Weaponization of resources and vulnerable regions

ISLAMABAD, Sep 2 (APP)::“The strong do what they can, and the weak suffer what they must,” wrote Thucydides in The History of the Peloponnesian War.

Written more than two millennia ago, these words capture a reality that continues to shape international politics,power often rests not only in military strength, but in the ability to control what others depend upon. Today, resources have become one of the most important instruments through which such power is exercised.

The weaponization of resources operates differently across developed, developing, and vulnerable states. Even within sovereign states, powerful groups can exploit control over resources to consolidate authority and influence communities.

In the 21st century, wars are no longer fought solely with tanks, missiles, or military alliances. Oil, natural gas, water, food, critical minerals, and semiconductors have become strategic assets capable of shaping national power and altering the balance of power. Whoever controls these resources, or the supply chains through which they move, can exert influence far beyond the battlefield.

Historically, resources have been central to economic development and national power. The First Industrial Revolution (1760–1840) introduced mechanization and large-scale factory production, while the Second Industrial Revolution (1870–1914) expanded steel, electricity, chemicals, and mass production. These advances enabled states to mobilize resources on an unprecedented scale, transforming warfare from localized conflicts into industrialized mass destruction.

The California Gold Rush (1848–1855) further demonstrates how resource discoveries can reshape economies and power structures. The discovery of gold attracted hundreds of thousands of people to California and accelerated the region’s economic transformation. Today, however, competition over resources has moved beyond economic gain. Major powers increasingly view critical commodities through a strategic and national-security lens, treating control over supply chains as a source of geopolitical influence.

The Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) of 1960 illustrates this vulnerability in South Asia. India’s upstream geographical position gives it greater leverage over river management and water infrastructure, while Pakistan’s agrarian economy depends heavily on the Indus Basin Irrigation System (IBIS). Agriculture contributes significantly to Pakistan’s economy and relies on the Indus River system, particularly the Jhelum and Chenab, for irrigation and food production. Water is therefore not simply an economic resource for Pakistan; it is a national lifeline and a potential strategic vulnerability. Following the Pahalgam attack, India’s move to suspend the IWT highlighted how upstream control can potentially be used as a tool of strategic pressure. Pakistan’s position received further support when a Hague-based international tribunal on last Monday ruled that India must continue to comply with its treaty obligations.

Resource competition is becoming even more intense as climate change, environmental degradation, and the global transition toward green energy increase pressure on already limited supplies. Critical minerals required for batteries, semiconductors, renewable energy, and defense technologies are becoming increasingly important to national security.

Major powers are already using economic and technological leverage to secure strategic advantages. The United States is increasingly using its financial and technological influence to secure strategic advantages, including through sanctions, semiconductor export controls, and initiatives such as the Forum on Resource Geostrategic Engagement (FORGE), which seeks to coordinate allied critical-mineral supply chains and reduce dependence on vulnerable sources. Russia has repeatedly used its energy and agricultural exports as sources of geopolitical leverage, while China’s dominance in several critical-mineral supply chains has given it significant influence over industries essential to the global energy transition and defense production.

The vulnerability extends beyond great powers. Europe’s dependence on external energy supplies, instability across parts of Sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East, and supply-chain exposure in Southeast Asia and Latin America demonstrate how resource dependence can translate into strategic vulnerability. In an increasingly interconnected world, a disruption at one point in the supply chain can generate economic, political, and security consequences far beyond its origin.

Ultimately, a nation’s resilience depends not simply on what resources it possesses, but on how quickly it can secure alternatives when those resources are threatened or cut off. Food, water, critical minerals, energy, technology, and even strategic territories such as the Arctic are no longer merely commodities; they are becoming frontlines of geopolitical competition. Nations that diversify supply chains, invest in alternatives, and reduce strategic dependencies will strengthen their autonomy. Those that fail to do so risk allowing their most essential resources to become weapons in the hands of others.