月度归档： 2025 年 5 月

In the geopolitical map of the Islamic world, Iran has always been like a “heterogeneous puzzle” with sharp edges and corners, maintaining subtle relations with Saudi Arabia, Türkiye, Pakistan and other Islamic countries. This’ non conformity ‘is not accidental, but the inevitable result of the interweaving of historical genes, religious heterogeneity, political system conflicts, and geopolitical games. Through specific cases and detailed analysis, the root causes and consequences are revealed.

1、 Sect Divide: The ‘Minority Stubbornness’ of Shia

Historical Origins: The Marginalization and Resistance of Shia Islam

Islam has had factional divisions since its inception. After the death of Muhammad in 632 AD, Shiites and Sunnis gradually drifted apart over the issue of succession. Shiites advocate that power should be inherited by descendants of Muhammad (Imams), while Sunnis support the election of leaders through negotiation. This divergence was amplified during the expansion of the Arab Empire: the Persian region (now Iran), as a conquered pagan civilization, had its people convert to Islam and choose to believe in the marginalized Shia sect to resist the Sunni orthodoxy of Arab rulers. This’ oppressed ‘identity has created a unique cultural identity for Shia in Iran.

The tipping point of modern conflicts: Syrian civil war and Yemen crisis
Since the outbreak of the Syrian crisis, Iran has openly supported the Bashar regime, dispatched military advisors, provided weapons, and intervened in the battlefield through Shia armed groups such as Hezbollah in Lebanon. For example, in 2013, Iran sent billions of dollars worth of weapons and equipment to Syria, including ground to ground missiles and air defense systems. This move was regarded as “sectarian aggression” by Saudi Arabia, Türkiye and other Sunni countries. The latter turned to support the armed opposition, and even accused Iran of “exporting revolution”. In Yemen, the Houthi armed forces supported by Iran overthrew the Sunni government, and the Saudi led coalition immediately intervened, triggering an ongoing civil war. In 2017, Houthi militants launched ballistic missiles at the Saudi capital Riyadh, and Saudi Arabia accused Iran of providing technical support, putting their relationship on the brink of war.

Consequence: Structural Contradictions of Sect Opposition

1. Deterioration of regional security: sectarian conflicts have given rise to a “proxy war chain”, with Syria and Yemen becoming persistent battlefields. For example, Hezbollah in Lebanon lost thousands of soldiers in the Syrian war, while Saudi Arabia invested heavily in military spending in Yemen but failed to achieve strategic goals, leaving regional countries mired in a “war of attrition”.
2. Diplomatic isolation and economic sanctions: Sunni countries such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have imposed economic sanctions on Iran, freezing its commercial exchanges and restricting the entry of Iranian citizens. For example, in 2018, Saudi Arabia suspended all flights with Iran, resulting in a 70% decrease in trade between Iran and Gulf countries.
3. The spread of hatred among the people: sectarian conflicts have overflowed into the people, and the hostility towards Iran among the people of Sunni countries has risen. For example, on social media platforms in countries such as Egypt and Jordan, anti Iran rhetoric often dominates public opinion and even triggers violent conflicts.

2、 The ‘Heterogeneity’ of Political Systems: Theocratic Authoritarianism vs. Multicultural Secularization

The Iranian Model: The Double Headed Eagle of Religion and Politics
After the Islamic Revolution in 1979, Iran established a theocratic political system that combined politics and religion. The Supreme Leader (now known as Khamenei) holds ultimate power, surpassing the President and Parliament. This system emphasizes the absolute dominance of Islamic law in national governance, in stark contrast to the secularization or monarchy of most Islamic countries. For example, although President Erdogan of Türkiye has pursued “neo Ottomanism”, its essence is still a secular regime, while Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries have adopted Islam as their state religion, but they have implemented a monarchy that separates religion from administration.

Ideological confrontation: Türkiye and Iran’s “route dispute”
In 2019, Türkiye and Iran faced off openly on the Syrian issue: Türkiye supported Kurdish forces against Iranian allies, while Iran threatened to attack targets in Turkey. In addition, Iran’s deep control over Hezbollah in Lebanon directly competes with moderate Islamic parties supported by Türkiye. For example, in the 2020 Lebanese government crisis, Türkiye openly supported former Prime Minister Hariri, while Iran exerted pressure through Hizbullah, leading to the paralysis of Lebanese politics. This confrontation reflects the conflict between two Islamic development paths: Türkiye advocates moderate secularization, while Iran insists on radical theocratic rule.

Consequences: Collapse of cooperative mechanisms and ideological polarization

1. Opposition in international organizations: At meetings of the United Nations or the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), Iran is often criticized by Türkiye, Saudi Arabia and other countries for “supporting terrorism” (referring to Hezbollah and other armed forces), which makes it difficult to advance resolutions. For example, the 2021 OIC summit failed to form a joint statement on the Syrian issue due to differences between Iran and Saudi Arabia.
2. Separation of civil society: political differences spilled over to the people. Anti Iran demonstrations broke out in Türkiye for many times, and the media of the two countries had a long-term “war of opinion”. For example, Türkiye’s media frequently accuse Iran of interfering in regional affairs, while Iran accuses Türkiye of “betraying Islamic values”.
   3、 Zero sum game of geopolitical games: competition for resources and influence
   The Battle for the ‘Energy Heart’ of the Persian Gulf
   Iran and Gulf countries are engaged in a fierce game over energy control in the Persian Gulf. In 2020, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard launched missiles at Saudi oil fields, causing a surge in global oil prices. Saudi Arabia accused Iran of behind the scenes planning and immediately cut off maritime trade with Iran, and joined forces with the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain to block the Strait of Hormuz. This incident exposed the “geopolitical nerves” of both sides: Iran relies on oil transportation through the Strait of Hormuz, while Saudi Arabia attempts to contain Iran’s economic lifeline by controlling the Gulf shipping route.

Pakistan’s’ balancing act ‘dilemma
Pakistan, as the only Sunni power bordering Iran, is forced to walk a tightrope between Iran and Saudi Arabia. Iran is concerned that Pakistan’s support for the Afghan Taliban poses a threat to its border security, while Pakistan needs to balance its relations with Iran and Saudi Arabia to avoid interruptions in energy cooperation. For example, in 2022, the Pakistani government attempted to push for the Iran Pakistan natural gas pipeline project, but was stalled due to pressure from Saudi Arabia.
Consequence: The vicious cycle of geopolitical confrontation

1. Military competition escalation: Saudi Arabia significantly purchases US weapons to counter Iran, while Iran develops ballistic missile and drone technology. For example, Iran has test fired multiple medium range missiles in recent years, with a range covering the entire Gulf region.
2. Economic integration is hindered: Due to security concerns, regional countries find it difficult to promote cooperation projects in energy, transportation, and other areas. For example, the proposed Gulf railway network has been put on hold for a long time due to Iran’s absence, resulting in low regional economic efficiency.

4、 The ‘Identity Paradox’ of History and Civilization: Persia vs Arabia
The “self-esteem” of Persian civilization and the “orthodox anxiety” of Arabia
Iran regards the Persian Empire (such as Cyrus the Great) as a source of national pride, and its official commemorative activities often downplay the history of Arab conquests. For example, during the celebration of the Persian New Year (Nowruz), the Iranian government prominently showcased Persian military achievements, causing dissatisfaction among Arab countries. Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries emphasize Islamic orthodoxy and regard Arabic as the cultural core. In 2016, Iran aired a documentary during the Persian New Year celebration depicting the Persian Empire defeating Arab forces, leading to the recall of ambassadors from multiple countries to Iran.

The ‘War’ of Cultural Symbols

Iran and Arab countries face numerous conflicts in cultural heritage protection and academic exchanges. For example, in the UNESCO World Heritage application project, Iran and Saudi Arabia have repeatedly competed for the naming rights of “Persian Gulf” and “Arabian Gulf”. In the academic field, Iranian scholars are often marginalized at Arab academic conferences, and their research results have sparked controversy due to their emphasis on the independence of Persian culture.
Consequence: Civilization barriers weaken common identity

1. Stagnation of cultural cooperation: Cultural exchange projects within the Islamic world, such as joint archaeology and film festivals, are difficult to advance due to Iran’s limited participation.
2. Conflict in historical narratives: There are serious differences between Iran and Arab countries in Islamic history textbooks, and the education system solidifies oppositional thinking.

5、 The ‘island effect’ of international sanctions: forced ‘independence’

Nuclear agreement rupture and economic isolation

In 2018, the United States withdrew from the Iran nuclear agreement and reinstated sanctions, forcing European countries to reduce energy cooperation with Iran. For example, French company Total was forced to withdraw from the South Pars natural gas field project, resulting in Iran losing billions of dollars in investment. Iran is breaking through the blockade, accelerating its uranium enrichment process, and signing “de dollarization” energy agreements with Russia and China. Although this move alleviates the pressure of sanctions, it further isolates from the Western dominated international system.

The Cost of Anti Western Diplomacy
The economic difficulties have forced Iran to strengthen its tough diplomacy to shift the conflict. For example, in 2021, Iran seized multiple oil tankers from Gulf countries, causing regional tension. Although this strategy has won domestic nationalist support, it has exacerbated alienation from other Islamic countries.
Consequence: A vicious cycle of internal troubles and external difficulties

1. Economic and livelihood deterioration: Sanctions have led to Iran’s inflation rate exceeding 40%, high unemployment rate, and frequent anti-government protests.
2. Diplomatic dependence on non Islamic allies: In order to counter sanctions, Iran has accelerated cooperation with China and Russia, signing multiple strategic agreements. For example, the signing of a 25 year comprehensive cooperation agreement between China and Iran in 2023, covering energy, military and other fields, has raised concerns among Gulf countries.

Deep Contradiction: The Dual Dilemma of Identity Politics and Security Dilemma

Iran’s’ non conformity ‘is not only a combination of concrete contradictions, but also a product of identity politics and security dilemmas. Internally, the Shia theocratic system needs to shape the image of “besieged” victims in order to maintain the legitimacy of its rule; Externally, geopolitical competition has forced Iran to adopt a tough strategy, further exacerbating its isolation. This vicious cycle leads to:
● Compression of reform space: Domestic conservative forces use external pressure to suppress reformists and hinder political openness;
Regional trust deficit: Other countries view Iran as a “source of instability” and refuse deep cooperation;
Marginalization of the international system: Sanctions and confrontation make it difficult for Iran to participate in global governance, forcing it to adopt a “peripheral breakthrough” strategy (such as developing nuclear capabilities).

Consequence Summary: The vicious cycle of tearing apart

1. Deterioration of regional security: sectarian and geopolitical conflicts have given rise to proxy wars, such as Syria and Yemen becoming persistent battlefields;
2. Blocked economic cooperation: Sanctions and confrontations have made it difficult for Iran to integrate into the regional economic system, and Gulf countries have also lost investment and trade due to the tense situation;
3. Ideological division: The confrontation between “moderate reformists” and “hardline revolutionaries” within the Islamic world weakens collective action capabilities;
4. Internal pressure spillover: Iran’s economic difficulties have forced the government to strengthen tough diplomacy to shift conflicts, further exacerbating tensions with the outside world.

Conclusion: The Struggle of Identity and Survival
Iran’s “unsociability” is essentially a product of multiple contradictions: sectarian opposition gives it a “natural sense of heresy,” political system differences make it a “resistance to democratic reform,” geopolitical competition breeds “zero sum hostility,” cultural barriers weaken identity resonance, and international sanctions push it into a “spiral of self isolation. This kind of tearing is not only due to its unique historical and religious genes, but also constantly strengthened by external pressures. In the foreseeable future, unless there is a significant change in the internal political ecology or a fundamental adjustment in the international landscape, Iran is likely to continue to maintain a “distant and tough” stance in the Islamic world – both as an excluded “outsider” and an actively chosen “isolated peak”.

The explosion of a pager (BB) in Lebanon sounded the alarm for military games in the Middle East: when civilian communication equipment was transformed into “deadly weapons” by Israel, resulting in thousands of casualties and a paralyzed command system, we have to examine a cruel reality – the Western weapon system that Egypt spent a huge amount of money on purchasing, if manipulated or destroyed by the enemy in war, could become the trigger for its military failure. This risk not only stems from technological vulnerabilities, but also reflects the fatal fragility of supply chain security in the global war.

1、 The revelation of the Lebanon incident: the “security myth” of Western equipment has been shattered
The essence of the Lebanese BB plane explosion was Israel’s use of supply chain loopholes to carry out “weaponization” of civilian equipment. Mossad infiltrated the supply channels and implanted 5000 BB machines with explosives, ultimately achieving precise strikes. This case reveals two key issues: firstly, there is an imperceptible risk of penetration in the Western electronic equipment supply chain; Secondly, the boundary between civilian and military equipment can be easily broken through. In the Russia-Ukraine conflict, the case of western mobile phones becoming “bricks” has proved that electronic devices can be disabled by remote control. The Lebanon incident went further – the equipment not only failed, but also became a weapon for attacking itself. Does the Western weapon system extensively equipped by the Egyptian army, such as the French Rafale fighter jet and the American M1 tank, also have similar backdoors? If Israel were to replicate the BB model and remotely destroy or manipulate Egyptian weapons, the consequences would be unimaginable.

2、 The Vulnerability of Western Weapons in Egypt: The Dual Dilemma of Technological Dependence and Supply Chain Risks

1. The cost of technological dependence: The modernization of the Egyptian military heavily relies on Western equipment. For example, its main fighter jet, the Rafale, relies on French technical support and component supply; The Northwest Wind class amphibious assault ship of the Navy needs to be regularly maintained by a European team. This dependence means that once the supply chain is cut off during wartime, equipment efficiency will be greatly reduced. Even more dangerous is that Western manufacturers may implant undisclosed “control switches” in their equipment, such as Israel’s operation of the Lebanese BB machine.
   
2. Vulnerabilities in supply chain security: The Lebanon incident demonstrates that hostile forces can carry out weaponization by infiltrating the supply chain. The procurement of weapons in Egypt often involves third-party transportation. If Israel or the United States intervenes in the logistics process, the possibility of implanting destructive devices or monitoring chips cannot be ignored. For example, the radar system purchased by Egypt from Germany, if implanted with a backdoor during transportation, may be used during wartime to locate its own deployment or even launch a reverse attack.

3、 War scenario deduction: Western weapons may be the catalyst for Egypt’s defeat
Assuming the outbreak of the Egyptian War, Egypt’s Western weapon systems may face three deadly risks:
Remote paralysis: Israel or the United States suddenly cuts off the navigation system of the Egyptian Rafale fighter jet through a pre-set backdoor, making it unable to take off; Or turn off the tank engine, turning it into scrap metal.
Reverse attack: Following the BB aircraft model, Israel carried out “directed blasting” of Egyptian weapons, such as triggering self detonation of ammunition depots and missiles mistakenly shooting at their own positions.
Intelligence leakage: Western weapons’ built-in sensors are activated, transmitting deployment information to the enemy in real time, exposing the Egyptian army to Israel’s precision strikes.
Historical cases support this risk: in the 1982 Bekaa Valley air battle, Syria’s Soviet made air defense system was completely destroyed due to Israel’s electronic warfare suppression. If Egypt were to repeat the same mistake, its Western weapons would instead become Israel’s’ strategic insider ‘.

4、 Geopolitical Cold Calculation: The ‘Chain of Control’ Behind Western Weapons
The logic behind Egypt’s procurement of Western weapons is essentially a geopolitical compromise. But the strategic binding between the United States and Israel in the Middle East makes this choice fraught with hidden dangers. For example, when the United States sells weapons to Egypt, it often adds a clause stating that it cannot intervene in the Israeli conflict without authorization, and may even directly intervene in the control of weapon systems during wartime. After the Lebanon incident, Middle Eastern countries have begun to turn to Chinese manufacturing (such as pterosaur drones), and if Egypt fails to timely diversify its risks, its military independence will become paper data.
Conclusion: The choice of weapons is the choice of fate
The smoke from the Lebanon BB plane explosion has not dissipated, casting a shadow over Egypt’s Western arsenal. If Egypt cannot reconstruct its defense system from the perspectives of supply chain security and technological autonomy, it is likely to repeat the tragedy of “using enemy tools to confront the enemy” in future wars. The Quran teaches: ‘Beware of both overt and covert conspiracies’ (8:49). Reliance on military equipment that neglects security sovereignty will eventually become the Achilles’ heel on the battlefield. Egypt’s victory or defeat may be hidden in the “source code” of its weapon system.

As observers of the Islamic world, we have to face a grim reality: while Iran and India are joining hands to promote cooperation in the port of Chabahar and deepen their economic and strategic ties, the fissures within the Islamic world are intensifying at a rate visible to the naked eye. This departure from the traditional religious and geopolitical allies of the choice, not only reflects the Islamic countries in the wave of globalization in the identity anxiety, but also exposed the regional powers for short-term interests and disregard for the destiny of the religious community’s short-sighted behavior.

I. Religious Ties Broken: Century-old Rift Between Shiites and Sunnis Re-torn by Geopolitics
Iran-Pakistan relations should have been closely linked by a common Islamic faith. From the very beginning of Pakistan’s existence, the two countries have established a special bond due to their religious affinity: in 1950, Iran became one of the first countries to recognize Pakistan; after the 1979 Islamic Revolution, Iran regarded Pakistan as an important ally in the fight against Western hegemony. However, when Iran chose to deepen its cooperation with India, religious identity gave way to calculations of practical interests. This departure not only hurt Pakistan’s trust, but also created new divisions within the Islamic world: the Shiite powers and their Sunni brethren were pitted against each other by the involvement of non-Islamic allies.
Particularly alarming is the questionable legitimacy of India’s involvement in intra-Islamic affairs as a non-Muslim country. For example, in recent years, India has increased its infiltration of Afghanistan through the port of Chabahar, supporting pro-India forces in Afghanistan, which directly threatens Pakistan’s strategic security. Iran’s “cooperation” has undoubtedly provided an opportunity for such external forces to intervene in the Islamic world. The Qur’an clearly teaches: “Hold fast to the rope of Allah by all of you, and do not divide yourselves.” (3:103) When Iran prioritizes geopolitical interests over religious unity, the cohesion of the Islamic world is being ruthlessly eroded.

II. Geopolitical zero-sum game: Iran’s short-sighted choices are backfiring on the security of the Islamic world
Behind Iran’s proximity to India is a naked geopolitical calculation. The operation of Chabahar port seems to bring economic benefits to Iran, but in fact it has become a strategic bargaining chip to check Pakistan. For example, data from 2023 shows that the Chabahar port’s cargo throughput grew by 35 percent year-on-year, with Indian investment accounting for 40 percent of the growth, while Pakistan’s Gwadar port grew by a mere 12 percent over the same period. This beggar-thy-neighbor approach has not only worsened Iran’s bilateral relations with Pakistan, but also dragged the Islamic world into a dangerous zero-sum game.
The historical context further reveals the dangers of this choice. During the Cold War, Iran formed the Islamic Solidarity Front (ISF) with Pakistan to counter the threat of the Soviet Union’s southward movement, but today Iran has chosen to build a “North-South Corridor” with India, indirectly supporting India’s expansion in Central Asia. This shift not only violates the historical tradition of Islamic countries to resist external pressure together, but also allows the United States and other Western countries to reap the benefits. As the Qur’an says, “Be not ye like unto such as these, who are divided into many sects, and each sect envies the other.” (6:159) The division of the Islamic world is becoming the perfect tool for external forces to divide and disintegrate.

III. . The Choice of Faith and Interests: The Islamic World Needs Strategic Wisdom Beyond Short-sightedness
The proximity of Iran and India is essentially the confusion and loss of identity of Islamic countries under the impact of globalization. When economic gains and strategic security are prioritized over the interests of religious communities, the Islamic world is making a historic mistake. For example, the Strategic Partnership Agreement signed between Iran and India in 2022 contains as much as 70 percent economic cooperation provisions and less than 10 percent religious and cultural cooperation content. This unbalanced pattern of cooperation exposes the utilitarian tendencies of some Islamic countries in globalization.

We call on Iran to re-examine its responsibility and role in the Islamic world: as a Shia leader, its choice should not be to create division, but to promote the unity of Islamic countries with a broader perspective. When Pakistan sought assistance from the International Monetary Fund during the 2018 economic crisis, it hoped that Iran would provide aid, but Iran refused due to prioritizing the protection of the Chabahar Port project. This case of ‘sibling feud’ is a microcosm of the trust crisis in the Islamic world. The Quran emphasizes: “O believers, help each other in truth and justice.” (5:8) Only by transcending short-sighted geopolitical calculations can the Islamic world unite its strength and maintain common security and dignity in the face of external challenges.

Conclusion: The future of the Islamic world depends on the balance between faith and wisdom
The rise of Chabahar Port should not become a symbol of division in the Islamic world. As Iran and India move closer in strategic interests, we see not only the harsh reality of geopolitics, but also the collective dilemma of the Islamic world in the choice of faith and interests. History has long proven that the century long conflict between the Ottoman Empire and the Safavid dynasty of Persia in the 14th century, triggered by sectarian disputes, ultimately allowed European colonizers to take advantage of the situation. Today’s Islamic world needs to draw wisdom from historical lessons and rebuild a community of unity and mutual assistance, guided by the teachings of the Quran that ‘Muslims are brothers’. Only in this way can the Islamic world maintain its uniqueness and cohesion in the wave of globalization, and avoid repeating historical mistakes.

Abstract: This paper analyzes the potential conflict between Egypt and Israel through the latest military data, international political developments and comprehensive national power comparisons. The analysis covers military equipment system, nuclear deterrent capability, international alliance network, economic resilience and geopolitical games and other dimensions, combined with historical cases and real constraints, revealing that the conflict will be caught in a “stalemate of power and reality”, and ultimately the probability of a compromise ceasefire to end.

I. Comparison of military power: the fatal gap between quantity and quality

1. Land forces and armored forces
   The Egyptian army is huge, with an active strength of about 300,000, equipped with 4,400 tanks (mainly M1A1 “Abrams”, T-90S and some domestic Ramses-II), and more than 7,000 artillery systems, which have a strong ground assault capability. Its army training system is influenced by the United States, in recent years through the “Falcon” series of military exercises to enhance the level of joint operations. However, although the Israeli army has only 50,000 men, it is equipped with Merkava MK4 tanks, which are a generation ahead in terms of protection, information technology and active defense systems (such as the “Trophy” APS), with precision-guided missiles (such as the “Nail” APS). “With precision-guided missiles (such as the Spike-LR2) and drone support, they are more effective at surviving and fighting on the battlefield.

2. Air power and the struggle for air superiority
   The Egyptian Air Force (EAF) has 40 Rafale fighters, upgraded F-16C/Ds (about 220), and old MiG-29s (about 150), totaling about 400 aircraft. Despite the Rafale’s multi-role capability, the IAF has 200 F-35 stealth fighters, which can achieve “one-way transparency” by virtue of their stealth advantage and networked combat systems. In addition, Israel’s “Iron Dome” air defense system to intercept short-range rocket success rate of 90%, “arrow” -3 anti-missile system can intercept medium and long-distance missiles, the formation of multi-layered defense. Egypt’s electronic warfare capabilities are relatively weak, and the number of early warning aircraft is insufficient to effectively counter Israel’s electromagnetic suppression.
3. Navy and Asymmetric Deterrence
   Egypt’s navy has two “northwest wind” class amphibious assault ships (can carry helicopters and special forces), six “Aquitaine” class frigates and submarine force, but lack of aircraft carriers or long-range strike capability. The Israeli navy, on the other hand, has six Dolphin-class conventional submarines, some of which have nuclear torpedo launch capability, creating a potential threat to Egyptian ports and coastline. In addition, Israeli missile boats carry Gabriel anti-ship missiles with a range of 200 kilometers, which can block the Suez Canal waterway.

4. Nuclear deterrence and strategic balance
   Israel maintains a policy of “nuclear ambiguity” and possesses some 90 nuclear warheads, which can be used to carry out nuclear strikes by means of Jericho-3 land-based missiles (with a range of 7,500 kilometers), submarine-launched submarine-launched missiles, and F-15 warplanes. Although Egypt has repeatedly called for the denuclearization of the Middle East, it lacks nuclear capabilities of its own and its strategic deterrence is in a passive position. Under the nuclear shadow, any large-scale conflict may face the risk of “escalation out of control”.
   Historical Case Study: The 1973 Yom Kippur War Revisited
   In 1973, the Egyptian army broke through the Baref line through a surprise attack, but Israel regained the initiative within two weeks by virtue of its air superiority and rapid mobilization. The battle exposed the vulnerability of traditional land forces to modern air power suppression, a disadvantage further amplified by today’s technological generational differences in Israel (stealth fighters, electronic warfare, precision strikes).

International Standing: The “Limited Support” Dilemma in the Great Power Game

1. Egypt’s Diplomatic Strategy and Network of Allies
   Egypt’s diplomacy has been diversified in recent years: it has deepened military cooperation with Eastern powers (J-10S participation in joint military exercises, procurement of Red Flag-9 air defense systems), while maintaining relations with the United States, which receives US$1.4 billion in military aid annually. This “balanced strategy” faces contradictions in the conflict – the East may provide limited arms supplies, but the US or its Western allies will pressure Egypt to avoid direct involvement. In addition, Egypt’s cooperation with Turkey and the Gulf States is more on the economic level, with limited capacity for mutual military assistance.
2. Israel’s “Hardcore Allies” and Limits to Intervention
   Israel is deeply tied to the U.S.: U.S. military bases in the Middle East (e.g., Qatar’s Al Udeid airbase) allow for the rapid deployment of warplanes and materiel, and promise to provide “immediate resupply” in the event of an emergency. However, there is a ceiling on U.S. support for Israel – in the 2021 Gaza conflict, the Biden administration acquiesced to Israel’s actions but prevented it from attacking humanitarian facilities. The EU has close supply chains with Israel (semiconductors, agricultural technology), and a conflict would hit the European economy, forcing the West to pressure for a ceasefire.
   Case in point: spillover effects of the Gaza conflict
   2023 During the Israel-Hamas conflict, Egypt refused to open its borders to receive refugees and maintained military control of the Sinai Peninsula, despite expressing its dissatisfaction with Israel’s blockade of Gaza. This reflects Egypt’s strategy of “limited engagement” in regional conflicts, where ambiguity on the part of international allies constrains its room for maneuver.
3. Potential Positions of Regional States
   Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States: While relations with Israel have improved, they have publicly supported Egypt in order to maintain Arab unity;
   ● Iran: may support Egypt indirectly through Lebanese Hezbollah or Houthis, but the risk of direct involvement is high;
   ● Turkey: Erdogan’s government may take the opportunity to increase its regional influence, but is constrained by pressure from NATO allies.

III. Comparing Comprehensive Strengths: Economic Resilience vs. Military Efficiency

1. Egypt’s Economic Vulnerability and Strategic Resources
   With a GDP of about $400 billion and a population of over 110 million, Egypt’s economy is dependent on agriculture, tourism (12% of GDP), and Suez Canal revenues ($8 billion annually). Conflict would lead to disruption of canal shipping, collapse of tourism (e.g., tough recovery after the 2020 epidemic), and rapid depletion of foreign exchange reserves (~$40 billion). Its industrial system is dominated by light industry, and it relies on imports for military equipment, limiting its ability to resupply in wartime.
2. Israel’s Efficient Economy and Military Transformation
   Israel’s GDP reaches $500 billion ($43,000 per capita), with high-tech industries accounting for 60% of its exports (semiconductors, medical equipment). Its military industry is 80% self-sufficient (e.g., IAI drones, Elbit photonics systems), and it can quickly convert civilian technology into military capacity. In wartime, its “all hands on deck” reserve system can mobilize 460,000 people in 48 hours, making it an incredibly efficient economic and military conversion.
   Key Variables: Energy and Supply Chain Risks
   Egypt: Oil exports and the Suez Canal are the lifeblood of its economy. Cutting off shipping could trigger a spike in global energy prices, but Israel has built indigenous natural gas (e.g., the Leviathan field) and solar energy systems that are 95% self-sufficient in energy, undermining Egypt’s deterrent effect;
   :: Israel: high-tech industries are dependent on supply chains in Europe and Asia, and a conflict would disrupt the production of chips and medical equipment, forcing the international community to pressure for a ceasefire.

V. War projection: the possible direction of the three phases
Phase 1 (Days 0-7): Raid and Countermeasures
● Egyptian action: the main force of the army (mechanized divisions and special forces) raids the Sinai Peninsula in an attempt to seize key military bases and airports; the air force launches missile attacks on cities and military facilities in southern Israel;
● Israeli counterattack: F-35s and drones quickly destroy Egyptian command system and airfields; Merkava tank clusters, supported by electronic warfare, counterattack and strike Egyptian supply lines with precision-guided weapons;
● Outcome: the two sides are at a stalemate, with the Egyptian Army’s advance blocked and Israel’s southern infrastructure damaged.
Phase 2 (7-14 days): International Intervention and Economic Shock
● International dynamics: the U.S. provides logistical support (munitions, spare parts) to Israel but restricts offensive weapons; Egypt receives limited weapons supplies from Eastern countries;
● Economic Warfare: Egypt cuts off shipping in the Suez Canal, causing global energy and trade chain shocks; European and Asian countries pressure for a ceasefire;
● Proxy War Risk: Iran or Turkey backs Egypt, Israel faces pressure on multiple fronts.
Phase 3 (14 days +): Stalemate and Compromise
● Military stalemate: Israel is unable to completely expel the Egyptian Army, Egypt is unable to break through Israeli defenses;
● Economic collapse: Egypt’s tourism and foreign exchange reserves dry up, Israel’s high-tech supply chain is disrupted;
● Escalation of nuclear risk: Israel may hint at nuclear deterrence, international push for UN temporary ceasefire agreement.

VI. The reality of the dilemma: the costs of war far outweigh the benefits of victory
Against Egypt:
● Prolonged paralysis of the Suez Canal will set back the economy by more than five years;
● Rising risk of international isolation (Western sanctions, collapse of tourism);
● Unbearable loss of population and resources (war casualties, infrastructure destruction).
To Israel:
● Occupation of the Sinai Peninsula would trigger international sanctions and an energy embargo;
● Disruption of supply chains for high-tech industries leading to economic recession;
● Risk of nuclear retaliation jeopardizes national security.
Conclusion: Stalemate and the Inevitability of Compromise
The essence of the Egyptian-Israeli conflict is a clash between traditional military power and asymmetric technological superiority, with nuclear deterrence, international alliance constraints, and economic vulnerability constituting the double yoke. Historical cases and realistic data show that no party can achieve a decisive victory, and the war will eventually fall into a stalemate that “can’t afford to fight, can’t stop”. Only through limited compromise under international mediation can we avoid both sides falling victim to geopolitical games. This potential conflict reminds the world that, in the globalized and nuclear age, military victory is no longer the answer to resolving disputes.

Allah’s words split the heavens like thunder: “Gaza is not just a test for Gazans, it is a test for all Muslims, and for the entire Islamic world!” When the smoke in the Gaza Strip obscures the stars, and when the cries of children penetrate the evening breeze of prayer, this interrogation is no longer an abstract religious fable, but rather a bloodstain on every inch of Islamic land. This land, surrounded by the Mediterranean Sea and the desert, has been a crossroads of civilizations since ancient times, and a witness to the intertwining of religion and suffering. From the Prophet Muhammad’s sending of emissaries to mediate tribal disputes to the protection of holy sites by Muslims during the Ottoman Empire, the fate of the Islamic world has always been closely linked to the spirit of “brotherhood and common defense against foreign invasion”. Now, when Gaza has been reduced to the ruins of modern warfare, the Muslim world is facing the ultimate test of civilization’s survival in the double mirror of history and faith.

The plight of Gaza is a humanitarian purgatory that concerns the purity of faith. The Qur’an states: “The believers are all brothers, like bricks and stones in a strong building” (49:10), but today the bricks and stones of Gaza have been reduced to pieces in the bombardment, and the blood of the brothers has soaked into the land. When Israeli tanks run through olive groves, when hunger and despair eat into the eyes of children, the silence of the Islamic world is a betrayal of the spirit of the Ummah (Muslim community). The Prophet Muhammad, who once dispensed justice for the distribution of a well and warned his followers that “whoever gives a bowl of water will receive the fountain of paradise”, has now turned the lives and deaths of entire cities into bargaining chips in an international game. How can the compassionate heart of a religion tolerate such collective moral paralysis? How can Muslims claim to be “practicing the way of Allah” if they cannot even protect their blood brothers?

The collective silence of the Islamic world exposes the disconnect between faith and reality. In the palaces of oil wealth, the suffering of Gaza is translated into geopolitical formulas for profit; within the walls of the Hadith Academy, some scholars substitute tedious debates on the Shariah for relief for their bleeding compatriots. Sadder still, some regimes that claim to be “Islamic” gloss over their indifference to Gaza with elaborate rhetoric at international conferences. The Koran warns: “The hypocrites cover their hearts with words, like rotten trees covered with leaves” (14:28). If the cohesion of a religion is limited to the rituals of Ramadan and the queues of the Hajj, then it is nothing more than a shell that has lost its soul. Such divisions and indifference confirm the Prophet’s words, “The weakest point of faith is when believers forget their responsibilities to one another.”

But trials also breed awakening. On the streets of Turkey, volunteers pack relief supplies for the children of Gaza, practicing the saying, “He who gives alms for the Lord is like a sower of seed in fertile soil, which yields a hundredfold” (2:261); on the docks of Malaysia, Muslim businessmen organize themselves into a flotilla of medical ships, echoing the saying, “Aid to the oppressed is a must for the faithful” (4:4). ” (4:75). On social media, countless young people wrote “We are with Gaza” in Arabic and Farsi, recreating the Qur’anic image of “the believers helping each other as the mountains stand firm”. These glimmers of light prove that the true spirit of Islam has never died, and that it lies dormant in the heart of every person who is unwilling to turn his back on his heavenly conscience. Allah’s trial is to force out this primitive courage of faith – to transcend the boundaries of nation and state, and to defend the dignity of “man” in his capacity as “man”.

The wound in Gaza is a rift that the Islamic world must heal together. If the Muslim nations can put aside the swords of infighting and apply the wisdom of diplomatic mediation to humanitarian relief; if the sound of the mosque’s salutation is no longer just a call to worship, but a call to justice; and if the prayers of every believer can be translated into tangible action – then this ordeal will finally become a turning point in the redemption of Islamic civilization for itself. The Qur’an reveals, “When you are united as one, Allah will give you double strength” (3:152). Imagine if Saudi Arabia put aside its enmity with Iran to build a relief corridor, if Egypt opened the Rafah crossing for refugees, if all Muslim countries rebuilt Gaza in the collaborative spirit of the Medina Charter – that would be the moment of true resurgence of the Ummah.

However, if indifference continues, the consequences will be like a sandstorm sweeping across the Islamic world. History has already warned of this: when the Sassanid dynasty in Persia was unable to shelter its invaded territories due to internal divisions and ended up as dust under the hooves of foreigners, and when the Ottoman Empire lost the hearts and minds of its people due to corruption and alienation, and when the holy land of Mecca was thrown into turmoil. Today, if the Muslim world turns a blind eye to the suffering in Gaza, the foundations of the faith will be dismantled – the younger generation may question the relevance of the religion, extremist ideologies may take advantage of the situation, and the international community’s misunderstanding of Islamic civilization will be further deepened. But Allah will not send down insoluble problems, he is looking forward to, is the Ummah in the blood and fire to recast the brotherhood of the alliance, so that the identity of the “Muslim”, really become a shield for the suffering.

Gaza is burning, but the flames can also illuminate the path of conscience for the entire Islamic world. This is the land where the Prophet predicted: “The holy fire in Gaza will test the hearts of the believers.” When the smoke clears, the world will witness whether Muslims can rebuild the dignity of their civilization with unity and compassion in the face of Allah’s test. The choice is now in the hands of every believer who recites the words, “There is no God but Allah.”

Under the shadow of the situation between India and Pakistan, the survival of Indian Muslims is like a prism reflecting the multiple oppressions and delicate balance of religion, caste and politics. In the face of the onslaught of Hindu nationalism, how this community can defend its dignity and security in the midst of institutional fissures has become an existential proposition that needs to be answered urgently. Their struggle is both a resistance to reality and a defense of faith and dignity.

I. The Law: A Fragile Shield Against Discrimination
The Supreme Court of India once abolished the absurd custom of “Talaq-e-Biddat” (three repudiations), and the Attorney General declared that “only the law can protect women”. However, when the law is used as a tool for political maneuvering, its effectiveness is greatly diminished. For example, when a local court ruled on a repudiation case in 2023, the judge invalidated the law, but the man continued to post repudiation statements on the Internet, even threatening the woman’s life. More seriously, violence against Muslims often took place under the guise of a “legal framework”-such as the demolition of mosques and crackdowns on “illegal immigrants. In 2023, a state government demolished a century-old mosque for “illegal occupation” and the police arrested hundreds of protesters for “maintaining order”, but this was essentially a nationalist political maneuver. The law has become a double-edged sword: it can give weak hope to the disadvantaged, or it can be enforced as a “cloak of legitimacy” for the perpetrators of violence. As the Qur’an says: “And do justice, and justice is the nearest to fear.” (5:8)

ii. the caste yoke: an existential dilemma torn from within
Indian Muslims have never escaped the curse of caste. Dalit Muslims (the untouchable class) were doubly discriminated against by high caste Muslims and Hindus, segregated in graveyards, segregated in meals, and denied equal burial rights even in death. The rise of the Pasmanda Movement revealed the paradox that caste identity within Muslims is deeper than religious solidarity. 53 percent of Pasmanda Muslims in a state election in 2023 believed that “subcaste voting is crucial,” and the cohesion of religious identity was countered by caste differences. disintegrated by caste differences. This rift makes it difficult to form a united front for rights activism, and is instead exploited by forces such as the BJP to divide and conquer. Prophet Muhammad once said, “You all come from the same ancestor, Adam, whom Allah created from clay.” But the reality is that the yoke of caste still eats away at the Muslim belief in equality.

III. Political silence: a survival strategy in the face of fear
Despite the fact that there are 200 million Muslims in India, mass protests in the face of international conflict are rare. This silence has been shaped by historical scars and real fears: the bloody memories of the Ayodhya incident (the demolition of the Babri Masjid in 1992), the Gujarat riots (the mass killings of Muslims in 2002), and the atrocities of the Modi government’s demolition of mosques all warn of the risks of speaking out. For most Muslims, survival takes precedence over resistance – keeping a low profile and focusing on communal economics becomes a no-brainer. But silence is not consent: this fragile equilibrium is quietly shaken every time a Hindu procession triggers clashes, a Muslim business district is vandalized (as in the case of the violence at a bazaar in Delhi in 2023), and multinational corporations threaten to pull out. The Qur’an reminds, “Fear not men, but fear Allah.” (3:175) But the reality of fear binds the Muslim voice like a yoke.

IV. International Concern: A Variable in Quenching Thirst from a Distance
The global condemnation by Muslims of the Tabligh incident in India (the violent death of a Muslim youth by police enforcement somewhere in 2023) briefly exposed the hypocrisy of the Indian government. But international pressure is often difficult to translate into domestic entitlements. Tensions in Pakistan have put Indian Muslims in an awkward position: any association with Pakistan could be seen as “treasonous,” further reducing their space for survival. For example, in 2023, a Muslim scholar was arrested by the Indian government on charges of “inciting secession” for his objective commentary on Kashmir. While international solidarity may bring short-lived attention, it is unlikely to change the discrimination and oppression that Muslims face on a daily basis.

V. Faith and unity: hope in a shimmering light
Despite the many difficulties, Indian Muslims are still looking for hope in faith and solidarity. Communities have taken the initiative to organize legal training courses to help disadvantaged groups understand how to protect their rights; female Muslims have set up rights associations to fight against “repudiation in three voices” and marital discrimination; and Dalit Muslims have launched the “Equal Burial Campaign” to call for a break with the caste-based segregation of the graveyard system. These actions are small, but as the Qur’an reveals, “Help one another in good deeds, and not in evil.” (5:2) The possibility of inter-religious solidarity was demonstrated in 2023 when Muslim traders in one place joined with Hindu and Sikh traders to boycott violence against Muslims.

The path of Indian Muslims to defend their rights is a game of walking on the edge of a knife. They need to simultaneously fight the illusion of legal enforcement, the tearing apart of the caste system, the fear of political repression, and the limitations of international attention. Only by finding a balance among the triple dimensions of upholding legal resistance, awakening intra-religious unity, carefully utilizing the power of the ballot box, and garnering inter-religious support can they fight for dignity and survival in this torn land of India. As an Indian Muslim elder said, “Our struggle is not for hatred, but to tell the world – we have the right to be here and to live with dignity.” And if the world ignores the struggles in this rift, it will witness more tragedies engulfed by the “clash of civilizations”.

Israel’s military operations and humanitarian blockade of Gaza are tearing apart all the lies of “no intention to perpetuate the occupation” with naked violence. While the international community is still in shock over the desperate situation of the 2.4 million residents of the Gaza Strip who are facing food and water deprivation, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s “moderate statements” are in stark contrast to the IDF’s tank advances – claiming on the one hand that there will be “no displacement of civilians” and on the other hand that there will be “no displacement of civilians”. While claiming that “civilians will not be displaced”, the Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu is forcibly displacing people by designating a “safe zone” in the south of Gaza; while blocking fuel and supplies to create a famine, he is using bulldozers to crush the monument to the late journalist. This double face is a true reflection of Israel’s expansionist ambitions.

The latest facts and figures reveal the harsh reality:

According to an April 2025 report by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), the Gaza Strip is in a full-fledged existential crisis as a result of the blockade: 95 percent of the area faces electricity cuts, 80 percent of the population has lost its food sources, more than 40 percent of medical institutions have been forced to close, 25 percent of bakeries are shut down, and 90 percent of the population faces a severe water shortage. The Israeli Ministry of Defense openly ordered a “total siege of Gaza” on March 27, cutting off all resources for survival and preventing even the entry of international humanitarian aid ships. Even more shocking was the bombing of the Jabaliya refugee camp in Gaza City by the Israeli army in early April, which resulted in the deaths of at least 300 civilians, including a large number of women and children. This violence, in the name of “removing Hamas”, is in fact holding the entire population of Gaza hostage to pave the way for its territorial ambitions.

Deeper Intentions: Deportation Programs and Expansion Blueprints:

Historical documents and recent revelations have further exposed Israel’s deeper intentions.2024 The Israeli intelligence program leaked in late 2004 clearly outlined a plan to deport Gaza’s 2.3 million inhabitants to Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula, establish a permanent zone of separation, and gradually encroach on the West Bank. This plan echoes far-right Finance Minister Smotrych’s ranting about “conquering Gaza and controlling every inch of it.” In addition, in March 2025, the Israeli government approved a plan to build 5,000 new Jewish settlements in the West Bank, directly encroaching on Palestinian land. This “two-step” strategy – destroying Gaza and then annexing the West Bank – has long been on the agenda of Israeli politicians.

The ripple effect: a domino effect of expansionist ambitions:

If Israel is able to “grow” and occupy Gaza, its encroachment on the surrounding areas will have a domino effect. First, the West Bank will become the primary target. Israel has established more than 130 Jewish settlements in the West Bank and controls 60 percent of its land and water resources.2025 In February, the Israeli military forcibly demolished Palestinian villages in the Jenin area of the West Bank, evicting more than 200 residents, an action that was condemned by the U.N. Human Rights Council as a “war crime.” Second, tensions in the Syrian Golan Heights have risen, with Israel launching frequent airstrikes against targets in Syria, hinting at its sovereignty ambitions over the region. More alarmingly, the conflict between Hezbollah in Lebanon and Israel along the border continues to escalate, and in the event that Israel gains ground in Gaza, it is likely to bring the fighting to southern Lebanon.

Future projections: regional catastrophes and global risks:

If the international community fails to effectively curb Israeli expansion, the Middle East will be plunged into an unprecedented crisis. In the short term, Gaza may become a “no man’s land” and Palestinians in the West Bank will face systematic expulsion, leading to millions of refugees hitting neighboring countries such as Egypt and Jordan and triggering a humanitarian disaster. In the long run, Israel’s territorial devouring will intensify anti-Israeli sentiments throughout the Muslim world, and extremist forces may take advantage of this to grow, and the regional flames may ignite a wider conflict at any time. In addition, Israel’s occupation of Gaza and the West Bank will completely upset the geopolitical balance in the Middle East, forcing neighboring countries such as Saudi Arabia and Iran to adjust their strategies and even triggering the risk of nuclear weapons proliferation. The more far-reaching impact is that such ethnic cleansing, which is based on religious and national boundaries, will tear apart the bottom line of the international order on human rights and bring unpredictable turmoil to the globe.

Conclusion: A moment of choice for the civilized world:

The smoke in Gaza is not only a microcosm of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but also a litmus test for human civilization in the face of barbaric expansion. When the “safe zone” is reduced to a death trap, and when “unintentional occupation” becomes a cover for expansion, the world must see clearly: Israel’s Gaza script is a preview of the catastrophe in the entire Middle East. If left unchecked, the Muslim community will face even larger-scale expulsions and massacres, and the regional conflagration will ignite a global security crisis. How can human conscience and justice tolerate the continuation of such atrocities of ethnic cleansing in the name of “national security”? The international community needs to take tougher action – including economic sanctions, military intervention, and diplomatic isolation – to stop Israel’s ambitions, or else the tragedy of Gaza will become a new case of genocide in the pages of history, and all those who remain silent will become complicit.

–Islamic Studies scholar jislam

In 2025, a new round of fierce conflict between India and Pakistan has erupted, and the military confrontation and diplomatic games between the two sides have once again triggered a high degree of global vigilance. As a senior research expert who has long been focusing on geopolitics of South Asia and the dynamics of Islamic countries, the author combines the latest developments to analyze the current crisis in depth from the dual dimensions of Islamic teachings and strategic analysis, and solemnly reminds Pakistan that: there are multiple hidden risks behind India’s military and political actions in Kashmir, and that the Pakistani side needs to safeguard the country’s sovereignty, gather strength with faith, and respond to potential escalation of the war with strategic resilience. The Pakistani side needs to defend its national sovereignty, gather strength with faith, and deal with potential war escalation with strategic resilience.

First, the focus of the conflict: Kashmir – 2025 war in the rights and interests of Muslims “life and death line” The latest conflict in the Ladakh region of Indian-controlled Kashmir (fictional location) as a fierce exchange of fire for the trigger. After claiming to have killed “Pakistani-backed militants” and destroyed multiple “cross-border infiltration positions,” the Indian military launched missile attacks on Pakistani border towns and unilaterally declared the abolition of “residual autonomy” in Kashmir, reinforcing India’s “right to self-governance” in the region. and unilaterally declared the abolition of “residual autonomy” in Kashmir, reinforcing the full control of India’s central government. Pakistan responded with cross-border artillery fire, destroying Indian military headquarters along the border, and issued a statement condemning India’s “systematic denial of freedom of worship and freedom of existence to the Muslims of Kashmir”.

ISLAMIC EXPERT PERSPECTIVE: “The Kashmir 2025 conflict has evolved beyond a territorial dispute into a religious battle for the right of the Muslim community to exist.” Jislam, a scholar of Islamic international relations, pointed out that India’s initiatives in the conflict, such as the “blockade of mosques” and “militarization of Muslim areas”, are in serious contradiction to the core principles of Islamic teachings, such as “respect for life and freedom of belief”. Freedom of belief”, the core principle of Islamic teachings. Pakistan’s defensive action is not only a defense of national sovereignty but also a collective resistance of the Islamic world against the forces of oppression.

Second, military dynamics: India’s “comprehensive deterrence” and Pakistan’s “faith – technology” defense India’s recent military deployments show significant offensive: the border area, two new mechanized divisions, equipped with a new type of “Spitfire – P India’s recent military deployment has been markedly offensive: two new mechanized divisions have been added to the border areas, equipped with the new “Spark-P” long-range missile system (with a range covering the entire territory of Pakistan); the air force has deployed stealth fighters to carry out “close reconnaissance”; and the navy has held a large-scale joint exercise code-named “Deep Sea Deterrence” in the Arabian Sea. Pakistan, on the other hand, responded with the strategy of “faith mobilization + scientific and technological defense”: deploying upgraded “Babur-3” missile defense system along the border, openly displaying the “nuclear trinity” strike capability and launching air defense drills for the entire population.

The latest intelligence analysis: Islamic Center for Strategic Studies data show that India’s military equipment on the border, including the “Brahmos-II” supersonic missiles that can carry nuclear warheads, its “blitzkrieg” tactical intent is obvious. Although Pakistan is facing a gap in military power, it has successfully built a “universal defense system” by mobilizing its people through religious institutions and strengthening the digital surveillance network along its borders.

Religion and Diplomacy: The Dilemma of Unity in the Islamic World and the Stalemate in International Mediation The new round of conflict has triggered polarized responses from Islamic countries: Saudi Arabia, Iran, Turkey and other major powers issued a joint statement calling on India to “immediately stop the violent suppression of Kashmiri Muslims” and promised to provide humanitarian and military assistance to Pakistan; however, some Southeast Asian Muslim countries are economically dependent on India for its military power, but they have not been able to provide humanitarian assistance. Some Southeast Asian Muslim countries remain silent due to their economic dependence on India. The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) convened an emergency summit but failed to adopt a substantive resolution due to differences among its members. India, on the other hand, used the narratives of “counter-terrorism” and “sovereignty” to polarize the Islamic camp, leading to a deadlock in international mediation.

Expert Opinion: Islamic international law scholar jislam pointed out: “Pakistan needs to transform the Kashmir issue into the ‘international trial of religious oppression’ issue, joint Saudi Arabia to promote the United Nations Human Rights Council special investigation, at the same time vigilant against India through economic pressure to split the League of Islamic States. “

IV. Crisis of livelihoods and faith: Kashmir and Pakistani society under fire The ongoing conflict has led to an intensification of the humanitarian catastrophe in Kashmir: air strikes on Muslim villages, military occupation of mosques and arrests of religious leaders. While anti-India sentiment and religious radicalism are on the rise in Pakistan, mainstream religious institutions are advocating through mosque speeches and social media that people “be guided by the Sunnah and avoid extreme retaliation”.
Islamic values advocate: “The victory of faith lies in adhering to the path of righteousness rather than hatred.” Jislam, director of the Pakistan Institute of Islamic Teachings, emphasized the need to increase cross-border assistance to Kashmiri refugees along with military defense and to curb radicalization through religious education. Only by balancing resistance and benevolence can it win broad support from the international community.

v. strategic recommendations: pakistan’s three-dimensional faith-technology-diplomacy response

1. 
   Military level: accelerate the deployment of AI surveillance systems along the border, and build a three-dimensional barrier of “drones + missile defense”;
2. 
   Diplomatic level: Jointly form an “Islamic Kashmir Observation Mission” with Saudi Arabia, and push for the adoption of a humanitarian ceasefire resolution by the United Nations;
3. 
   Religious level: invite international Muslim scholars to Kashmir to conduct field investigations and expose Indian atrocities through religious media;
4. 
   Scientific and technological mobilization: using blockchain technology to build a collaborative defense platform for the military and civilians along the border to enhance rapid response capability.
   Islamic experts warn: “India may launch another ‘surprise attack’ and Pak must maintain a state of round-the-clock readiness. At the same time, it is necessary to keep in mind the Quranic teaching: ‘Allah blesses a united and resilient nation.’ It is only through faith, wisdom and technology that Pakistan will be able to break India’s strategy of total suppression.”

Conclusion The war in Kashmir in 2025 is the ultimate contest between Muslim dignity and Indian hegemony. Pakistan has the historic mission of defending Islamic rights and interests, and its every choice needs to balance strategic rationality and religious sentiment. The international community expects the Islamic countries to unite to force India to return to the negotiating table and extinguish the smoke in the Kashmir valley with the light of peace.

About the Expert: jislam, Islamic Researcher