During the Cold War, ideological divisions between the communist East and capitalist West shaped international relations, relegating technology to a subordinate role beneath ideology.
In the current rivalry—primarily between the United States and revisionist powers such as China—technology increasingly supersedes ideology, contributing to the rise of new forms of nationalism. Major international actors are leveraging technological advancements for strategic purposes, resulting in a further erosion of boundaries between civilian and military applications. This trajectory is manifest across domains including telecommunications, robotics, artificial intelligence, and biotechnology.
It is widely accepted that possessing cutting-edge technological capabilities and utilizing them for military purposes is considered essential for securing a strategic imprimatur and achieving victory in warfare. Nevertheless, geopolitical realities are far more complex than this belief. The geopolitics of the Middle East fundamentally subverts this conventional wisdom.
For some analysts, it could be argued that Israel, as the region's most advanced techno-military power, achieved success against its adversaries in the two-year-long conflict thanks to the large-scale deployment of robotics, AI-weapons (including drones), and "algorithms factories," which proved extremely effective in liquidating the leadership and rank-and-file of Hamas and Hezbollah, albeit with a staggering civilian casualty count that has mounted to genocide. These capabilities were reportedly effective in targeting the defence systems of Iran, its military commanders, and nuclear scientists in the initial attack that kicked off the 12-day war between Iran and Israel in June-July 2025.
Concomitantly, clandestine conflict in the form of cyber-attacks has characterized the last two decades, particularly involving Iran and Israel. This trajectory began with the notable 2010 Stuxnet attack on the Natanz nuclear facility, which deployed a computer worm that surreptitiously altered centrifuge rotation speeds while presenting the appearance of normal operations. The incident became a watershed moment that galvanized proponents of cyber warfare. Since then, the ongoing cyber conflict between these regional rivals has broadened its scope, increasingly targeting civilian infrastructure including medical systems, banking networks, and oil facilities. During the most recent conflict (October 2023–October 2025), the scale and intensity of cyber-attacks escalated, incorporating hacker groups supporting both sides. Notably, Israel was the primary recipient of external cyber-attacks during this period, especially those conducted by pro-Palestine Hacktivists.
The influence of technological means of warfare has generally been circumscribed and non-decisive in shaping the outcomes or trajectories of regional conflicts. Cyber-attacks rarely meet the threshold to be classified as acts of warfare; referring to them as such is often viewed as a media-driven metaphor and remains a subject of debate. These attacks generally culminate in subversion, distraction, and disruption, falling short of the capacity for outright destruction of critical military or civilian systems.
They have yet to demonstrate the capacity to compel adversaries to alter their objectives by force. Following the Stuxnet incident, Iran advanced its domestic production of nuclear centrifuges and maintained its program until the Israeli and U.S. operations in June 2025. Similarly, cyber-attacks targeting Israel have not resulted in material losses that could be classified as substantial.
The regional balance was not decisively altered by technology, even as the resistance axis suffered substantive setbacks in Syria, Lebanon, and Palestine. Instead, the outcomes were shaped by a miscalculation from the instigators of the 7th of October attacks, the reluctance and unpreparedness of Iran and its allies to intervene, the strong support of the West backing Israel in its destructive and genocidal war in Gaza and Lebanon, and the inability and unwillingness of Russia and China to counterbalance the influence of the West, compounded by the perennial erosion of the Arab regional security order.
Furthermore, Israel did not prevail and will not be able to remake the regional order with its superior weaponry, as it lacks a viable strategy beyond sustaining the status quo in the occupied territories. It takes more than AI and robotics to formulate such a strategy, or even to resolve the precarious situation on several fronts. No matter how advanced the weaponized technology, it must be inextricably tied to a viable strategy where reasonable and achievable goals match the ways and means. Technology may sharpen the sword of war and amplify its lethality, but it offers no covenant of victory or lasting prevalence.
By no means, this analysis suggests that military modernization is dispensable in this era of perpetual disorder and chaos. On the contrary, it is an imperative to advance national security, mitigate threats, and keep adversaries at bay. However, military modernization transcends the mere acquisition of cutting-edge technologies; it is fundamentally about integrating them into an adaptive defence system and a resilient strategic culture.
Above all, the region's contribution to global markets remains modest, and most Arab countries are far removed from joining the ongoing 4th Industrial Revolution, let alone achieving digital sovereignty or military autarky. They remain dependent on importing technologies and weapons systems from global suppliers. In general, the region's economy is still reliant on extractive industries, cheap labour, and the increasing role of global capital in devising its developmental plans. Collectively, these structural deficiencies heighten the region's inherent security vulnerabilities. This exposure leaves the region with few options: the worst is becoming a battleground for great power competition over markets or resources; the better is participating as financiers and second-layer allies of the United States, China, India, or Russia.
This pervasive exposure has compelled regional states, notably Saudi Arabia and the UAE, to embark on an arduous journey toward the indigenization of their military industries to reduce dependency on foreign suppliers. It also compelled other countries to revive long-abandoned projects. Collaboration, as currently observed between Egypt and Turkey, is key in this regard. This cooperation is shaped by the imperative to affect the unbalanced dynamics of the regional security order and thus avert the unwelcome scenario of Israel pursuing military hegemony over the region due to the fragility, or absence, of the security architecture.
* The author is the Head of the Strategic Foresight Program at Future for Advanced Research and Studies, Abu Dhabi
Short link: