Uncategorized
The “era of wars” in which we now live has reshaped the global economic order, and corporate strategy in the advanced industrial technologies sector has changed along with it. Post-Cold War assumptions of inevitable globalization no longer apply as renewed authoritarianism, regional conflict, financial fragmentation, and institutional weakening have transformed the operating environment for multinational firms. Companies at the intersection of civilian and military technologies are shifting away from efficiency-driven globalization and toward resilience, political alignment, and integration with national security priorities. Israel’s experience after October 7, 2023 demonstrates that geopolitical instability must be treated as a permanent, core business risk if a company is to enjoy long-term corporate survival and profitability.
The recent US military attack on Venezuela constitutes a turning point in the evolution of the international system. Contrary to claims that such actions are now “business as usual” in an anarchic world, the Americans’ unilateral and officially acknowledged use of military force for regime change without international authorization marks a profound erosion of the post-World War II international order. Unlike Cold War-era covert interventions, the Venezuelan case signals the breakdown of a key normative barrier separating indirect influence from overt coercion. This development undermines the legal and normative arguments employed by the West in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, revealing a structural similarity in strategic methodology irrespective of political intent or outcome. The attack on Venezuela is part of a wider American grand strategy centered on consolidating control over the Western hemisphere while reducing global engagement, and it will accelerate the transition toward a fragmented, multipolar, and increasingly anarchic international system.
In recent years, Turkey has emerged as a rising regional power. It has independent defense industries, produces armed and unarmed UAVs, missiles, warships, and advanced weapons systems, and maintains an extensive military presence from Syria to the Horn of Africa. The Turkish vision was articulated by President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in his annual New Year’s address for 2026, in which he described Turkey’s military buildup as a “major leap forward” encompassing all domains of defense. Erdoğan frames this process as a “historic opportunity” for Turkey to convert military achievements into lasting success. However, the very military power that was expected to strengthen Turkey’s regional and international standing has, in recent years, isolated the country, entangled it both domestically and externally, and pushed it backward rather than forward.
Though an increasing number of states plan to recognize a Palestinian state, no such action—even in large numbers—can confer sovereignty. Under international law, statehood is “independent of recognition by the other states.” Such juridical status is based on Montevideo Convention (1933) requirements of (a) a permanent population; (b) a defined territory; (c) a government; and (d) the capacity to enter into relations with other states. In the specific matter of Israel, recognizing a Palestinian state would undermine a core provision of the Oslo Accords and corollary Arafat-Rabin commitments not to alter the status of territory prior to formal agreement on permanent status. Such premature recognition would also be at odds with the status of the EU and other states as witnesses to the Oslo Accords, and with the multiple endorsements of those Accords expressed in UN resolutions. Acts of recognition in this matter would prejudge the outcome of negotiations that were never completed because of relentless Palestinian terrorism, and would violate the Natural Law origins of international law.