Dr. Hamad Kasasbeh

In light of the escalating tensions between Iran on one side, and the United States and Israel on the other, the current conflict is no longer just a test of military power. It has become a deeper test of what “protection” truly means. The key question today is no longer who holds greater force, but who can sustain stability in an increasingly uncertain environment.

What this war reveals goes beyond the battlefield. Military bases spread across several Arab countries have not prevented the spread of tension. Instead, they have brought these countries closer to its center. With some of these bases being targeted—or threatened—they have shifted from tools of deterrence into potential points of friction.

This exposes a clear paradox. Structures that
were meant to provide protection are, in some cases, becoming sources of risk. This raises a critical question: does military presence shield states from conflict, or does it draw them into it?

With this shift, involvement in war is no longer solely a political decision. In some cases, it is shaped by geography and security alignment. Countries may find themselves within the sphere of conflict without being direct participants. This reflects a new form of indirect entanglement.

The impact is not limited to security. It quickly extends into the economy. As risks rise, insurance costs increase, investments slow down, and supply chains become more fragile. This clearly shows that military protection does not necessarily translate into economic protection.

As these effects deepen, the cost of alliances becomes more visible. While security partnerships may offer temporary deterrence, they also tie economies to external sources of tension. This can increase
vulnerability rather than reduce it.

Meanwhile, the global economy operates under a different logic. Investors do not seek military presence. They seek stability and predictability. As a result, capital moves away from risk—not toward centers of military power.

This shift redefines the meaning of strength. Military superiority alone is no longer enough to protect a country. Economic resilience has become the true line of defense. Countries with diversified and flexible economies can absorb shocks, while those relying on external protection remain more exposed.

This leads to a clear conclusion: protection is no longer built solely on military bases, but on economic foundations. Factories strengthen production, universities build knowledge, and technology centers drive innovation. At the same time, economic cooperation with allies—beyond security—offers a more sustainable path to stability.

In the end, protection is no longer measured by the number of military bases, but by a country’s ability to generate strength from within. Countries that build their economies protect themselves. Those that rely on external protecti
on may discover, at the first real test, that such protection was only temporary.