Vol. 4 No. 3 (2026)
Articles

The Implications of USA/Israeli War with Iran on Global Peace

Joseph O. Odama
National Institute for Security Studies, Lower Usuma Dam, Abuja-Nigeria
Mukhtar Imam
Almuhibbah Open University, Abuja, Nigeria
Francis C. Okpo
National Institute for Security Studies, Lower Usuma Dam, Abuja-Nigeria

Published 2026-07-10

Keywords

  • Third World War,
  • Trump Interventionism,
  • New World Order,
  • NATO Fragmentation,
  • Iran-US Conflict,
  • Multipolarity,
  • Strait of Hormuz,
  • Great Power Competition
  • ...More
    Less

Abstract

Purpose – This study examines the structural dynamics of the military confrontation involving the United States, Israel, and Iran during *Operation Epic Fury* and evaluates its implications for the evolving international order. Drawing on hegemonic transition theory and alliance politics, the study investigates whether the conflict represents a precursor to systemic great-power war or a catalyst for the transformation from a unipolar to a multipolar global system. Design/methodology/approach – The research adopts a qualitative case study approach based on documentary analysis. It integrates theoretical perspectives from hegemonic transition theory and alliance politics to interpret geopolitical developments, alliance behavior, and strategic interactions among major powers. Policy statements, strategic documents, and contemporary geopolitical developments are analyzed to identify emerging patterns in the international system. Findings – The analysis indicates that the conflict has intensified strategic realignments rather than creating the conditions for a conventional global war. The crisis has exposed growing divergences within the transatlantic alliance, reflecting increasing strategic autonomy among several European states. At the same time, Russia and China have adopted distinct strategic responses shaped by their respective geopolitical and economic interests rather than forming a unified anti-Western bloc. The disruption of energy supply routes has further demonstrated the vulnerability of the global economy to regional conflicts, reinforcing the strategic significance of maritime chokepoints and energy security. Research implications/limitations – The study is limited to a single geopolitical case and relies on documentary evidence available during the period examined. Because international crises evolve rapidly, subsequent developments may alter strategic assessments. Future research should incorporate longitudinal analysis and comparative studies of major-power crises. Originality/value – This study contributes to contemporary international relations scholarship by integrating hegemonic transition theory with alliance politics to explain how regional conflicts can accelerate systemic transformation. It argues that the emerging international order is characterized less by renewed bipolarity than by the growing influence of multiple regional powers operating within an increasingly multipolar strategic environment.

References

  1. Al Jazeera. (2026, March 5). Where are Iran's allies? Why Moscow and Beijing are keeping their distance.
  2. Al Jazeera. (2026). European leaders reject military involvement in Strait of Hormuz.
  3. Al Jazeera. (2026). Reports on China's response to the Iran conflict.
  4. ARD. (2026). Public opinion survey on European attitudes toward the Iran war.
  5. Asia Times. (2026, April 12). Iran war as a cage Trump can't escape.
  6. Assemblée Nationale. (2026). Parliamentary testimony on transatlantic security.
  7. Bangladesh Sangbad Sangstha. (2026, April 13). War in the Middle East: Latest developments.
  8. Băsescu, T. (2026). Statements on European strategic autonomy.
  9. Birol, F. (2026). IEA's Birol says Strait of Hormuz must reopen without conditions. Reuters.
  10. Britannica. (2026). 2026 Iran conflict. Encyclopaedia Britannica.
  11. Center for Strategic and International Studies. (2026). Analysis of the strategic consequences of the Iran conflict. CSIS.
  12. Center for Strategic and International Studies. (2026). Strategic implications of the Iran conflict. CSIS.
  13. Chatham House. (2026). Ukraine and Gulf security cooperation. Chatham House.
  14. China News Network. (2026, April 13). “This conflict has nothing to do with NATO”: European countries rarely say “no” to the United States.
  15. Clark, C. (2012). The sleepwalkers: How Europe went to war in 1914. HarperCollins.
  16. CNA Corporation. (2026, March 23). War in Iran tests the limits of the “no-limits partnership” between China and Russia.
  17. CNA. (2026). Analysis of Sino-Russian relations during the Iran crisis.
  18. Demirören Haber Ajansı. (2026, April 10). Economic power struggles are reshaping the global order.
  19. Deutsche Welle. (2026, April 13). Iran war: U.S. military to blockade Iranian ports.
  20. European Council on Foreign Relations. (2026). European strategic autonomy after the Iran crisis. ECFR.
  21. European Council on Foreign Relations. (2026). European strategic autonomy and defense integration. ECFR.
  22. Gilpin, R. (1981). War and change in world politics. Cambridge University Press.
  23. Haass, R. (2025). The age of disorder: Great power competition in the twenty-first century.
  24. Hoffman, F. G. (2007). Conflict in the 21st century: The rise of hybrid wars. Potomac Institute for Policy Studies.
  25. Ikenberry, G. J. (2011). Liberal leviathan: The origins, crisis, and transformation of the American world order. Princeton University Press.
  26. Ikenberry, G. J. (2025). Liberal international order and global transformation.
  27. International Energy Agency. (2026). Global energy market assessment. IEA.
  28. International Energy Agency. (2026). Global energy market outlook. IEA.
  29. International Monetary Fund. (2024). World economic outlook 2024. IMF.
  30. International Monetary Fund. (2025). World economic outlook. IMF.
  31. Islamabad Talks. (2026). Islamabad talks on the Iran crisis.
  32. The Jerusalem Post. (2026, April 11). Trump made a decision on Iran, now it poses an existential threat to Israel.
  33. Kremlin. (2026). Statements regarding Russian mediation efforts.
  34. Malmvig, H. (2021). Trump's Middle East policy and the logic of maximum pressure. Middle East Policy, 28(1), 45–59. https://doi.org/10.xxxx/xxxx
  35. Mearsheimer, J. J. (2001). The tragedy of great power politics. W. W. Norton.
  36. Mearsheimer, J. J. (2025). The future of great power politics.
  37. Middle East Institute. (2026). Iran and the changing balance of power in the Middle East. MEI.
  38. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China. (2026). Statements by Foreign Minister Wang Yi.
  39. Mueller, J. (1989). Retreat from doomsday: The obsolescence of major war. Basic Books.
  40. Nye, J. S. (2025). Power and interdependence in a changing world order.
  41. Pinker, S. (2011). The better angels of our nature: Why violence has declined. Viking.
  42. Ratcliffe, J. (2026). Remarks on intelligence cooperation involving Russia, China, and Iran.
  43. Reuters. (2026). China's expanding use of the yuan in global trade.
  44. Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. (2025). Russia-Iran strategic partnership treaty.
  45. United Nations. (2026). Security Council deliberations on the Iran crisis. United Nations.
  46. Walt, S. M. (2025). Alliance politics in an era of strategic uncertainty.
  47. Waltz, K. N. (1979). Theory of international politics. McGraw-Hill.
  48. World Bank. (2024). World development indicators. World Bank.
  49. World Bank. (2025). World development indicators. World Bank.
  50. Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
  51. YouGov. (2026). United Kingdom public opinion survey on the Iran war.
  52. Zakaria, F. (2009). The post-American world. W. W. Norton.
  53. 2026 Iran War. (2026).
  54. 2026 Strait of Hormuz Campaign. (2026).
  55. 2026 United States Naval Blockade of Iran. (2026).