Where is the world going?

The continuous conflict between Israel and Iran has serious geopolitical, military, and humanitarian consequences and has emerged as one of the Middle East’s instability and critical conflicts. In recent years, this conflict which has its roots in decades of hatred and ideological conflicts has become worse to a disastrous level. The cycle of bloodshed has been increased by Iran’s Oct 2024 launch of more than 180 ballistic missiles toward Israel, which has carried both countries and their allies into a destructive cycle. 

Questions concerning the direction of this conflict and the world at large shade big as everyone watches with eagerness. We need to examine the historical background of Israel and Iran’s relationship in order to understand the present conflict between them. It may surprise you to learn that Israel and Iran were not always enemies. Both countries had friendly connections before the Iranian Revolution in 1979. Iran recognized Israel and supplied it with oil throughout the Arab-Israeli wars during Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi’s secular reign. However, the dynamics of their relationship had been drastically changed by the 1979 Iranian revolution. 

After the revolution, Iran became an Islamic Republic and Ayatollah Khomeini came to power. As a result of this change, Iran adopted an anti-Israel and anti-Western foreign policy. Iran started backing anti-Israel militant organizations like Hezbollah and Hamas that called for the annihilation of Israel after Khomeini declared Israel to be an illegitimate state. This was the start of a long-running hostility that has had a significant impact on the region’s geopolitics. Since then, both nations have been fighting a proxy war through middlemen like Hamas and Hezbollah. 

However, Israel has been focusing on stopping Iran from getting nuclear weapons, frequently using illicit methods such as the murder of Iranian nuclear scientists. Iran perceives Israel as a tool of Western hegemony in the Middle East, while Israel considers a nuclear-armed Iran as a mortal danger. These conflicts continue to grow worse over time. When Iran fired more than 180 ballistic missiles at Israel in Oct 2024, the conflict escalated to another level. Israel’s killings of important Hamas and Hezbollah leaders prompted this retribution. Although various of the missiles were stopped by Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system, the attacks, which targeted Israeli communities and military infrastructure, caused extensive damage and casualties. 

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Israel reacted quickly and harshly, directing airstrikes against Iranian forces. The war quickly spread throughout the region, attracting Hezbollah, which attacked Israeli targets in southern Lebanon. In response, Israeli troops increased their strikes in Gaza, the West Bank, Syria, and Iraq while executing ground operations along the Israel-Lebanon border. Air and naval forces are engaged in a regional struggle for supremacy along several fronts in the conflict. Despite its longstanding involvement, the United Nations Security Council’s (UNSC) attempts to mediate and settle the tensions between Israel and Iran have frequently been failed by the geopolitical interests of its permanent members.  

In order to resolve tied issues, the UNSC has approved a number of resolutions. For example, Resolution 1701 in 2006 tried to end the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah, while Resolution 2231 in 2015 supported the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), also referred to as the Iran nuclear agreement. However, the Israel-Iran dispute has caused significant division inside the UNSC. As a strong supporter of Israel, the United States has backed resolutions that seek to limit Iran’s regional influence. 

On the other hand, resolutions that are detrimental to Tehran have frequently been rejected by China and Russia, both of whom have strong relations to Iran. No real progress has been made in the Security Council’s attempts to resolve the crisis because of this split. The UNSC has demanded a cease-fire in the most recent escalation, but neither Israel nor Iran seem prepared to back down. Nepal is the only nation that has been conspicuously silent during this international confrontation. Nepal, which has been a member of the UN since 1955, has historically avoided taking sides in international disputes by pursuing a non-alignment foreign policy. 

Nepal’s long standing adherence to neutrality and peace serves as the foundation for this position. Nepal’s foreign policy has always been careful to strike a balance given its strategic location between two regional giants, India and China. Nepal also has close commercial relations with the Middle East. Gulf countries like Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, with which Nepal maintains diplomatic ties, employ hundreds of thousands of Nepali workers. 

Nepal’s commercial ties with the area could be difficult and the livelihoods of these workers put at risk if it takes an aggressive position on the Israel-Iran conflict. Nepal is afraid to get involved in international wars in part because of its own internal problems, such as governance and economic recovery. The region’s civilian populations have suffered greatly as a result of the Israel-Iran conflict. The most recent wave of violence has murdered almost 40,000 Palestinians in Gaza alone. Hezbollah has been attacking the area around the northern border with Lebanon, which has resulted in the displacement of thousands of Israelis. 

Many people lack access to basic essentials including food, water, and medical care, making the humanitarian crisis dire. The conflict’s effects on the economy are also world. Due to the conflict’s threat to interrupt the flow of oil through the Strait of Hormuz, a crucial chokepoint for the world’s oil trade, the price of oil has increased by five percent. Rising energy prices are worsening the effects of inflation, which are already an issue for many economies healing from the Covid-19 pandemic. 

Major world powers including the US, Russia, and China have become involved in the conflict, which has raised concerns about a wider regional or possibly global conflict. The war between Iran-supported Hezbollah and Israel grew worse dramatically yesterday. Hezbollah commanders in Beirut were the target of major attacks by Israeli troops, which caused significant damage and casualties. 

Israel said Iran launched a missile attack on its military bases, which prompted this escalation. Ayatollah Khamenei, the supreme leader of Iran, threatened dire consequences if Israel’s military actions continued in a rare public declaration. Four soldiers were killed in a drone attack on an Israeli army camp by Hezbollah in retaliation. The continuous violence has resulted in nearly 2,000 casualties in the last two weeks, according to the Lebanese authorities. Both sides are getting ready for more conflicts, and the situation is still extremely unstable. 

Notwithstanding continuous international efforts to negotiate and de-escalate the conflict, a peaceful resolution is difficult due to the parties' continuing disagreements and strategic objectives. The Israel-Iran conflict acts as a harsh reminder of the world’s uncertain state of peace and security. The Middle East and the entire world are at risk as the conflict escalates. Major nations like China, Russia, and the United States are involved, which makes a peaceful outcome less probable. The situation does not appear to be de-escalating, and the United Nations is still divided despite its attempts. 

Nepal has a historical foreign policy perspective on which is shown in its neutrality and non-alignment in the conflict. But the entire globe is at a turning point. There is an urgent need for diplomatic involvement and a long-term peace process to stop more deaths and heal an area that has already suffered too much. The future of global order will be shaped by how the entire world handles the current situation, and the risks are extremely high. In these unpredictable and dangerous illustrations, one thing is clear: the globe is on edge, and where it goes from here depends on leaders’ decisions and diplomacy’s ability to map a road toward peace.

Prabin Kumar Yadav

BA LLB 

Kathmandu School of Law