A facility for registered citizens under an initiative aimed at encouraging voluntary public participation in warfare is opened with a ceremony in Tajrish Square, Tehran, Iran on November 2, 2026. [Fatemeh Bahrami – Anadolu Agency]
It seems that a third round of war between the United States, Israel, and Iran may be approaching. The United States and Israel may be considering another military campaign, hoping to achieve their goals through surprise attacks and a further escalation of tensions. They may believe that a stronger and more extensive attack could weaken Iran’s military capabilities and as Trump has put it, “finish them off” once and for all. However, the conditions have changed. Iran has gained direct experience from the previous wars and has had time to strengthen its internal resilience for another battle, develop its response options, and prepare a realistic and actionable target bank for different scenarios. Therefore, a new conflict would begin under different circumstances.
Better prepared Iran
The two previous wars gave Tehran direct experience of the military capabilities of the United States and Israel, their methods of attack, and the weaknesses in Iran’s own defense system. Iran has since had time to address some of these weaknesses and strengthen its military capabilities.
We should also consider the much lower risk of surprise.
In the previous wars, the initial attacks caught parts of Iran’s military and security structures off guard. This time, Iran had time to strengthen security measures around its senior political and military leaders.
The protection of commanders and key officials is now likely to be much stronger than it was during the previous conflicts. This does not mean that Iran can prevent every terror effort, but the chances of repeating the same level of surprise have become very low.
Iran has also learned from the overall military and security experience of the two wars. It now has a better understanding of where American vulnerabilities lie, and how it can use its own military and technical capabilities to cause them greater damage. This experience could make Iran’s response more effective in a new conflict. Tehran has had time to review its previous operations, identify what worked and what did not, and prepare more realistic options. These changes mean that a new war would not begin under the same conditions as the previous two. Iran is more prepared, less vulnerable to surprise, and better informed about how to respond to American and Israeli military operations.
READ: The Israeli and US elections and the future of the war on Iran
A new war could lead to wider escalation
It seems that the United States and Israel are planning to escalate the conflict further in the next round of fighting. Yet Iran has its own options for increasing the level of confrontation too. As Iran’s supreme leader mentioned on 31st October; a new war may not remain limited to the same targets and geographical areas as the previous conflict and “it must be Immediate, Effective and Without Geographical Limit Response”. Indeed, if the United States and Israel expand their attacks, Tehran could also widen the scope of its response.
For example, if Iranian military facilities and critical infrastructure come under attack, Iran may consider responding against important infrastructure across the region. This could increase the costs of war for all countries in the region.
Such a situation would place the United States in a difficult position. Many of its regional allies depend on stability for their economic plans. Their oil exports, foreign investment and development projects all require a secure environment and undamaged infrastructures. A wider war could put these interests at risk.
In such scenario, United States would then face pressure from regional partners who may want the conflict to end, even if Washington has not achieved its objectives. This could limit America’s ability to continue the war.
The Strait of Hormuz and the risk of a new oil shock
The Strait of Hormuz remains one of Iran’s most important sources of strategic leverage. The oil market has already experienced significant changes since the previous war. Prices have risen sharply, while the global economy remains vulnerable to disruptions in energy supplies. If another war begins and Iran imposes further restrictions on shipping through Hormuz, the result could be a major oil shock.
The rise in fuel and energy prices, along with the economic pressures now visible in Europe and the United States, already reflects the impact of reduced energy supplies. If the conflict escalates and oil supplies face further restrictions, the pressure that has so far been held back could be released, triggering a much sharper rise in oil prices and energy costs. This would create a difficult choice for Washington. It could continue military operations while dealing with economic shock. Iran may suffer serious destruction during such a war, but it can impose a definite oil shock to international order.
Other sources of pressure
Beyond oil, Iran has other means of putting pressure on global markets, including the US market. One of these is the possibility of disrupting undersea internet cables. These cables carry financial data and support international banking, trade, and digital services. Any serious disruption could affect financial transactions and market activity. Even a temporary interruption lasting a few days could create major uncertainty and financial losses. Specifically, the cryptocurrency market could be severely affected. Bitcoin and other digital assets depend on internet connections and access to trading platforms.
The duration of the outage may be less important than the disruption itself here. Even a few hours without internet access could create enough panic and uncertainty to trigger a sharp market crash.
Now there are Rumors circulating that, under such circumstances Bitcoin could fall even to around $20,000, wiping out a large share of the crypto market’s value. Of course, similar disruptions could also affect other financial markets, with potentially serious consequences for the global economy.
READ: A Nuclear Strike on Iran Would Poison the Region It Claims to Protect
Conclusion
A new war may appear to offer the United States and Israel another opportunity to weaken Iran. Yet Iran is now better prepared, has gained experience from the previous conflict, and has a wider understanding of the risks and methods involved. If the attacks become more extensive, Iran could also increase the scope of its response.
The Strait of Hormuz, global oil markets, and the security of neighboring countries could all become major sources of pressure on Washington. Iran would face serious damage, but the United States and its allies would also have to deal with the economic and political consequences of a wider conflict.
The central question is whether Washington can bear these costs without achieving its main objectives. If another war leads to an energy crisis, greater regional instability, and declining trust in American leadership, the United States may emerge from the conflict in a weaker position.
A campaign intended to defeat Iran would not only prove futile but could also unleash dangerous consequences that put American interests, those of its allies, and the global economy at serious risk.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.
A third war with Iran will not only be futile but also dangerous
250 couples celebrate mass wedding in Gaza
‘Lula must turn his support for Palestine into concrete action,’ Brazilian analyst tells MEMO
Kafr Qasim at 70: The massacre Israel still hasn’t owned up to
Podcast by Jasim Al-Azzawi with Jeremy Corbyn: A Nation Mutinies: Can Trump Survive His Own War?
