When Israel launched the Six-Day War in 1967 against Egypt, Jordan and Syria, I was in second year high school; for the next three years, Israel and Egypt engaged in low-level conflict involving border skirmishes and artillery duels. In 1979, a revolution in Iran brought about the establishment of an Islamic Republic led by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini who ruled until his death in 1989.

By the time the Gulf War erupted in January 1990, I was serving my first stint in government. Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, setting off fears about the disruption of oil supplies.

Today’s banner headlines reflect the government’s concern over rising oil prices due to tightening supply as Iran has blocked the Strait of Hormuz. We have gone full circle.

As governments around the world recalibrate and prepare to roll out contingency measures, their citizens are naturally asking: What scenarios lie ahead, and how can governments protect ordinary people from being the collateral victims of a distant war?

The immediate effects of the strikes are now visible: retaliatory missile and drone barrages against U.S. and allied positions in the Gulf, escalation involving Iran-aligned militias, and heightened global condemnation. Allow me to offer my two cents’ worth in terms of enabling readers to grasp the ramifications of what lies ahead.

Scenario 1: Contained escalation, protracted conflict.

One possible scenario is a contained but protracted conflict, where both sides avoid a full-scale mobilization but continue a cycle of strikes and counter strikes. Analysts see this as the most likely immediate path — involving continued military engagements around key strategic targets, ongoing missile exchanges, and intensifying cyber operations without decisive ground campaigns.

Such a stalemate could have serious secondary effects beyond the battlefield. Energy markets could become volatile, with oil and gas prices spiking as traders price in risk premiums related to the security of the Strait of Hormuz — a chokepoint for nearly a fifth of global oil shipments.

Even without a regional conflagration, these economic aftershocks will reach consumers worldwide through higher fuel costs, inflationary pressures, and disrupted trade flows. For developing economies and import-dependent countries like the Philippines, these indirect effects could hurt growth and affordability, especially for basic commodities and transportation.

Scenario 2: Broader regional conflict.

The second plausible scenario is broader escalation if Tehran or its proxies — such as Hezbollah in Lebanon or Houthi forces in Yemen — widen the conflict. Missile salvos into Israel, attacks on Gulf states, or assaults on US bases would expand the war’s geography.

A wider conflict would test alliances and could draw in neighboring states not originally at war, exacerbating a regional conflagration. It would also further disrupt energy production and shipping routes, threatening global supply chains that rely on stable Middle Eastern logistics hubs.

Scenario 3: Internal turmoil in Iran.

A third scenario — less predictable but deeply consequential — is internal destabilization within Iran. Targeted attacks on senior leadership and critical infrastructure could accelerate institutional fracture, giving rise to unrest, power struggles, or even humanitarian crises.

While some hope that military pressure might weaken hardliners and open avenues for political change, many experts caution that external intervention often consolidates domestic resistance and could empower security elites at the expense of reformist movements.

For governments not directly involved in the conflict — including the Philippines — policy responses must prioritize citizen welfare on multiple fronts.

First: Safeguard economic stability.

Global economic linkages would set off higher oil prices and freight costs could worsen inflation. Targeted subsidies for vulnerable sectors, and diplomatic engagement with oil exporters can help cushion price shocks.

Second: Protect overseas workers.

With conflicts near recruitment hubs and travel routes, more Filipinos in the Middle East and beyond may require emergency support, evacuation assistance, and consular protection. Government agencies should proactively communicate risks and offer contingency plans.

Third: Strengthen cybersecurity.

The risk of cyber-attacks is elevated in modern conflict. US intelligence already warns of likely Iranian cyber operations targeting critical infrastructure. The Department of Information and Communication Technology (DICT) must ensure the fortification of the country’s digital defenses to protect financial systems, utilities, and communication networks.

Fourth: Promote ASEAN-centric diplomacy.

Amid superpower rivalry, ASEAN can play constructive roles that promote de-escalation and conflict resolution. The setting up of humanitarian corridors can greatly assist and protect Filipino civilians caught in geopolitical crossfires.

Economic stress and global uncertainty can translate into domestic social pressures. Governments should anticipate rising costs of living and bolster social safety nets, from cash transfers to public health support, to maintain social cohesion.

In the current geopolitical landscape, distant conflicts can quickly become local economic and security vulnerabilities. Whether the conflict remains contained, broadens into a regional war, or triggers deep political shifts within Iran, the ripples will be felt globally. Thoughtful government action, grounded in safeguarding people’s well-being, resilience building, and principled diplomacy, is essential now more than ever.

Comments may be sent to [email protected]