← WW3 RISK TRACKER / THEATER: Iran War
Iran – Israel, USA, Gulf conflict
- Two commercial vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz were attacked on 18 August, killing a bulk carrier chief engineer.
- U.S. President Trump stated that no diplomatic negotiations with Iran are planned following the formal expiration of the bilateral pact.
- Saudi Arabia resumed oil loadings and commercial sales at terminals inside the Strait of Hormuz despite active shipping hazards.
- The U.S. Department of Defense initiated options reviews regarding potential future reductions to its military footprint in the Gulf.
- Iranian authorities prepared contingency economic measures to sustain state operations against anticipated additions to U.S. sanctions.
Active maritime hostilities continue in the Strait of Hormuz following the formal expiration of the temporary U.S.-Iran diplomatic agreement.
Assailants attacked two commercial ships transiting the Strait of Hormuz on 18 August, killing a bulk carrier chief engineer. Simultaneously, the U.S. Department of Defense initiated reviews to evaluate long-term military force levels in the Gulf after repeated strikes on regional bases.
U.S. President Trump stated on 18 August that no negotiations with Tehran are planned, identifying disagreements over Strait of Hormuz navigation as the primary impasse. Iranian officials confirmed that diplomatic discussions halted following the expiration of the temporary framework.
Saudi Arabia resumed commercial oil loadings at export terminals inside the Strait of Hormuz despite ongoing maritime transit risks. In Tehran, Iranian financial officials outlined emergency economic plans to sustain trade against prospective U.S. sanctions.
Failure to establish a navigation agreement leaves commercial shipping vulnerable to direct interdiction. Assessment: Persistent attacks on merchant vessels in the Strait of Hormuz will likely sustain high military force posture across the Gulf while formal diplomatic channels remain closed.
- 2026-08-17
U.S. and Iran fail to reach broad agreement as diplomatic deadline expires.
The June Memorandum of Understanding between Washington and Tehran expired on August 17 without a broad peace agreement. Direct and indirect negotiations deadlocked over Strait of Hormuz maritime blockade enforcement and ceasefire terms.
- 2026-08-14
US Navy deploys USS George Washington to the Middle East
The U.S. Navy deployed the aircraft carrier USS George Washington to the Middle East to relieve the long-deployed USS Abraham Lincoln.
- 2026-08-13
United States enforces Hormuz blockade while Tehran rejects American control claims
US CENTCOM forces redirected dozens of commercial vessels near the Strait of Hormuz as part of active blockade measures. Iranian officials disputed assertions of complete US control while commercial maritime transit through the chokepoint dropped to multi-month lows.
4 more
- 2026-08-12
Iran reports no progress in peace talks with U.S. amid Hormuz dispute
Iran stated that no progress has been made toward reviving an interim peace agreement with the United States. Negotiations remain stalled over maritime access and naval enforcement within the Strait of Hormuz.
- 2026-08-12
Iran rejects ceasefire extension with Washington as disputes over Strait of Hormuz control stall peace talks
Tehran publicly denied reports of extending a ceasefire with the United States, maintaining its refusal to compromise until its demands are met. The diplomatic impasse coincides with contesting assertions over maritime control and transit security in the Strait of Hormuz.
- 2026-08-12
U.S. forces fire on vessel ignoring Strait of Hormuz blockade amid frozen peace negotiations
U.S. forces reportedly engaged a commercial vessel that bypassed blockade parameters in the Strait of Hormuz. Concurrently, Iranian officials reported no progress toward extending or reviving interim peace arrangements with Washington.
- 2026-08-12
Iran denies ceasefire extension talks with U.S. amid fresh maritime attacks
Tehran publicly denied reports of discussing a truce extension with Washington as fresh shipping attacks occurred near the Strait of Hormuz and Red Sea. Both sides maintain aggressive military postures while diplomatic initiatives stall.
COMMON QUESTIONS
Is Iran at war with Israel and the United States?
There is no declared war. Iran and Israel have exchanged direct military strikes, United States forces are engaged in the region, and the pressure extends to sanctions and to shipping through the Gulf. The index sits high because that fighting is real, not because war has been declared. Iran, Israel and the United States all appear as conflict parties in Geneva Academy's worldwide classification — the strikes register as interstate hostilities even without a declared war. The index reads 51/100 as of 1 January 1970 (limited armed conflict); above 50 it grades the fighting itself rather than the risk of it.
How dangerous is the Iran and Israel, USA, Gulf situation right now?
The index reads 51/100 — limited armed conflict. The scale is anchored on 22 historical episodes from 1914 to 2005, so the number means the same thing from one theater to the next. It is a measurement of what is reported, not a forecast.
How is the Iran and Israel, USA, Gulf risk index calculated?
By fixed formula from open-source reporting: events are extracted and graded by how well evidenced they are, scored across weighted factors, and the model never picks the number. How the index works, and what it does not measure, is explained at wwiii.report/methodology.
How often is this updated?
Every day. The report is rebuilt from that day's reporting and the index re-judged from it, and a fall is published only once the evidence confirms it.
Timeline events — hover the chart to read them
Timeline events — hover the chart to read them
Timeline events — hover the chart to read them
One 0–100 scale for the whole conflict. 0–49 is escalation before war; 50–100 is active war and how far it has gone.
50 is not a threshold the number can cross on its own. Which side a theater sits on is decided by whether verified belligerents are fighting there, so war onset always moves the score up across 50 — the number never declares a war by climbing.
It is a stage, not a probability: 42 is not a 42% chance of war. Below 50 it grades movement toward war, above 50 the war itself.
Why it moved, under the chart, names what changed in the latest move: the day’s readings — strikes, casualties, talks — and, when the conflict’s stage was re-judged, what was graded differently and the events behind it. Open it for the detail.
Re-judged from open reporting by fixed formula — the model never picks a number — and a fall publishes only once the evidence confirms it. A dot on the line is a day the stage itself moved. How it is made →
Direction — which way the week pushed. Severity — where the index sits. Connections — how much of the rest a shock here reaches. Cascade — that reach combined with how ready this theater is to go off.
The index reads the state of the conflict, not the volume of news. Each run grades the factors listed below against fixed rubrics, and the score follows by formula.
So a dramatic headline moves nothing unless it changes a grade. A theater already graded for recurring incursions absorbs one more without moving — it is priced in.
Open How this was measured for every grade, its movement since the last run, and the events behind it. Full construction →
A different measurement from the score above, from a different source. This line counts how much of the world's news reports conflict between these two states, against their own long-run normal: 100 is normal, 200 is twice the usual level.
It is computed mechanically from the GDELT Project's open event stream every 15 minutes and never touches the assessed index above — when both move together, that agreement is the signal. A day with too few events shows no reading rather than a guess. Click the chart for the full history.
Data: the GDELT Project.