Israel’s targeting of the Hamas leadership in Doha, while the most expensive and sophisticated arsenal in the Muslim world sat idle, was more than just a tactical or technological episode. It was a blunt illustration of imperial realpolitik.
Qatar, with its $19 billion defence stockpile of air defence systems, fighter jets, drones, and missile batteries, watched helplessly as its sovereignty was bypassed with the press of a button. The entire defence grid comprising 11 Patriot PAC-3 batteries from the US, 40 NASAMS-2 launchers co-produced by Norway and the US, 18 Rapier systems from the UK, nine Roland units from France and Germany, and even preparations for a THAAD system due in 2025, was reduced to decorative scrap. None of it functioned — not the interceptors, not the radars, not the jets.
This was a disablement, sending a thunderous message across the Muslim world, and particularly to countries that are heavily entangled in a web of Western defence procurement and security dependence. Sovereignty without self-reliance is an illusion and arsenals without political independence are little more than theatre.
This episode cannot be understood in isolation. It is symptomatic of the broader architecture of American-led hegemony in which allies are armed, funded and equipped not for their independence, but for their dependence. Qatar’s arsenal of illusions is a telling case study: 36 Rafale fighters from France, 24 Eurofighter Typhoons with another dozen on order, 37 F-15EX Eagles from the US, heavy transport aircraft such as C-17 Globemasters and C-130J Hercules, 24 Apache attack helicopters and even Bayraktar TB2 drones from Turkey. On paper, these are among the most modern fleets in the region. But in reality, they remain hostage to kill-switches, licensing regimes and political controls embedded deep within their systems.
The bitter truth is that these weapons are not meant to defend Doha from Israel or the US. They are effective against weaker regional rivals or in the orchestration of ‘coalition missions’ aligned with Western designs.
The US-Israel relationship is not one of convenience; it is doctrinal, strategic and unwavering. And those who imagine themselves as partners in this equation are perpetually misreading the script. As George Orwell once observed, “In a time of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act”. The truth today is that Muslim capitals are witnessing in real time the fragility and hypocrisy of the so-called security guarantees extended under American hegemony.
Economically, the irony is sharper still. Qatar has invested over $1.2 trillion in US markets, an economic lifeline that has been entrusted to Wall Street in the hope that prosperity will bring security. Yet history shows that wealth parked abroad does not immunise a state from coercion; rather, it deepens vulnerability. Punitive tariffs, arbitrary sanctions and political strings are always within reach of Washington’s toolkit. Security umbrellas are offered, but they come tied to diplomatic compromises and the constant shadow of abandonment.
To be independent is to be self-reliant. Yet what we see today are nations with folded hands, unable to act, while atrocities unfold next door, sanctioned or overlooked by the very allies they depend upon. Imperialism is a system of domination that pretends to be cooperation. Qatar’s experience is now the latest entry in that grim museum of betrayal.
For Pakistan, the lesson is urgent and sobering. Pakistan, too, has built significant portions of its defence on Western-supplied systems. The Pressler Amendment of the 1990s is a painful reminder that entire fleets of Pakistani F-16s were grounded for years — paid for but undelivered, while Indian and Israeli adversaries advanced unhindered. The defence industries of Muslim nations, despite their budgets and hardware acquisitions, remain largely dependent on Western technological control. This dependence is by design. Washington and its allies ensure that their clients are perpetually armed enough to serve their purposes, but never autonomous enough to defy them.
The global implications of this Qatar moment are equally profound. Across the Middle East and beyond, smaller states have justified massive defence spending as insurance policies against aggression. They have signed billion-dollar contracts for cutting-edge fighter jets and missile shields, imagining these arsenals as protective walls around their fragile sovereignties. But walls built with borrowed bricks are always vulnerable to collapse.
The Doha bombing exposed this theatre: the world watched as the supposed impenetrable fortress stood naked when it mattered most. If $19 billion cannot buy dignity or sovereignty, then what are these budgets defending?
For Pakistan, this incident raises not only military but also strategic and economic alarms. Pakistan has long sought to balance relations between Washington, Beijing and regional allies in the Gulf. But Qatar’s exposure reveals what overreliance on any single bloc entails. In the coming days, Pakistan must weigh its options carefully. On one hand, Pakistan has a strategic partnership with China, including the co-production of fighter jets like the JF-17 Thunder and growing naval cooperation. On the other hand, Pakistan still relies heavily on Western-origin technology.
This reality also necessitates a reevaluation of economic policy. Just as Qatar’s trillion-dollar investments in US markets did not secure it, Pakistan’s reliance on IMF programmes, foreign loans and externally dictated economic policies cannot serve as shields for sovereignty. The political economy of dependence, whether military or financial, is a house built on sand. To build true resilience, Pakistan must prioritise domestic industrial capacity, indigenous defence production, and economic self-reliance. This is not an argument for isolationism, but for balance; partnerships must be forged on reciprocity, not servitude, and cooperation must be conditional on sovereignty, not subordination.
The US and Israel, for their part, have once again demonstrated that their alliance is absolute and immune to negotiation. This is the ideological axis that underpins their actions, unconditional support for Israeli security, even at the cost of undermining so-called allies in the Muslim world. The expectation that billions of dollars in arms purchases could buy protection against this axis is a fatal miscalculation. For Pakistan, which sits in a volatile neighbourhood with an assertive India, unstable Afghanistan and evolving Middle Eastern crises, the message is crystal clear: such dependence is a losing strategy.
Ultimately, the lesson is as stark as it is painful: stockpiling sophisticated arsenals means nothing without political spine. Security without sovereignty is theatre. And dependence on external powers is not a strategy; it is surrender.
We must recognise that dignity cannot be outsourced, sovereignty cannot be rented and defence cannot be delegated. The moment of truth always arrives, and when it does, only self-reliance, resilience and political will matter.
The writer is a trade facilitation expert, working with the federal government of Pakistan.
Disclaimer: The viewpoints expressed in this piece are the writer's own and don't necessarily reflect Geo.tv's editorial policy.