Middle East conflict raises fear of global war
Article Information
- Author, Ahmen Khawaja, Global Journalism Team
- Author, Global Story Podcast
- Role, BBC World Service
- Published: 4 hours ago
- Read time: 7 min
More than a month after the start of the Israel-Iran war, concerns about an escalation in the Middle East conflict are emerging.
This conflict not only affects Iran but also a dozen other countries, including the UAE, Iraq, Bahrain, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Azerbaijan, occupied West Bank, Cyprus, Syria, Qatar, and Lebanon.
Many wonder if this regional conflict could degenerate into a world war.
When does a war become a world war?
“Wars are often thought to be meticulously planned and those involved are believed to know exactly what they are doing,” explains history professor Margaret MacMillan during an interview with the BBC Global Story podcast from Oxford University.
“In reality, when we look back at past wars – like the First World War – we see that its outbreak often happened by chance and misjudgments of the opponent,” says Professor MacMillan. “It could be compared to a playground brawl.”
It was the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, nephew of Emperor Franz Joseph of Austria-Hungary, that triggered the chain of events leading to the outbreak of the First World War in 1914, MacMillan points out.
In a few weeks, a set of alliances dragged Europe into the conflict: Austria-Hungary opposed Serbia, Germany supported Austria, Russia mobilized to support Serbia, France backed Russia, and Britain, in the name of honor and strategy, entered the war. What followed became a global catastrophe, she says.
International history professor Joe Maiolo defines a world war as an open conflict involving all major powers.
“During the First World War, this would have included European imperial powers. During the Second World War, it involved the US, Japan, and China,” he told the BBC.
Many characterize current tensions in the Middle East as mainly regional. But are the conditions for a broader escalation in place?
In an interview with the BBC in February, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky stated that he believed Russian President Vladimir Putin had already initiated the Third World War and that intense military and economic pressure was necessary to restrain Moscow.
So, what is the current risk of a Third World War?
“I think Iran, or its allies like the Houthis in Yemen, are the most likely to exacerbate the situation,” says MacMillan.
According to her, Iran’s potential actions – like targeting maritime routes or closing the Strait of Hormuz – could have global consequences, disrupting energy supplies and prompting intervention from major powers.
The US involvement also heightens stakes; other countries, even if not directly involved, are economically or strategically impacted, they add.
There is also another risk, she explains: conflicts in one region can create opportunities elsewhere.
For example, China could seize the distraction in the West to act on Taiwan, or Russia could intensify actions in Ukraine while international attention is elsewhere.
“There is always a risk of conflict spreading beyond a region, especially because foreign actors see opportunities in it as it involves people who could hinder them from acting,” MacMillan concludes.
Professor Maiolo believes the conflict will remain regional and involve the Gulf Cooperation Council countries, including Saudi Arabia. He does not, however, foresee China and Russia getting involved in the war.
“It is absurd to think that a global event could trigger a Chinese attack on Taiwan,” Maiolo says.
She adds that leaders who refuse to admit failure or yield can prolong and worsen conflicts.
She explains that pride can be a decisive factor for leaders, citing Putin as an example: “He clearly made a serious mistake in trying to invade Ukraine.”
Shortly after launching the large-scale invasion four years ago, Putin stated that his goal was to “demilitarize and denazify” Ukraine. Yet, Russia claims its military goals in Ukraine have not been achieved, she concludes.
MacMillan adds that leaders who refuse to acknowledge their failure or give in can prolong and aggravate conflicts.
She points out that decisions like these can turn limited conflicts into devastating wars.
The role of leaders
MacMillan says history has often shown that war is triggered by pride, honor, or fear of the opponent.
She also points out that history shows that some leaders can influence events.
French Prime Minister, Georges Clemenceau, declared during the First World War that “it is harder to make peace than to make war.”
According to MacMillan, it is often said that when faced with heavy losses or significant sacrifices, leaders decide to “continue the war.”
She explains that pride can be a decisive factor for leaders, mentioning Putin as an example: “He clearly made a serious mistake in trying to invade Ukraine.”
Shortly after launching the large-scale invasion four years ago, Putin stated that his goal was to “demilitarize and denazify” Ukraine. Yet, Russia claims its military goals in Ukraine have not been achieved, she concludes.
MacMillan adds that leaders who refuse to acknowledge their failure or give in can prolong and aggravate conflicts.
She points out that decisions like these can turn limited conflicts into devastating wars.
De-escalation pathways
To achieve de-escalation, diplomacy is essential, says MacMillan: “One must understand the other side and maintain contact.”
She explains that communication improved on both sides towards the end of the Cold War and with NATO involvement.
“We have seen many examples where we said, ‘wait, the situation is deteriorating.’ We realized tensions were getting too high and needed to be eased,” she says.
The existence of nuclear weapons is always a factor to consider in de-escalation policies involving major powers.
Professor Maiolo shares this view: “Recognition is needed in Tel Aviv, Washington, and Tehran that they have reached the limits of what is possible.”
He explains that a new war will not produce the desired outcome for all parties.
“An agreement on lifting sanctions, security measures, and an understanding of Iran’s place in global politics will be necessary,” Maiolo says. He believes only mediation will allow the involved powers to achieve a ceasefire and then transform it into a more sustainable agreement
