The dynamics of modern conflicts in the 21st century are changing. The nature of war as we know it today is significantly different from how we experienced warfare in the past. In history, most wars were between nation states on defined territories, using large armies to pursue clearly outlined political aims. As we enter the 21st century, conflict now occurs in an ‘ecosystem of conflict’ in which the military forces of sovereign states, insurgent or extremist groups, ideologically based networks, and political movements all interact with one another at the same time. Within this evolving ecosystem, the presence of non-state actors and right-wing populists has emerged as an important variable in the outcome of conflicts. Non-state actors have the potential to significantly impact the political outcome and military strategies of states, and they can also influence the diplomatic relationships of other states.

From South Asia to the Middle East, non-state actors are continuing to redefine how modern warfare occurs. Their increasing influence illustrates that conflict is no longer a state-centred event. Instead, the conduct of conflict today is a complicated arena of interactions that cross-cut each other through armed groups and ideologically based movements. In modern-day conflicts, violent non-state actors are becoming significant political and military players, illustrating the transcendence of their marginal insurgencies. Many hybrid warfare techniques have been implemented by these groups, including guerrilla warfare tactics, cyber capabilities, propaganda efforts, and advanced weapon systems previously reserved for legitimate governments.

The conflict between Pakistan and Afghanistan is an example of how non-state actors can have an impact on bilateral relationships between neighbouring governments. Beginning in February 2026, Pakistan conducted air strikes in Afghanistan against suspected TTP hideouts. The air strikes provoked retaliation from the other side and augmented the scale of fighting between the two countries. The conflict further illustrates one of the major issues with security in the modern world. As a result of the actions of non-state actors in contested spaces, states come into conflict with each other, yet states are typically (or sometimes) unable to control the actions of non-state actors within contested areas. The border region of Pakistan and Afghanistan has become an area where militant groups and global interests converge, complicating traditional diplomatic efforts. Because of this, relations between the two nations are shaped more by the activities of militant networks than by the formal policies of either state.

The significant impact of non-state militant networks can also be seen in contemporary conflicts in the Middle Eastern region, where groups such as the Houthis, Hezbollah, and Hamas have become imperative players in the geopolitical landscape of the region. Hezbollah has demonstrated its capabilities by using drones and advanced surveillance technology when fighting with Israel, illustrating that non-state actors can learn and adopt the tactical methods of conventional militaries. The Houthis in Yemen started as a local insurgency and evolved into a pivotal regional player. The attacks by Houthis on shipping vessels in the Red Sea exemplify how non-state actors can disrupt international trade and supply chains. Moreover, Hamas has also employed social media and sophisticated technologies as strategic tools for military operations. All of these groups are part of a larger network of regional conflicts whose actions can cause regional escalations, change the way states interact with each other, and obscure efforts to find resolutions to conflicts.

Another significant part of modern-day conflict is the increased presence of right-wing populist governments in other parts of the world—including India, the U.S., and Israel—which has changed how we think about both domestic and foreign politics. The economic aspects and geographical proximity of these states to major financial hubs usher in a renewed emphasis on the role of right-wing governments in contemporary conflicts. These types of governments focus on issues related to national security, sovereignty, and civilisational narratives. Because of this, confrontations between non-state actors often become highly politicised, thereby transforming local insurgent activity into larger ideological battles. For instance, the war between Israel and Hamas has been both a military engagement and a global narrative war, including propaganda, (dis)information warfare, and geopolitical narratives. Non-state actors have increasingly taken advantage of digital media platforms to influence public perception and mobilise legitimacy for their causes around the world.

The emergence of non-state actors has produced important consequences for international security. Firstly, the monopoly on violence that states once possessed now increasingly comes under threat from these non-state actors as they begin accessing advanced technology such as the latest weapons, drones, cyber capabilities, and sophisticated telecommunication networks. As such, militant organisations pose a challenge to state forces within certain operational domains. Secondly, it becomes increasingly difficult to conduct diplomacy when conflicts are being fought between militant groups instead of between formally recognised governments. States have additional difficulties reaching functional diplomatic agreements with actors that do not possess formal international recognition or centralised command structures. Thirdly, the operations of non-state actors occur transnationally, creating regions of prolonged, transnational conflict between multiple states that lead to security dilemmas for those states. An appreciation of the modern security environment depicts an interactive conflict ecosystem, where international actors, militant networks, populist governments, and geopolitical rivalries are operating within the same timeframe.

To effectively respond to this changing environment requires a different way of thinking. A comprehensive and sustainable strategy needs to be delineated that recognises the economic, cultural, and technological factors that allow non-state actors to inflict significant impact. Failure to develop such a strategy will result in increased conflict and make it more difficult to predict or resolve future wars. The confluence of non-state actors and right-wing governments might create hindrances for the formulation of sustainable policies for peace and stability.

Zaid Bin InamThe writer is an academician and faculty member at NUML.

© The Nation