Iran conflict could tilt global balance of power

How will the Iran conflict affect the global balance of power? Answering this question may seem a fool's errand given how fast events are moving now that US President Donald Trump has joined the war on Israel's side. A lot depends on whether Tehran retaliates or sues for peace.

Still, it is possible to identify some factors that will help determine whether the United States, China, Russia and Europe emerge from the conflict with more or less power. Will Iran's nuclear programme come to an end, will war topple its regime, will a new government be less hostile to the US, or will the country descend into anarchy?

Other key considerations are whether the US can limit its involvement to a short, sharp strike or gets sucked into a drawn-out conflict, and whether the rest of the world views it as a rogue power. If Israel kills more people in Gaza while the world's attention is diverted to Iran, some may also blame the US for giving it cover.

The oil price is another critical factor: by last Friday, the cost of a barrel of Brent crude had risen about 11% since Israel first bombed Iran on June 13. Disruptions to shipping or pipelines could push it up further.

Yet another key factor is whether outsiders play a role in resolving the crisis and gain anything from doing so.

TRUMP'S HIGH-WIRE ACT

The US has much to gain or lose. Ending Iran's nuclear programme would be a big win and would enhance the perception that the US is the world's superpower. But despite Trump's claim to have "totally obliterated" Tehran's nuclear-enrichment facilities, some experts think its nuclear threat may be far from over.

Some of Trump's most prominent Republican supporters, as well as allies in Gulf states and some European leaders, were worried that the US could cause chaos by joining the war. But if Trump manages to neutralise Iran's nuclear threat and avoid a long conflict, those doubts will melt away.

The US might then be able to switch its attention from the Middle East to China, the only serious threat to its superpower status. Washington could focus its strike groups on the Indo-Pacific, says Richard Fontaine of the Center for a New American Security.

If the conflict also topples the regime led by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the consequences are unclear. While a new government could be less antagonistic to Washington, it might be just as hostile. And if Iran became a failed state, American allies and enemies would blame it for wanton destruction and further destabilising the region.

If the US gets embroiled in a new "forever" war, it would suffer even more damage. "The United States used a big stick in Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq. All have diminished, not enhanced US power," says Robin Niblett of Chatham House.

Trump would also suffer if the Iran conflict leads to a major oil price shock, for example if Iran stops crude being shipped through the Strait of Hormuz. Though American oil companies benefit from high prices, voters detest paying more for petrol.

AXIS OF UPHEAVAL

Iran is part of what Fontaine has called the "Axis of Upheaval". The other countries are Russia, China and North Korea. Though this is not a formal alliance, Tehran, Beijing and Pyongyang have provided Moscow with significant support in its war with Ukraine.

Russia and China would be pleased if Iran stopped its nuclear programme. The two countries were signatories of the original 2015 deal that put limits on what Tehran could do. But they would not be happy if a new Iranian government distanced itself from their loose club.

That scenario would be particularly bad for Moscow, which agreed a 20-year strategic partnership with Iran in January. After failing to protect Bashar al-Assad, its Syrian ally, last year, the Kremlin would look weak if it now could not help Khamenei's regime.

The most important factor for President Vladimir Putin will be how the Iran conflict impacts Russia's Ukraine war. It might lose a useful source of drones. But if oil prices stay high, the Kremlin will have more cash to finance its war of attrition. And if the US gets bogged down in a long war in Iran, Washington may be even less willing to provide military equipment to Kyiv.

One wild card is whether Moscow can, even at this late stage, broker a pact between Washington and Tehran, as Trump suggested it might before he authorised the US airstrikes. In return, Russia might be able to get Trump to further cut back American support for Ukraine, says Michel Duclos of the Institut Montaigne.

For China, a higher oil price would be bad news as it imports hydrocarbons, while regime change in Tehran could cost it a key ally in the region. But the People's Republic would benefit if the US got bogged down in a new Middle Eastern war. Following the American invasion of Iraq, Beijing built its economic and political power. China could also win over other countries by arguing that it is a responsible nation while the US is an aggressive hegemon – a narrative already fuelled by Trump's trade wars.

EUROPE'S VULNERABILITY

Europe has much to lose if the conflict escalates from here. As a big oil importer, it too would suffer from a crude price shock. Meanwhile, if Iran descends into chaos, that could trigger a new influx of refugees, further fuelling far-right nationalism in Europe. Iran's population of 92 million is four times bigger than Syria's, whose refugee crisis in 2015 caused so much turmoil in European politics.

The biggest risk to Europe is that the Iran crisis helps Russia in its war in Ukraine. By contrast, Europe would benefit if it could broker a deal between the US and Iran, though Trump was dismissive of that shortly before the US launched its attacks.

So much for the known unknowns. There are also unknown unknowns – factors that are not currently on anybody's radar. How both play out will determine whether the Iran crisis marks a turning point that tilts the global balance of power back towards the US, or further in favour of China.