A World Growing More Dangerous
As 2025 draws to a close, the global landscape feels more unstable than at any point since the Cold War’s end. Armed conflicts now rage at levels not seen since World War II, with interstate wars on the rise and violence spilling across borders. The Council on Foreign Relations’ eighteenth annual Preventive Priorities Survey, released in December 2025, captures this unease. Over six hundred U.S. foreign policy experts assessed thirty plausible contingencies for 2026, ranking them by likelihood and potential impact on American interests. For the first time, the survey also highlighted opportunities for prevention. The results paint a sobering picture: five scenarios rated as both highly likely and highly damaging, including escalations in the Middle East, Ukraine, and even domestic U.S. unrest. New entries reflect the Trump administration’s aggressive stance, such as potential direct strikes inside Venezuela amid an ongoing maritime campaign against alleged drug traffickers. Geopolitical divides—U.S.-China rivalry, Russia’s European provocations, and Middle East fault lines—complicate consensus, while experts warn of blindsided crises draining resources and lives. In this volatile era, where the U.S. holds vast commitments but faces internal constraints, foresight is not luxury but necessity.
The survey’s logic is clear: anticipate threats to prioritize responses, averting costly surprises. Yet the Trump administration has dismantled key prevention tools, slashing related funding. As conflicts multiply—from Gaza’s fragile truce to Sudan’s atrocities—2026 looms as a year where risks could cascade, testing alliances and resolve.
————————————————————
How Experts Assess the Risks: The Survey’s Method and Matrix
Each year since 2008, the Center for Preventive Action polls thousands of experts—government officials, academics, think tank scholars—to gauge emerging threats. In October 2025, public input via social media helped select thirty discrete contingencies, judged plausible and U.S.-relevant over the next year. Excluded are broad trends like climate change or pandemics, too unpredictable short-term, though they fuel many risks.
November’s poll scored each on likelihood (low to high) and impact (low to high: homeland threats, treaty allies, or vital interests warranting military response). Results slot into three tiers on a matrix, guiding priorities.
This year, anxieties match last: five Tier I (high likelihood/high impact), twenty-eight of thirty at least moderately likely, seventeen moderately or highly impactful. Middle East dominates top tiers (six involving Israel), Africa most contingencies (nine, though mostly lower impact). Experts added “other concerns” like Arctic clashes or Balkan flare-ups.
New this year: prevention opportunities, where U.S. leverage or partnerships shine—topping Ukraine, Gaza, Taiwan.
The matrix aids clarity: Tier I demands urgent attention, Tier III monitoring. With armed conflicts at post-WWII highs and U.S. exposure vast, the PPS urges proactive steps amid administration cuts to foresight and peace-building.
————————————————————
Tier I Priorities: The Most Urgent Threats to Watch
Tier I contingencies—high likelihood and high impact—demand closest scrutiny, potentially triggering U.S. military involvement.
High-likelihood ones include West Bank clashes over settlements and Gaza rights, amid post-war tensions; renewed Gaza fighting deepening humanitarian woes and regional spill; intensified Russia-Ukraine strikes on infrastructure and cities; U.S. escalation to direct Venezuela strikes, destabilizing Maduro amid ongoing Caribbean operations; and growing U.S. domestic political violence, fueled by polarization.
Moderate-likelihood but high-impact: Iran-Israel renewal post-2025 clashes; AI-enabled cyberattack on U.S. infrastructure; China-Taiwan crisis drawing U.S.; Russia-NATO armed clashes from provocations; North Korea nuclear tests sparking Korean confrontation.
These reflect persistent flashpoints: Middle East instability, great-power risks (Taiwan, Ukraine, cyber), and Trump-era shifts like Venezuela focus and domestic unrest resurgence.
Notable changes: North Korea rises to Tier I; Haiti, Lebanon drop; U.S. political violence climbs after 2025 dip.
Experts see prevention windows in Ukraine (top opportunity), Gaza, Taiwan—U.S. diplomacy key.
————————————————————
Lower Tiers and Emerging Concerns: Broader Instability on the Horizon
Tier II mixes high-likelihood/low-impact (Sudan escalation with atrocities; Haiti violence amid dysfunction; South Sudan delays sparking ethnic fights) with moderate-likelihood/moderate-impact (Somalia terror surge post-U.S. aid cut; Yemen Houthi actions deepening crisis; Lebanon Hezbollah disarmament failure; Syria ISIS/sectarian resurgence; India-Pakistan Kashmir renewal) and low-likelihood/high-impact (U.S. Mexico strikes over drugs; China-Philippines South China Sea clash).
Tier III covers moderate/low (Sahel insurgencies; Nigeria Islamist persistence; Congo resource fights; Bangladesh violence/election delays; Myanmar collapse; Ecuador crime/repression; Ethiopia-Eritrea reignition; Mozambique insurgency; Afghanistan-Pakistan clashes; Cameroon unrest).
“Other concerns”: Arctic Russia/China-U.S./NATO; Armenia-Azerbaijan; Cambodia-Thailand; China-Japan Senkaku; Colombia-Venezuela spill; Balkans intervention.
Africa features heavily (nine), Sudan most likely overall. Removals: Afghanistan internal (now border-focused); Turkey Kurds (disarmament progress); Ethiopia/Libya civil; Russia non-NATO provocations.
Revisions reflect 2025 events: Ukraine infrastructure focus; Iran-Israel post-war; U.S. Mexico/Venezuela drug emphasis; Sudan atrocities; Somalia U.S. withdrawal; Yemen internal; Lebanon Hezbollah.
These underscore fragmented violence: civil wars, insurgencies, spillovers—often low direct U.S. impact but humanitarian tolls, migration drivers.
————————————————————
Conclusion: A Call for Prevention in an Unforgiving Year
The 2026 PPS signals unrelenting global disorder: high risks undiminished, new ones from policy shifts like Venezuela escalation. Middle East and great-power tensions loom largest, Africa volume heaviest. Opportunities exist—Ukraine diplomacy tops—but require tools the administration has curtailed.
As interstate wars rise and U.S. commitments strain, prevention grows vital. Experts urge reversing ally alienation, rebuilding foresight. 2026 could tip toward wider wars or managed truces—depending on proactive choices. In this more violent world, ignoring warnings risks costly surprises; heeding them offers paths to stability. The survey’s message: anticipate, prioritize, act—before crises consume.
