As tensions escalate between Israel and Iran, both nations are on high alert, with the potential for conflict looming large. Why should the global community be concerned about a potential war between these two countries? The New York Times outlines four critical reasons.

**Powerful Militaries in the Middle East**

Israel boasts one of the most advanced military forces in the world, with defense spending accounting for one of the highest percentages of GDP globally. Experts note that Israel’s robust arms industry enabled it to record high weapons exports even during last year’s conflict in Gaza. Additionally, the U.S. has been a steadfast ally, providing Israel with over 29,000 guided bombs, rockets, and various missiles since 2009.

Conversely, according to the UK think tank International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), Iran maintains one of the largest military forces in the Middle East, with at least 580,000 active personnel and around 200,000 reserves, encompassing both the regular armed forces and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. For decades, Iran has prioritized the development of precise long-range missiles, amassing one of the region’s largest stockpiles of ballistic missiles. Moreover, Iran possesses a significant number of drones with ranges of up to 1,550 miles, capable of flying at low altitudes to evade radar detection.

**U.S. and Gulf Nations at Risk of Involvement**

Rising tensions between Iran and Israel, a close ally of the United States, could potentially draw American forces stationed in the region into the conflict. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi recently warned on social media that anyone “aware of or privy to” Israel’s plans to attack Iran should be held accountable. President Biden has previously indicated awareness of Israel’s intentions.

Pentagon officials are currently debating whether bolstering the U.S. military presence in the region to prevent a broader conflict might inadvertently embolden Israel and intensify regional tensions. In late September, the Department of Defense announced plans to deploy several thousand additional troops, raising U.S. military personnel in the area to about 40,000. This month, the U.S. provided Israel with an advanced missile defense system known as THAAD and sent approximately 100 troops to assist in its operation.

Iranian Foreign Minister has indirectly threatened countries hosting U.S. troops, including Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Kuwait. This month, the Iranian delegation to the United Nations warned that any nation assisting the “aggressor” would be viewed as a co-conspirator and a legitimate target.

**Potentially Devastating Economic Consequences**

Israel has assured the U.S. that its anticipated strikes will not target Iran’s nuclear or oil facilities. However, this assurance does little to guarantee that Israel will refrain from striking Iranian oil installations in future escalations, which could severely disrupt global economic stability.

While the likelihood may be low, an attack on Iranian oil facilities by Israel could provoke Iran or its proxies to target refineries in Saudi Arabia or the UAE. Analysts express concern over a scenario where Iran gains control of the Strait of Hormuz, effectively allowing it to control key global oil shipping routes.

Disruptions to global oil supplies could lead to skyrocketing gas prices, curtail employment and investment, and precipitate economic recessions. The impact would be particularly severe for poorer nations reliant on imported oil.

**High Stakes for Misjudgments**

In recent years, observers have generally believed that both Iran and Israel wished to avoid direct confrontation. However, in April, Iran launched over 300 drones and missiles in retaliation for Israel’s assassination of seven Iranian officials in Syria, shattering that presumption. This caught Israeli officials off guard, as they misjudged the extent of Iran’s reaction. Israel opted for a cautious response at the time, which fortunately stopped short of igniting a war.

Earlier this month, Israel’s attacks extended beyond military targets to civilian areas, indicating a new willingness to take risks in a potential conflict with Iran. The longstanding framework of deterrence appears to be unraveling, increasing the risk that either side may misjudge the other’s responses and cross critical boundaries.