The Drums of War Are Beating Between Iran, the United States, and Israel… and the World Stands on the Brink

Mohieddin Ghunaim
In a scene that recalls some of the most tense moments in modern history, signs of confrontation are escalating between Iran on one side and the United States and Israel on the other. This escalation is unfolding amid unprecedented media rhetoric, mutual accusations, and political خطاب that has gone beyond deterrence to explicit threats of war and regime change.
The discussion is no longer about “diplomatic disagreements” or “exchanged deterrent messages.” Instead, direct threats have become the dominant headline. Washington and Tel Aviv openly speak of the necessity of “striking Iran” and preventing it from acquiring instruments of power. At times, the rhetoric goes as far as calling for the “overthrow of the Iranian regime,” as if regime change has become a legitimate objective in the lexicon of international politics.
Despite repeated talk of negotiations and diplomatic tracks, the lack of trust between the parties renders these efforts closer to crisis management than genuine conflict resolution. Iran views the United States as lacking credibility, citing previous experiences and unilateral withdrawals from international agreements. Meanwhile, Washington insists that Tehran represents a direct threat to regional stability.
In this charged atmosphere, the media has become a parallel battlefield: fiery statements, security leaks, exaggerations of military capabilities, and displays of force through military exercises and naval movements. Each side seeks to impose a deterrence equation, yet the thin line between deterrence and explosion has become more fragile than ever.
The most dangerous aspect of this situation is not merely the possibility of a military strike, but the nature of international alignments that could transform any confrontation into a broad regional war—if not the spark of a larger global conflict. Major powers such as Russia, China, and North Korea have, to varying degrees, declared their support for Iran in the face of Western pressure. This overlap between regional calculations and global rivalries makes any military strike fraught with unpredictable risks.
Igniting the Iranian front would not remain confined within its geographical borders. Networks of influence, alliances, and military balances would open multiple arenas—from the Gulf to the Eastern Mediterranean, and perhaps beyond.
Any war among these parties would place the entire Middle East in the eye of the storm. Gulf states would find themselves on the frontline. Energy markets would face severe disruption, and maritime navigation would be threatened—especially if the Strait of Hormuz, the vital artery through which a significant portion of global oil exports passes, were to be closed.
Even a partial closure of the strait would mean a dramatic surge in oil prices, disruption of supply chains, and deep tremors in the global economy. Europe would suffer a new energy crisis. Asia would face instability in its imports. Global financial markets would enter a phase of panic and uncertainty.
Are we on the verge of a third world war?
For some, such talk may seem exaggerated. Yet a close reading of today’s map of alliances and polarizations suggests that the world stands atop a volcano. A single miscalculation or an uncalculated strike could draw major powers into direct or indirect engagement, opening the door to a confrontation far wider than a regional conflict.
Insisting on a military solution under the banner of “eliminating the threat” or “toppling the regime” often leads only to prolonged chaos. The experiences of recent decades testify that wars rarely end at their initial borders; instead, they generate new crises and reshape maps upon the ruins of stability.
The region today cannot withstand another war. Its peoples are exhausted by conflict. Its economies suffer from chronic crises. Its security structures are fragile in the face of any military earthquake. Continuing to beat the drums of war will not deliver a decisive victory for any party; rather, it will plunge all into a dark tunnel from which escape may prove difficult.
What the world needs is not more aircraft carriers, but genuine political will—one that restores the value of diplomacy based on mutual respect rather than imposed dictates. Wars may begin with a decision, but they do not end by the will of one side alone.
The drums of war are beating… but history teaches us that those who ignite the fire may not be able to extinguish it.