War hysteria: Insanity disguised as patriotism

“Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”— Bertrand Russell and Albert Einstein, The Russell–Einstein Manifesto, 1955

War hysteria sweeping the world shows nothing more than absolute insanity on the part of all belligerent parties. Humanity can explore distant planets, communicate across continents within seconds and build machines capable of imitating human intelligence, yet it still appears incapable of resolving disputes without bombing cities, starving populations and producing generations of traumatised children.

There are people struggling with poverty, food shortages, unemployment, high inflation, disease and homelessness. Then there are their so-called leaders—some elected, some imposed, some in uniform and others protected by manufactured democratic legitimacy—who remain obsessed with gunfire, drones, missiles, nuclear warheads and weapons of mass destruction. This is not leadership. It is organised madness presented as patriotism.

Look at Gaza. Nearly 1.9 million of its 2.1 million inhabitants remain displaced, many of them repeatedly, while restrictions and operational constraints continue to obstruct humanitarian relief. Families are pushed from one devastated neighbourhood to another, carrying whatever they can salvage. For them, “strategic operations” mean ruined homes, unsafe water, inadequate food, fractured hospitals and children learning the geography of survival before they learn the alphabet.

Look at Ukraine. During the first six months of 2026, the United Nations verified 1,396 civilian deaths and 7,978 injuries—a 37 per cent increase over the corresponding period of 2025. June recorded the highest monthly civilian casualty total since April 2022. Yet the war continues to be discussed through maps, territorial percentages and weapon packages, as though the dead were merely inconvenient entries in a military balance sheet.

Look at Sudan, where a contest for power has become a war against the population itself. About 19.5 million people face acute hunger, five million are at emergency levels and an estimated 825,000 children under five are expected to suffer acute malnutrition during 2026. Several areas remain at risk of famine while humanitarian agencies struggle for access and resources. The world can finance bullets that arrive on time, but food and medicine are eternally delayed.

Now look at the ever-expanding Middle Eastern conflict. What began as confrontation involving Israel, the United States and Iran has steadily drawn other states into its orbit. The latest joint military strikes by the United States and Saudi Arabia against Iran-aligned armed groups operating in Iraq demonstrate how quickly regional conflicts acquire new participants and new frontlines. Iraq, itself struggling to preserve its sovereignty and internal stability, has once again become a battleground for rival powers. Every new military operation is justified as retaliation or deterrence, yet each one merely widens the geography of destruction and pushes peace still further beyond reach. The consequences are not confined to the combatants. Energy infrastructure, shipping routes and humanitarian supply corridors remain vulnerable, while the risks of slower global growth, renewed inflation and economic instability continue to rise. Once again, decisions taken in heavily guarded capitals are paid for by ordinary families thousands of kilometres away.

That is the cruel arithmetic of modern warfare. The latest strikes in Iraq also expose another dangerous reality. Countries that once claimed merely to support one side diplomatically are now becoming direct military participants. Every additional state entering the conflict reduces the space for negotiation while increasing the possibility of miscalculation. History repeatedly demonstrates that wars rarely remain confined within the boundaries imagined by those who initiate them. They expand geographically, economically and morally, dragging into their vortex nations and populations that neither sought nor desired confrontation.

A missile is fired in the Middle East and transport and electricity can become more expensive in Pakistan. A shipping route is blocked and food prices rise in poor importing countries. Oil installations are attacked and workers whose wages were already inadequate are advised to “adjust” their household budgets. The poor neither declare wars nor negotiate ceasefires. They merely finance wars through taxes, inflation and deprivation—and then provide their bodies.

The scale of this moral collapse is evident from global priorities. Military expenditure reached a record US$2.887 trillion in 2025, marking the eleventh consecutive annual increase. In the same world, approximately 645 million people faced hunger during 2025 and around 2.7 billion could not afford a healthy diet. There is no global shortage of money. There is a shortage of conscience, political courage and human decency.

Governments insist that military expenditure ensures security. Security for whom? What security does a mother possess when she cannot feed her children? What security is enjoyed by an unemployed graduate, a patient unable to afford medicine or a farmer crushed by fuel and fertiliser prices? Of what use are supersonic aircraft to citizens living without clean water, functioning schools or basic healthcare?

Even more frightening is the renewed worship of nuclear weapons. At the beginning of 2026, the world possessed an estimated 12,187 nuclear warheads. About 9,745 were held in military stockpiles for possible use, while between 2,100 and 2,200 deployed warheads remained on high operational alert. Leaders speak of deterrence, escalation ladders and tactical nuclear options as though they were discussing pieces on a chessboard rather than devices capable of extinguishing cities and contaminating generations.

The language of war has also been deliberately sanitised. Bombing becomes an “operation”; dead civilians become “collateral damage”; starvation becomes “food insecurity”; demolished homes become “infrastructure losses”; and children torn apart by explosives become “unintended consequences.” Such expressions do not explain reality. They hide it. They allow those ordering violence to sleep peacefully while others search for their loved ones through rubble.

Responsibility in every conflict is not necessarily equal. International law distinguishes aggression from self-defence, occupation from resistance and military targets from civilians. But no invocation of history, religion, national security or territorial ambition can justify treating innocent human suffering as politically useful or morally irrelevant. Every party that deliberately attacks civilians, blocks essential relief, uses starvation as leverage or prolongs war for domestic political survival must be held accountable.

Citizens must also confront their own complicity. War hysteria cannot survive without crowds to applaud it, television studios to dramatise it, social-media warriors to celebrate it and political parties to label every voice of restraint a traitor. People who would never personally harm a child can cheer the bombing of a city containing thousands of children because propaganda has converted human beings into flags, sects, ethnic groups and targets. Once the victim has been deprived of a face, a name and a family, almost any atrocity can be defended.

Patriotism does not require moral blindness. Supporting one’s country does not mean surrendering one’s conscience to a government, general or television anchor. Diplomacy is not cowardice. Restraint is not surrender. Peace is not appeasement. The greater betrayal of a nation is to waste its youth, impoverish its citizens and mortgage its future in pursuit of perpetual confrontation.

The citizens of Earth must demand that every government explain why money is always available for missiles but not medicines; why military budgets are protected while schools and hospitals are deprived; why arms manufacturers flourish while humanitarian organisations beg for funds; and why young people are repeatedly asked to die for disputes created by older men sitting in secure rooms. They must reject the idea that questioning war is treason. They must challenge inflammatory propaganda, demand independent scrutiny of military actions and insist that negotiations begin before cities are destroyed—not after there is nothing left to negotiate over.

The latest expansion of hostilities into Iraq should remind humanity that wars never remain satisfied with their original battlefields. Every missile creates the justification for another missile. Every retaliation becomes tomorrow’s grievance. Every new participant transforms a regional conflict into a wider catastrophe. The real contest is not East against West, Muslim against Christian, Jew against Arab, Russia against Europe, America against Iran or one flag against another. It is sanity against madness, humanity against barbarism and survival against annihilation. Planet Earth does not belong to presidents, generals, monarchs, arms dealers or ideological fanatics. It belongs equally to every child born upon it. Citizens must reclaim it before those playing with fire finally burn down the only home humanity has.

_____________________________________________________________________________

The writer, lawyer and author, is former Adjunct Faculty at Lahore University of Management Sciences (LUMS), a member Advisory Board and Senior Visiting Fellow of Pakistan Institute of Development Economics (PIDE)