British scientist H. G. Wells once warned, “If we do not end war, one day war will end us.” The statement may be very old, but in today’s world, there seems to be no greater “universal truth” than this.
We are observing with deep concern that before the fire of one war has even been extinguished, a new fire is breaking out elsewhere.
After Ukraine came Gaza, followed by conflict in the Middle East centered around Iran, and the heat of that conflict is spreading across a vast region, including Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq, Syria, and Saudi Arabia.
This raises the question: Is the world, then, slowly moving toward a war whose consequences will eventually be beyond anyone’s control?
Recently, the activities of Yemen’s Houthis have created new concerns around the Bab el-Mandeb Strait. This waterway, adjoining the Red Sea and the Suez Canal, is one of the most important arteries of global trade.
If prolonged disruption occurs in the Bab el-Mandeb Strait alongside instability in the Strait of Hormuz, the impact will not remain confined to the Middle East; rather, it will spread across the world. The reason is that today’s world is not a collection of isolated islands.
If shipping is disrupted in one strait, transportation costs rise elsewhere. If fuel supplies face shortages, oil prices rise, and when oil prices rise, the prices of almost everything—from food, clothing, and medicine to nearly all other goods—naturally increase.
It is particularly noteworthy that during the Red Sea crisis, many ships have had to take longer routes around Africa. As a result, both travel time and fuel costs have increased.
Such disruption to major shipping routes is bound to put significant pressure on global trade and inflation—something we are witnessing at present.
Yet the most brutal irony of war lies elsewhere! A closer look reveals that decisions to wage war are almost always made by the powerful, while ordinary people are the ones who pay the price.
The great powers calculate their weapons expenditures, while people in poorer countries become exhausted trying to decide whether they can afford to buy rice or their children’s medicine.
Countries at war speak of their own security, but say little about the fact that the consequences of those wars leave the lives and livelihoods of hundreds of millions of people insecure.
Anticipating the risks, developed countries try to reduce their vulnerabilities through alternative energy sources, strategic reserves, multiple supply routes, and international cooperation.
But where are those poor countries supposed to turn? Why should people’s futures be thrown into such uncertainty? World leaders seem unwilling to acknowledge even this simple truth, despite understanding it.
The major powers are instead busy expanding their spheres of influence, while regional powers are busy calculating their own interests. One side is taking a position against another; new alliances are being formed; the arms race and tensions are intensifying.
But in this ledger of calculations, who will account for the lives, hunger, employment, and future of ordinary people?
The situation makes one thing clear: the world truly can no longer bear the burden of war. On one side are hunger, poverty, climate change, and unemployment; on the other are the arms race and war.
As a result of all these trends, the space for dialogue and compromise—so essential for peace—is steadily shrinking. Witnessing this situation, concerned and conscientious people are asking themselves whether, instead of making the world a habitable place for humanity, we are turning it into a battlefield.
The explosion of a missile may take place in one territory, but its repercussions can reach markets, ports, factories, and, above all, the kitchens of poor families thousands of miles away. Therefore, the unavoidable question now is not who will win the war, but whether humanity itself will win at all.