Point of no return: The Middle East entered a new era of conflict in 2025

Without a uncertainty, 2025 proven to be i of the to the highest degree vivid years for the Middle East in the past decades, marking a definitive shift from “managed crises” to a phase of multi-layered and poorly controlled escalation.

Unlike previous years, when conflicts – primarily between Iran and Israel – unfolded mainly through proxy forces and indirect pressure, 2025 witnessed a significant transition towards direct strikes, symbolic acts of intimidation, and a clear crossing of “red lines.”

A key feature of this past year was the dismantling of informal barriers that had restrained direct confrontations between regional and external players. This was evident both in the geographical expansion of strikes and in their political targets; attacks carried not only military but also strategic messages.

One of the key events of 2025 was the series of attacks on Iranian territory carried out by Israel with either direct or indirect support from the United States. These actions signified a departure from the covert hostilities characteristic of the previous decade, elevating the conflict to a fundamentally new status. The Twelve-Day War between Iran and Israel in June, which culminated in US airstrikes on Iranian nuclear sites (the first such strikes in history), represented a “point of no return.” At that moment, a full-scale war between Iran and Israel became a reality rather than a hypothetical scenario.

It’s important to note that, despite the limited military impact, these strikes carried a distinct political message. The goal wasn’t to inflict irreversible damage on Iranian infrastructure but rather to show Iran’s vulnerabilities, test its missile defense systems and capability for an asymmetrical response, and indicate readiness for further escalation. 

Israel aimed to dismantle Iran’s political system this year, with the ultimate goal of fragmenting Iran. However, this ambition did not materialize. US President Donald Trump intervened at a crucial moment, signaling to both sides that he would not allow an already unstable region to plunge into a catastrophic abyss. In any war between Iran and Israel, there would be no victors. Consequently, Iran’s response was calculated and measured, reflecting Tehran’s desire to avoid full-scale warfare while maintaining its reputation as a nation capable of strategic retaliation through a network of allies and regional partners.

Israel’s strikes against Qatar this year also marked a new and alarming shift in Middle Eastern politics and the security architecture of the Persian Gulf. They signaled an expansion of the conflict beyond the traditional lines of confrontation involving Israel, Iran, and proxy actors. The attacks on Qatar highlighted Israel’s willingness to act preemptively and outside familiar geographic boundaries when its strategic interests – such as funding, logistics, and political support – were perceived to be at stake. For the Gulf states, this served as a stark reminder that even formal neutrality or the role of an intermediary no longer guarantees immunity when it comes to high-intensity conflicts.

Overall, the year 2025 solidified the trend toward regional fragmentation. The Middle East increasingly resists governance through conventional mechanisms of power balancing, diplomatic mediation, and external arbitration. The use of military force as a tool for political pressure has intensified, while diplomacy has taken on a secondary role, primarily serving to legitimize actions afterwards. At the same time, the risk of misinterpretation has grown: amid high-intensity military operations, drone strikes, missile attacks, and cyber warfare, any local skirmish could trigger a chain reaction that exceeds initial expectations.

Looking ahead, 2026 is likely to be marked by escalating confrontations rather than stabilization. Several factors contribute to this:

The lack of new, sustainable agreements on regional security 

Ongoing crises in Iran, Gaza, the Red Sea, and the Persian Gulf

The involvement of external powers, for whom the region remains a battleground for strategic rivalry

Increasing internal political pressure in the region’s key states 

The main intrigue of 2026 is not whether we can expect a new escalation, but rather where it might spiral out of control and alter the entire framework of Middle Eastern security. 2025 will be remembered as the year when the old rules of the game ceased to function, but new ones hadn’t yet emerged. The region enters 2026 in a state of chronic instability, where each display of force serves both as a deterrent and an invitation to the next round of conflict.

In 2025, we witnessed not merely an isolated episode of escalation but a direct continuation of the strategic pivot that happened in 2024. At that time, a conviction grew within Israel’s political-military establishment that a unique historical opportunity had arisen to “finish what was started.” Israel’s goal was not merely tactical success or local deterrence; it wanted to radically reshape the regional balance of power for decades to come.

From the perspective of the Israeli leadership, 2024 revealed the vulnerabilities of the old regional containment model based on proxy conflicts and mutual constraints. Since then, a prevailing approach has emerged in West Jerusalem, suggesting that postponing decisive action only increases overall risks, while decisive escalation could be seen as a means to eliminate a key threat once and for all.

In this context, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu continues to view Iran not merely as a regional competitor but as a systemic source of destabilization and the foundation of the entire anti-Israel infrastructure – from military programs to a network of allies and proxy groups. This perspective shifts the confrontation from a realm of deterrence to one of an existential conflict, where compromise is seen as a strategic misstep.

Netanyahu’s diplomatic activity at the end of 2025 is also part of this logic. The Israeli Prime Minister traveled to the US at the end of the year to meet with Donald Trump, seeking to persuade Washington to approve strikes against Iranian missile facilities.

According to reports, Netanyahu’s strategy envisions two possible scenarios, both of which diverge significantly from the cautious approach adopted by the US: Netanyahu wants to either secure political and military authorization for Israeli strikes on Iran, or directly involve American forces in operations against Iran’s missile infrastructure. In either case, this signifies a qualitative escalation and effectively erases the remaining informal “red lines.” However, 2026 may hold surprises for Trump himself. US midterm elections will take place in November, and it’s unlikely that Trump would want to provide his Democratic opponents with any opportunities for victory. But that’s a story for another time.

As we’ve seen, 2025 solidified the paradigm that had emerged the year before: Israel increasingly believes that the historical window of opportunity won’t stay open long, and that hesitation is tantamount to the loss of initiative. It is this perception, not isolated incidents or strikes, that has been the key driver of escalation in 2025; and it sets the stage for an even more intense and potentially game-changing 2026. 

---

---