from such turmoil. Instability in the Gulf region, including disruptions to air routes and transport hubs, would not merely affect aviation but could slow the broader rhythm of international trade and economic activity. Equally concerning is the humanitarian dimension. Under international law, targeting civilian populations during armed conflict constitutes a grave violation. Recent reports of attacks on civilian facilities including a girls’ school in Iran where more than 180 children reportedly lost their lives, and strikes on hospitals have raised serious questions about the protection of non-combatants. Such incidents not only deepen human tragedy but also challenge the credibility of international norms designed to safeguard civilians during war. The world therefore finds itself confronting a fundamental question: will the balance of power be shaped through war, or through diplomacy? If wisdom fails to prevail, this crisis will not remain confined to missile exchanges or regional rivalries. Its consequences may spread through the arteries of the global economy and further destabilise an already fragile international order. For Pakistan, the situation presents a delicate test of diplomacy. On one side lies neighbouring Iran; on the other, the Gulf states where millions of Pakistanis are employed and whose economies are closely linked with Pakistan’s own. Navigating this landscape will require careful balance, prudence and a commitment to regional stability. History repeatedly teaches that wars rarely solve the problems they claim to address. More often, they create new crises that last for generations. At this critical moment, the world would do well to return to the path of dialogue and diplomacy for peace remains the only durable foundation upon which a stable international order can be built. — Rising tensions in the Middle East as nations navigate a fragile path between conflict and diplomacy.

Middle East at the Brink: Power, Deception and a Changing World

Global tensions in the Middle East highlight the urgent need for diplomacy and careful international dialogue.

By Fahad On Mar 5, 2026

By ASIF IQBAL
Ramazan 2026 once again reminds us that decisions taken in the corridors of global power are never merely political. They often shape the destinies of nations and determine the course of history. Today, the Middle East appears to be standing once more at the edge of a potentially dangerous confrontation. On one side stands Iran, on the other Israel, with the United States positioned firmly in the background. At first glance, it may seem like a dispute among a few states. In reality, however, it reflects a deeper story one about the shifting balance of global power.

History shows that when a superpower confronts a comparatively weaker state, it often imagines a short, swift and decisive conflict. The expectation is usually of a limited operation that forces the adversary into submission within days or weeks. In the early stages of the current tensions, a similar narrative appeared to dominate the political discourse in Washington: that pressure on Iran would remain contained and that the outcome would be achieved quickly.

Yet wars rarely unfold according to the plans drawn on strategy tables. As time passes, the tone of official statements often begins to change. What is initially described as a brief operation gradually becomes a matter of weeks and sometimes evolves into the fear of a prolonged conflict. It is at this moment that the confidence of great powers begins to show signs of strain.

The issue, in fact, is not merely about a potential war. It is about the structure of global power itself. After the Second World War, an international system emerged in which the United States occupied a dominant position. During the Cold War, ideals such as democracy, human rights and freedom became central to its political narrative. At the same time, however, the world witnessed episodes of covert interventions, regime changes and strategic maneuvering in different parts of the globe.

In the 21st century, that global order is gradually evolving. The era when the world revolved around a single dominant power is slowly giving way to a more complex and multipolar system, where multiple actors compete for influence and strategic space.

Iran must be understood within this broader context. Over the past few decades, it has built a political and security structure that does not rely solely on one individual or office. If a particular leader disappears from the scene, the system is capable of presenting another figure to maintain continuity. For this reason, strategies aimed at weakening Iran simply by targeting its leadership may not be as straightforward as they appear.

In the United States itself, the question of who holds the authority to wage war has long been debated. Constitutionally, the power to declare war lies with Congress. Yet in practice, American presidents have often stretched those boundaries. From the Vietnam War to the invasion of Iraq, several conflicts began without a formal declaration of war. The War Powers Resolution of 1973 was introduced in an attempt to limit presidential authority, but in reality, its effectiveness has remained constrained by political circumstances.

Another factor that constantly shapes Middle Eastern tensions is the status of Jerusalem and its sacred sites. The Al-Aqsa Mosque holds immense religious and historical significance for Muslims across the world. Any development connected to this sensitive location has the potential to trigger widespread international reaction.

The pressing question today is whether the world can afford another major conflict. The Middle East has already endured decades of instability and confrontation. The region, burdened by unresolved political disputes and humanitarian crises, can scarcely bear another prolonged war.

Wars often begin with slogans and promise of decisive outcomes, yet they usually end in devastation. Decisions made in distant halls of power may revolve around strategy and geography, but on the battlefield, there are cities, communities and human lives at stake.

Wherever wars occur, their consequences are most severely felt by developing countries and ordinary people. The global economy too is rarely insulated from such turmoil. Instability in the Gulf region, including disruptions to air routes and transport hubs, would not merely affect aviation but could slow the broader rhythm of international trade and economic activity.

Equally concerning is the humanitarian dimension. Under international law, targeting civilian populations during armed conflict constitutes a grave violation. Recent reports of attacks on civilian facilities including a girls’ school in Iran where more than 180 children reportedly lost their lives, and strikes on hospitals have raised serious questions about the protection of non-combatants. Such incidents not only deepen human tragedy but also challenge the credibility of international norms designed to safeguard civilians during war.

The world therefore finds itself confronting a fundamental question: will the balance of power be shaped through war, or through diplomacy?

If wisdom fails to prevail, this crisis will not remain confined to missile exchanges or regional rivalries. Its consequences may spread through the arteries of the global economy and further destabilise an already fragile international order.

For Pakistan, the situation presents a delicate test of diplomacy. On one side lies neighbouring Iran; on the other, the Gulf states where millions of Pakistanis are employed and whose economies are closely linked with Pakistan’s own. Navigating this landscape will require careful balance, prudence and a commitment to regional stability.

History repeatedly teaches that wars rarely solve the problems they claim to address. More often, they create new crises that last for generations. At this critical moment, the world would do well to return to the path of dialogue and diplomacy for peace remains the only durable foundation upon which a stable international order can be built.

Update on Petrol Supply in Pakistan amid Iran War