4. Syed Ahmed Ali-Pax Judaica-Oped thumbnail-March-2026-APP

Israel’s aggressive settlement expansion and blatant disregard for international law have contributed towards the fragmentation of the international rules-based order. In the midst of this upheaval, Tel Aviv has cemented itself as the dominant power in the Middle East, creating what commentators term “Pax Judaica”. This regional order is dominated by Israeli perceptions of security threats which it must eliminate for the preservation of the Jewish state. Israel’s limited strategic capacity is compensated by leveraging its political lobbies, intelligence networks and ideological support of the Zionist movement embedded deep within Washington. This allows the Israeli defence forces unmitigated access to technology, financial support and military cooperation with the West. Consequently, the Middle East reflects an asymmetrical security architecture where the rest of the region is vulnerable to Israeli territorial expansion, pre-emptive strikes, regime changes and genocide, all in the garb of self-defence.

Israel’s actions in the Middle East particularly in Gaza, constitutes as a crime against humanity and are in clear violation of the first three article of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The UN commission confirms that Tel Aviv has been responsible for killing at least 64,964 people and the destruction of 90% of civilian infrastructure Israel’s actions have set a dangerous precedent for the global security community in Sudan, the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) adopted the Israeli policy of shrinking civilian space in the battlefield, which allows security personnel to use overwhelming force on residents. According to a report, nearly 500 people have been killed and thousands internally displaced as the RSF had declared Zamzam a military warzone. Similarly, India’s consul general in New York, Sandeep Chakravorty, has signalled to enforce demographic change policies by using Article 35A and 370 as legal instruments, which closely mirrors Israeli policies in Gaza.

The legalisation of international violence has led Israel to challenge international institutions. In 2023, Tel Aviv was brought into question over concerns of genocide during the war in Gaza, which was subject to a trial by the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The court issued a provisional order which directed the Israeli court to ensure humanitarian aid to Gaza and prevent all actions that could lead to genocide. The Israeli government paid no heed to the ICJ’s rule; consequently, on 21 November, 2024, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued an arrest warrant for Prime Minister Netanyahu and Chief of Defence Yoav Gallant. The Israeli government rejected the jurisdiction of the ICC and openly defied its arrest warrants by travelling to the US, followed by Hungary. The lack of cooperation by states has created political space for the accused to disregard international courts. However, it is important to mention notable exceptions like Turkey, which has also issued an arrest warrant for crimes against humanity.

Israel in a bid to eliminate its perceived threats has blatantly disregarded the international law, which is clearly reflected in its treatment of international bodies. On 16 November, 2025, UN peacekeepers reported heavy artillery firing by Israeli tanks on the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) positions. These forces were tasked to stabilise Southern Lebanon under Security Council Resolution 1701. Israel’s belligerent behaviour has not even respected international protocols and norms. Tel Aviv’s recent strike on Qatar is a violation of the Vienna Convention of 1961, which forbids the attack on diplomats. Such attacks risk the erosion established conventions and sets a dangerous precedent in the international community. The use of deception and the weaponisation of diplomatic negotiations was also seen in the recent Iran-Israel war. Where the Trump administration used the guise of the sixth round of talks as a cover for Israeli led operation ‘Rising Lion.’ This has created a world where there is no trust between international actors, as such conflicts cannot be halted by ceasefire mechanisms or confidence-building measures when each side anticipates bad faith.

Israel’s policies in the Middle Eastern region come at the expense of international norms, which often creates dangerous precedents which are promptly adopted by other states. The destruction of the Arab world is fuelled by an absence of balance of power in the region, which has created a power vacuum, which is filled by the rise of Pax Judiaca. Washington’s partisan behaviour and the absence of any meaningful international body to monitor Tel Aviv’s actions leave Israel with virtually no oversight. As a consequence of the international system’s inability to safeguard sovereignty and basic human rights, regional states may turn to broader alliances to guarantee their security. This reflects a broader trend in the international community where international organisations are replaced by regional and extra-regional alliances. It should be noted that Israel’s behaviour is a product of the relentless pursuit of state interests and extremist ideologies. It has often pushed the soul of humanity to the brink of collapse. The question then arises: have we finally gone too far?

Syed Ahmed Ali is a research assistant at the Centre for Aerospace and Securtiy Studies (CASS), Islamabad, Pakistan. The Article was first published by Middle East Monitor. He writes on technopolitics and can be reached at [email protected]


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

The Cover-up: IAF Narrative of the May 2025 Air Battle

Even after one year since the India-Pakistan May war of 2025, the Indian discourse regarding Operation Sindoor remains uncertain under its pretence of restraint. The Pahalgam attack on 22 April, which killed 26 people, triggered an escalatory spiral. New Delhi quickly accused Pakistan-linked elements, while Islamabad refuted the allegation and demanded an independent investigation. On 7 May, India launched attacks deep inside Pakistan under what it later termed as Operation Sindoor. The political motive was intended to turn the crisis into coercive signalling by shifting the blame onto the enemy and projecting a sense of military superiority.
This episode, however, began to fray immediately as war seldom follows the intended script. Within minutes PAF shot down 7 IAF aircraft including 4 Rafales. On 8 May, Reuters reported that at least two Indian aircraft were shot down by a Pakistani J-10C, while the local government sources reported other aircraft crashes in Indian-occupied Jammu and Kashmir

Read More »

Why the IAF’s Post-Sindoor Spending Surge is a Sign of Panic

After Operation Sindoor, India is spending billions of dollars on new weapons. This is being taken by many people as an indication of military prowess. It is not. This rush to procure weapons is in fact an acknowledgement that the Air Force in India had failed to do what it was meant to do. The costly jets and missiles that India had purchased over the years failed to yield the promised results.

Sindoor was soon followed by India in sealing the gaps which the operation had exposed. It was reported that Indian Air Force (IAF) is looking to speed up its purchases of more than 7 billion USD. This will involve other Rafale fighter jets with India already ordering 26 more Rafales to the Navy in 2024 at an estimated cost of about 3.9 billion USD. India is also seeking long-range standoff missiles, Israeli loitering munitions and increased drone capabilities. Special financial powers of the Indian military were activated to issue emergency procurement orders. The magnitude and rate of these purchases speak volumes.

Indian media and defence analysts have over the years considered the Rafale as a game changer. When India purchased 36 Rafales aircrafts at an approximate cost of 8.7 billion USD, analysts vowed that the aircraft would provide India with air superiority over Pakistan. Operation Sindoor disproved all those allegations. Indian aircraft did not even fly in Pakistani airspace when the fighting started. India solely depended on standoff weapons that were launched at a safe distance. The air defence system of Pakistan, comprising of the HQ-9 surface-to-air missile system and its own fighters, stood its ground.

Read More »

May 2025: Mosaic Warfare and the Myth of Centralised Air Power

Visualise a modern-day Air Force commander sitting in the operations room, miles away from the combat zone, overseeing every friendly and enemy aircraft and all assets involved in the campaign. In a split second, he can task a fighter, reposition a drone, and authorise a strike. In today’s promising technological era, he does not even need an operations room; a laptop on his desktop will suffice. The situation looks promising as it offers efficiency, precision, and control. The term used for such operational control is ‘centralisation’, which has been made possible with advanced networking, integrating space, cyber, surveillance, artificial intelligence, and seamless communication, enabling a single commander to manage an entire campaign from a single node. Centralised command and control, championed by the Western air forces and then adopted by many others, has thus been seen as a pinnacle of modern military power.
The concept of centralisation, enabled by state-of-the-art networking, may seem promising, but it is nothing more than a myth.

Read More »