In a recent podcast at NHS Media, Dr. Qamar Cheema explored the concept of World War III, the current global power dynamics, and the role of the Muslim world in international conflicts. Dr. Cheema expressed concern over the widespread fascination with the idea of World War III, particularly among social media users who often fail to grasp the complexity of such conflicts. He questioned how such a war would unfold, especially for Muslim-majority nations, which he believes are not sufficiently prepared to face a global conflict of that magnitude.
Key Points:
- The Muslim world is not adequately prepared to engage in or influence a potential global conflict due to a lack of military and technological capabilities.
- Disunity among Muslim-majority countries limits their ability to act as a cohesive and powerful force on the international stage.
- A focus on military conflicts over critical investments in technology and economic growth has left some nations, like Pakistan, struggling to keep pace with global competitors.
- Global influence in the future will be driven by economic strength, education, and technological innovation, rather than military might.
One of Dr. Cheema’s central arguments was that, despite emerging power blocs around the world, the Muslim world remains fragmented and lacks the unity necessary to present a cohesive front. He observed that while certain countries, such as Iran, possess military capabilities like missiles, these are not enough to significantly alter the global balance of power. Iran’s recent missile attacks on Israel, for instance, demonstrated limited military reach, underscoring the broader issue that many Muslim-majority nations do not have the advanced military resources, such as intercontinental ballistic missiles or nuclear weapons, to assert their influence in a global conflict.
Dr. Cheema criticized the casual manner in which the idea of World War III is often discussed, particularly by those who do not fully understand the devastating consequences of such a conflict. He noted that while some may speak confidently about the inevitability of a global war, few consider the practical challenges faced by countries like Pakistan and Iran in engaging in such a conflict. For instance, he questioned what role Pakistan, with its limited military resources, could realistically play in a world war, especially without external support.
Turning his attention to the political and military dynamics within the Muslim world, Dr. Cheema highlighted the Islamic Military Alliance, a coalition led by former Pakistani Army Chief General Raheel Sharif. The alliance was formed to combat extremist groups such as ISIS and Al-Qaeda but, as Dr. Cheema pointed out, it is not directed against global powers like the United States or Israel. This lack of focus on broader geopolitical threats, he argued, further weakens the Muslim world’s ability to present a united front on the global stage.
In addition to his analysis of military alliances, Dr. Cheema offered a critical assessment of Pakistan’s geopolitical strategy. He lamented the country’s lack of investment in critical and emerging technologies, comparing it unfavorably to India, which has made significant strides in the tech industry. India, he noted, has positioned itself among the world’s top five countries in terms of critical and emerging technologies, while Pakistan remains focused on military conflicts at the expense of technological and economic growth. This, according to Dr. Cheema, has left Pakistan sidelined in international relations, especially in the Middle East, where India has replaced Pakistan in its relationships with Arab states.
Dr. Cheema’s frustration extended to Pakistan’s leadership, which he accused of failing to recognize the importance of technological advancement and economic stability. He argued that Pakistan’s fixation on conflict has prevented it from achieving the kind of growth seen in neighboring countries like India. He also expressed concern over Pakistan’s strained relations with Iran, particularly regarding military cooperation. He questioned why Pakistan should provide military support to Iran, given the complexities of regional politics and the potential consequences of such alliances.
In his broader critique, Dr. Cheema touched on the role of nationalism and the need for Muslim-majority countries to prioritize national interests over ideological commitments. He suggested that Pakistan, in particular, must move beyond its focus on religious alliances and instead concentrate on building a strong, self-sufficient nation capable of competing on the global stage. He emphasized that, while religious unity is important, it should not come at the expense of national progress or security.
Dr. Cheema also explored the broader geopolitical landscape, including the shifting dynamics in the Middle East and the growing influence of India in the region. He noted that India’s increasing presence in the Arab world, particularly in the fields of technology and commerce, has significantly weakened Pakistan’s standing. He contended that this outcome is a result of Pakistan’s failure to adapt to the changing global order and its continued reliance on outdated political and military strategies.
Dr. Cheema called for a shift in focus from military posturing to economic development and technological innovation. He urged Pakistan and other Muslim-majority nations to invest in education, technological advancements, and infrastructure rather than preparing for hypothetical wars. According to him, the real path to power in the 21st century lies in economic strength and technological prowess, not military might.
Ultimately, Dr. Cheema’s message was clear: the Muslim world, particularly Pakistan, must abandon its preoccupation with conflict and instead focus on building a prosperous future. He emphasized that the global order is no longer defined by wars between nations but by economic competition and technological innovation. Without significant changes in priorities, Dr. Cheema warned, countries like Pakistan risk being left behind in the new world order, where success is determined by economic and technological leadership rather than military power.