This article was first published in our World Update newsletter. To receive a weekly briefing on global affairs and international relations direct to your inbox, please subscribe to the newsletter.

Vladimir Putin’s regular threats about his nuclear arsenal have focused minds on the existential threat his nuclear weapons still represent. But it’s the volatility of the situation in the Middle East that has added a worrying degree of uncertainty to the international situation.

A year after the brutal Hamas attack on Israel – and after months of tit-for-tat missile attacks between Israel and Iran – Israel has commenced a ground invasion of Lebanon which pits the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) directly against Iranian proxy Hezbollah.

At the same time, the government of Benjamin Netanyahu is pursuing an ever more drastic campaign against Hamas in Gaza. It is now reportedly planning to expel all residents from the north of the enclave in order to establish a military zone there. Meanwhile it has ramped up its attacks on the Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen and against Iranian proxies in Syria.

All-out war between Israel and Iran remains unthinkable, even as questions are raised about Iran’s nuclear ambitions. And yet, as any historian will tell you, the wrong combination of miscalculation, errors of strategic judgement and failures of diplomacy to cause things to escalate with alarming rapidity.

In 1997, Austrian economist Friedrich Glasl published a model of conflict escalation which is generally accepted as the best study of how disagreements can develop into disastrous warfare. It maps, in nine stages, how a conflict can develop from tension between antagonists to a situation into which the warring parties plunge “together into the abyss”.

Matthew Powell, a historian of warfare, compares Glasl’s model to the situation between Israel and Iran. He assesses the two antagonists have have reached stage seven, “where they are launching limited blows against each other while avoiding direct confrontation. Both want to make their adversary consider whether the cost of continuing is worth the potential rewards that can be gained”.

Powell believes that both sides presently seem keen to remain at arms length for fear that a direct conflict could plunge them – and their allies – into the aforementioned abyss.

Read more: Israel-Iran and the nine stages of how conflicts can escalate and get out of control........

© The Conversation