No, this likely isn't the start of WWIII. But what to watch next and how it all can impact you.

Boston Globe

4 hours ago

Here's a clear-eyed look at where things stand now, what to watch for, and how this moment could matter to your daily life.
Advertisement
So, World War III didn't just begin?
All signs say it has not. Saturday night's attacks may be the most aggressive — and possibly final — step the United States takes in this conflict.
Get Starting Point
A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday.
Enter Email
Sign Up
World wars are typically defined by the involvement of multiple great powers on both sides, spanning continents, and with global stakes. That is not the case here. This is a bilateral conflict (Israel vs. Iran) with few signs it will draw in the world's major militaries.
On Israel's side, no major powers are lining up to join the fight. The major European powers, Canada, Australia, Japan, and others are all calling for de-escalation. Even the United States now appears focused on restraint: Asked on Sunday news shows whether the U.S. is at war with Iran, both
Advertisement
Iran, meanwhile, is learning just how few real allies it has. While Tehran maintains a loose alignment with Russia, China, and North Korea, there is no mutual defense pact or formal military commitment among them. This is not NATO.
Russia and China have both called for calm and show no appetite for military involvement. Russia, preoccupied with its war in Ukraine, also has a long, complicated — sometimes cooperative — relationship with Israel. Consider: While Iran began supplying drones to Russia for use in Ukraine starting in 2022, Russia's initial response to Hamas's October 7, 2023, attacks on Israel was sympathetic to Israel. That said, Russia still maintains diplomatic ties with Hamas and casts itself as a mediator in Gaza and not an Iranian partisan.
China, for its part, avoids direct military conflicts. Its support tends to come in the form of economic investment or rhetorical backing. China views Iran as a key energy partner, but it notably did not condemn Israel's preemptive strikes and quickly called for de-escalation following the US attack.
All signs suggest that, even if this becomes a prolonged conflict, it is likely to remain limited to Israel and Iran.
What's next?
While a long-term war may stay confined to Israel and Iran, the short-term still holds real risk, especially for further Iranian retaliation involving the United States.
Iran will almost certainly respond in some form. On Sunday, Iran's ambassador to the United Nations told the
Advertisement
Here are four:
1. Target US troops in the region
Roughly 40,000 American troops are stationed within missile range of Iran across Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the UAE, and Oman. When President Trump ordered the killing of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani in 2020, Iran responded with missile strikes on US bases in Iraq, resulting in over 100 traumatic brain injuries but no deaths.
This time, the U.S. has reportedly warned Iran that any attack on American personnel will trigger additional consequences. And it's worth noting: there's no confirmed evidence that any Iranians were killed in the US strikes on Saturday, which occurred around 2:30 a.m. local time.
2. Disrupt the Strait of Hormuz
This narrow waterway — just 90 miles wide at its tightest — is a vital artery for global oil transport. About a quarter of the world's exported oil passes through it.
Iran's navy has the ability to mine the strait, disrupting global markets and potentially trapping American destroyers in the upper Gulf. But doing so would hurt Iran's own economy and threaten China's oil supply, up to 40 percent of which comes from Iran via the strait.
3. Launch a cyberattack, possibly with North Korean help
North Korea is one of the world's most capable cyber warfare actors and a quiet ally of Iran. A coordinated cyberattack could target US infrastructure, disrupt financial markets, or even knock out power grids or internet access in parts of the country. That may be a more attractive option for Iran than a conventional military response.
Advertisement
4. Use terrorist proxies to strike inside the United States
The most dangerous — and perhaps most tempting — option for Iran would be to activate terrorist networks it funds to launch an attack on US soil. Iran could deny involvement, preserving plausible deniability. If it openly claimed responsibility, a NATO-backed military response could follow, potentially leading to regime change in Iran.
How this affects you
Polling shows Americans across the political spectrum are deeply wary of another Middle East war. The current administration seems to share that sentiment, in spite of these recent actions. Like President Biden's stance on Ukraine, leaders have clearly stated there will be no deployment of US troops on the ground.
If that holds, there's little risk of mass deployments or a draft.
Yes, the threat of terrorism or cyberattacks is real, but it has been for decades. A large-scale cyberattack could disrupt your ability to access bank accounts or make credit card purchases, but such risks already exist and are monitored closely by US intelligence.
The most direct impact would be economic: If Iran disrupts the Strait of Hormuz, even briefly, gas prices could surge. That would ripple through the economy, increasing costs across the board.
The guiding principle at the moment: keep calm and fill up the gas tank.
James Pindell is a Globe political reporter who reports and analyzes American politics, especially in New England.