JAKARTA, KONTAK BANTEN — Escalating tensions between Iran and Israel have entered a new and more dangerous phase, raising concerns among global observers about the potential for a wider international conflict.
The latest developments follow a series of confrontations that date back to April 2024, when Iran launched a large-scale missile and drone attack against Israel. The incident marked one of the most significant escalations in the history of their rivalry and signaled a shift toward more direct military confrontation.
The situation further intensified after Israeli strikes on June 13, 2026, reinforcing fears that the conflict could spiral into a broader war involving major global powers.
Global Attention and Escalating Risks
Muhadi Sugiono, a lecturer in International Relations at Universitas Gadjah Mada, said the conflict has drawn widespread international attention due to the involvement of powerful global actors.
“This situation is under close scrutiny because the involvement of major powers could accelerate geopolitical tensions on a global scale,” he said on June 23.
According to him, the ongoing hostilities not only threaten regional stability in the Middle East but also have the potential to reshape the global balance of power.
Nuclear Concerns and Strategic Motives
Muhadi explained that the Iran–Israel conflict reflects a long-standing rivalry rooted in ideological differences, historical tensions, and strategic competition. He argued that recent Israeli strikes targeting Iran go beyond isolated actions and represent a systematic effort to weaken Iran’s nuclear capabilities.
These operations reportedly include attacks on nuclear facilities, scientists, and military officials.
A 2024 report by the International Atomic Energy Agency noted that Iran had enriched uranium up to 60%, exceeding agreed limits. However, no conclusive evidence has confirmed that Iran is actively producing nuclear weapons.
“Israel justifies its actions by accusing Iran of violating the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), yet Israel itself is not a signatory to the treaty,” Muhadi noted, highlighting what he described as a contradiction in global nuclear governance.
Toward Open Conflict
Although neither side has formally declared war, Muhadi emphasized that the intensity and frequency of direct attacks—including missile strikes, drone operations, and cyber warfare—indicate that the conflict has effectively crossed into open confrontation.
“The absence of effective de-escalation mechanisms is allowing the conflict to grow unchecked,” he said.
U.S. Involvement Deepens Crisis
The role of the United States has further complicated the situation. After initially denying direct involvement, the U.S. reportedly conducted strikes on three Iranian nuclear facilities in Isfahan, Natanz, and Fordo on June 21, in response to Iranian attacks on Israel.
Muhadi warned that Washington’s involvement, particularly its support for Israel’s defense systems, blurs the line between strategic backing and active participation in the conflict.
“This significantly raises the risk of a broader regional war that could be difficult to contain without multilateral intervention,” he said.
Risk of Global War
The growing alignment of global powers behind opposing sides has fueled concerns that the conflict could escalate into a wider global confrontation. Muhadi compared the current geopolitical climate to the Cold War, where tensions between rival blocs could trigger chain reactions.
He also noted that instability could spill over into already fragile regions such as Syria, Yemen, and Lebanon.
Weak International Response
Muhadi criticized the limited effectiveness of international institutions, particularly the United Nations, in responding to the crisis.
He pointed out that divisions among major powers within the UN Security Council have hindered decisive action, while resolutions from the General Assembly often lack enforcement mechanisms.
“When multilateral diplomacy loses its leverage, states tend to act unilaterally,” he said.
Diverging Global Powers
Differences in stance among major powers such as China and Russia compared to the U.S. and its allies further complicate efforts to establish a unified global response.
According to Muhadi, these divisions reflect broader failures in the international system to achieve consensus on collective security.
Implications for Indonesia
The conflict is also expected to impact Indonesia, particularly in economic and foreign policy terms. As an open economy, Indonesia could face rising inflation due to potential disruptions in global energy supply and logistics.
Diplomatically, Indonesia may encounter challenges in balancing its “free and active” foreign policy while maintaining its strong stance on issues related to Palestine.
Call for Indonesia’s Role
Muhadi emphasized the need for Indonesia to take a clear and principled stance, particularly as the world’s largest Muslim-majority country. He called for consistent support for nuclear disarmament and urged all Middle Eastern countries to adhere to international nuclear agreements.
He also suggested that Indonesia could strengthen its role through humanitarian initiatives and diplomatic mediation, particularly within non-aligned forums.
“Indonesia should take a firm stance in condemning aggression and promoting diplomatic solutions,” he said.
Domestic Response
At the domestic level, public sentiment in Indonesia remains largely pro-Palestinian, although it has not yet translated into structured political action.
Muhadi noted that the government needs to carefully monitor public opinion to ensure that foreign policy decisions align with national aspirations.
Strengthening Diplomacy and Humanitarian Efforts
Amid growing global uncertainty, Muhadi concluded that Indonesia should prioritize diplomatic engagement and humanitarian action. He suggested forming coalitions with like-minded countries to promote de-escalation and maintain regional neutrality.
“Indonesia must act as a moderate and active voice for peace while consistently advocating fair and universal nuclear disarmament,” he said.
