The Middle East War and the Collapse of the Outsourced Security Illusion

By Prof. Engr. Zamir Ahmed Awan,

Global Silk Route Research Alliance

The latest escalation between the United States, Israel and Iran has raised a serious question for the Middle East, Europe and the wider world: can any country safely outsource its national security to another power forever? For decades, many oil-rich Arab states relied heavily on American protection. They hosted U.S. military bases, bought expensive weapons, paid for security arrangements, and trusted that the American shield would be enough to deter any major threat.

That assumption is now under deep pressure!

The United States maintains a vast military footprint across the Middle East, including major facilities in Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, the UAE, Iraq, Jordan and other locations. These bases are equipped with advanced aircraft, air-defense systems, radars, missile batteries, command centers, naval assets and intelligence platforms. In theory, this network was designed to protect U.S. interests, secure energy routes, reassure Gulf allies and deter Iran. In practice, recent events have shown that even the most advanced military architecture can be vulnerable when facing a determined regional power with missiles, drones and asymmetric capabilities.

Iran has lived under sanctions, isolation and economic pressure for decades. Yet it still developed a serious missile and drone capability. This does not mean Iran is stronger than the United States. It is not. But it does show that modern warfare is no longer only about aircraft carriers, stealth fighters and billion-dollar defense systems. A sanctioned country can still create pressure through cheaper, mobile, dispersed and difficult-to-stop weapons. The battlefield has changed. The old myth of complete American military invincibility has been shaken.

American bases in the region have been targeted and damaged to certain extent, and Arab host countries have discovered that hosting foreign power does not automatically guaranteed immunity from war. Protection can become exposure.

This is the central lesson for Arab states. For too long, some of them invested more in imported security than in sovereign defense capacity. Their armed forces were often built around regime protection, internal stability, border policing and ceremonial strength rather than preparation for complex regional war. In some countries, security forces became more experienced in controlling expatriate labor, checking documents, protecting royal families and maintaining internal order than in facing missile warfare, drone swarms, cyberattacks or full-scale military escalation.

This model may have worked in peaceful periods, but it is not enough for the new era. A modern state cannot rely only on foreign bases and imported weapons. It needs trained personnel, local defense industries, integrated air defenses, civil defense systems, cyber resilience, emergency planning, strategic autonomy and political wisdom. Real security is not purchased. It is built.

The lesson is not only for the Middle East. Europe must also think seriously. Since the Second World War, many European countries have lived under the American security umbrella through NATO. This arrangement brought stability, but it also encouraged dependence. Europe became economically powerful but strategically incomplete. Many European states reduced defense capacity, neglected industrial preparedness and assumed that Washington would always lead, always pay and always protect.

That assumption is increasingly risky. The United States is facing internal polarization, changing strategic priorities, a rising focus on Asia, financial pressure, and public fatigue with foreign commitments. American politics can change sharply from one administration to another. Europe must ask uncomfortable but necessary questions: if a major crisis comes, will Washington act quickly? Will American voters accept another costly confrontation? Can Europe defend itself if U.S. support is delayed, reduced or conditional? Is NATO strong because Europe is strong, or because America is strong?

These questions do not mean Europe should abandon NATO. NATO remains one of the most important security alliances in modern history. But Europe must stop treating NATO as a substitute for European capability. An alliance is strongest when all members are capable, not when most members depend on one.

The way forward is clear. Arab states should diversify security partnerships, invest in domestic defense industries, develop missile and drone defense, strengthen regional diplomacy, and reduce their dependence on foreign military guarantees. They should also prioritize political settlement, because no defense system can protect a region that is permanently trapped in confrontation.

Europe should build a stronger European pillar inside NATO. This means more defense spending, but not spending blindly. Europe needs ammunition production, air defense, cyber capability, drones, intelligence coordination, military mobility, energy security and strategic manufacturing. It must also develop a political culture that understands defense as a long-term responsibility, not a temporary reaction to fear.

For the youth, especially Gen-Z, this debate is vital. They will inherit the consequences of today’s security choices. They must ask whether their countries are spending wisely, whether foreign alliances are balanced, whether war is being normalized, and whether diplomacy is being neglected. They should not accept slogans about superpowers, invincibility or permanent protection without questioning them.

The Middle East crisis has exposed a hard truth: dependence is not security. A country that cannot defend itself, feed itself, power itself or make independent decisions is never fully sovereign. The United States may remain powerful, but it cannot be everywhere, protect everyone and absorb every risk. The Arab world and Europe must learn this lesson before the next crisis arrives.

Security in the 21st century must be sovereign, regional, technological and diplomatic. The future belongs not to those who buy protection, but to those who build resilience!

—

Author:

Prof. Engr. Zamir Ahmed Awan,

Sinologist – Diplomat – Advisor – Consultant,

Founding Chair, Global Silk Route research Alliance.

(E-mail: awanzamir@yahoo.com). WhatsApp: +923348777892