ISRAEL’S attack on Qatar on Sept 9 may have been one of the most significant watershed moments in global geopolitics since US President Donald Trump’s so-called “Liberation Day” in April this year.
Saudi Arabia has traditionally been one of America’s biggest allies in the Arab world.
Pakistan on the other hand, while not as belligerent as, say, Russia or Iran, is not generally considered to be a key ally that is consistently aligned with America’s interests.
This major geopolitical shift shows that the Arab world has taken Israel’s attack on Qatar with deadly seriousness.
If once the perception was that America held the reins on Israel, it is clear now that Israel has let slip the dogs of war. Either America has permitted Israel to strike American allies, or Israel simply has no regard for what America does or does not permit.
Either way, as of Sept 9, it seems that American security guarantees are no longer worth the paper they are written on.
If you are paying protection money to your local gangster, and that gangster’s best friend feels he can throw a rock through your window anytime he wants with impunity, you have to ask yourself: what are you paying the gangster for?
America has a singular ability to conduct military strikes nearly anywhere in the world, with barely a moment’s notice.
It maintains this capability partly by having military bases all over the world.
The only reason a country would let a foreign power build a military base on its soil is because of an explicit or implicit defence pact, which can be boiled down to: We let you build a military base on our soil, you help to keep our country safe.
This is a simple, sacred deal – one that made sense for most of the last 80 years.
As of September 2025, it no longer makes sense.
The American military base at Al-Udeid in Qatar holds the distinction of being the largest American military base in the whole of the Middle East. The US and Qatar have a long history of strong diplomatic relations.
And despite all this, Qatar was not protected from being bombed in broad daylight – not even by an “enemy”, but by America’s biggest ally (or “puppet master” some would say).
It isn’t just America’s brown allies either, who are having to rethink 80-year-old paradigms. Imagine how Danes began to feel, when Trump refused to rule out the possibility of conquering Greenland by force. The sheer insanity of the mere suggestion is mind bending.
So the question facing many of what used to be America’s key allies is again: what is the use of paying the local gangster?
This is the same question faced by America’s biggest trading partners in the wake of Trump’s “Liberation Day”, which saw massive tariffs suddenly announced on America’s trading partners.
If America was willing to turn around and suddenly announce inexplicable tariffs that singlehandedly turned the globalised trade economy on its head almost overnight, jeopardising entire industries and national economies in a blink of an eye, was it wise to rely on it to be the leading centre of the global economy moving forward?
Once the giant goose that laid giant golden eggs, America is now the giant goose that has shown itself to be capable of suddenly biting your head off, if it felt like it.
This is not a reliable business partner. No matter how many giant golden eggs a goose provides, you can’t enjoy even one of them if you no longer have a head. Better to go with the goose that lays bronze eggs but never bites your head off.
After Liberation Day, the smartest global players likely started to look for other key economic partners, and probably started scheming on how to decouple from an American-led global economy – all likely while still smiling and playing nice with the monster they can’t wait to get away from.
With Israel’s attacks on Qatar, this philosophy and approach now extends from global trade partnerships to global security partnerships – as clearly demonstrated by the latest mutual defence pact by Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.
From 1945 to 2025, global trade and global security norms were built around what can be termed as a rules-based order.
The very idea of a liberal rules-based global order emerged from the horror and the ashes of World War II – the deadliest conflict in human history, which saw around 70 to 85 million deaths, the Holocaust, the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and countless other unimaginable atrocities.
Whoever was left standing came together and basically designed a new global rules-based order that could perhaps be summarised in just two words: “Never again.”
The generation of people who built that system and could remember the horrors of a world without rules are now dead and forgotten, and have been replaced by a generation who seem set on “Let’s do it all again”.
The opposite of a rules-based order is a “might makes right” law of the jungle.
From an analytical standpoint, I feel it is wiser for us to acknowledge that this is indeed the actual, natural state of the world. The powers at the end of World War II were mighty enough to impose a new type of “right”, but the motivations and resolve of that time are now long gone, and rampant self-interest runs deep in its place.
Prior to Trump, most global actors were invested in a globalised rules-based order, because the major players felt that they were benefitting from it. When Trump came back, he decided to push the narrative that a globalised rules-based order had resulted in America being taken advantage of, and in its place, he pursued the most radical, illogical, and borderline insane version of “America First” imaginable.
This had a cascading effect, which ends essentially in a world where every man is for himself, and with no one trusting America to be a reliable leader or ally, either economically or militarily.
As the world becomes a more and more dangerous place, another set of actors it is absolutely vital to watch are the large defence corporations.
For much of the post-World War II world, war was the domain of Third World countries. But now have open, full-on war on European soil, and a full-on genocide in the Middle East unfolding live on TV.
There is arguably more war, death, bombing, and destruction now than there has been in 80 years. And through all this, rest assured: Someone is profiting and getting filthy rich.
Even as the tides of geopolitics wax and wane, I believe there is no stopping the flames of war, until we truly understand who that someone is, and how exactly they are profiting.
Nathaniel Tan is a strategic communications consultant who hopes the floods in Sabah abate soon. He can be reached at nat@engage.my. The views expressed here are solely his own.
Already a subscriber? Log in
Get 20% OFF The Star Digital Access
Cancel anytime. Ad-free. Unlimited access with perks.
