The Global Risks Report 2024

No. of conflictsNo. of conflict fatalities 405060 0 20 1030160k200k240k 080k 40k120k Year2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2021 2022 2020 Total state-based armed conflicts State-based armed conflict fatalities Interstate armed conflictsInternationalized armed conflictsIncidence and impact of state-based armed conflict, 2007-2022 FIGURE 1.12 Source Uppsala Conflict Data Program (UCDP), 2023.NoteThe UCDP Armed Conflict Database’s definition of state-based armed conflict is defined as “a contested incompatibility that concerns government and/or territory where the use of armed force between two parties, of which at least one is the government of a state, results in at least 25 battle-related deaths in one calendar year”. This may include intrastate armed conflict (occurring between a government and a non-governmental party), internationalized intrastate armed conflict (occurring between a government, and one or more internal opposition groups, with intervention from other states on either side), and interstate armed conflict (occurring between two or more states or governments). The definition of interstate armed conflict adopted by the GRPS is broader than the UCDP’s definition of “interstate armed conflict”, encompassing some elements of “internationalized intrastate armed conflict”. High-stakes hotspots Over the next two years, the attention and resources of global powers are likely to be focused on three hotspots in particular: the war in Ukraine, the Israel-Gaza conflict and tensions over Taiwan. Escalation in any one of these hotspots would radically disrupt global supply chains, financial markets, security dynamics and political stability, viscerally threatening the sense of security and safety of individuals worldwide. All three areas stand at a geopolitical crossroads, where major powers have vested interests: oil and trade routes in the Middle East, stability and the balance of power in Eastern Europe, and advanced technological supply chains in East Asia. Each could lead to broader regional destabilization, directly drawing in major power(s) and escalating the scale of conflict. All three also directly involve power(s) reckoned to possess nuclear capabilities. Over the next two years, the war in Ukraine could sporadically alternate between intensifying and refreezing. Despite sanctions, Russia has continued to benefit from energy profits and commodity exports – and this could increase further if the conflict in the Middle East widens. 31 Pro-Russian or neutral sentiment in Eastern and Central Europe could soften support from Ukraine’s European allies, 32 while support in the United States could wane under domestic pressures, other international priorities, or under a new government. Global divisions with respect to the Middle East conflict may also complicate efforts by Ukraine to maintain unity with Western allies, while also garnering support from the Global South. 33 If the conflict intensifies, it is still more likely to do so through conventional rather than nuclear means, but it could also expand to neighbouring countries. While post-conflict scenarios for both Ukraine and Russia are difficult to predict, the war could ‘refreeze’ into a prolonged, sporadic conflict that could last years or even decades. 34 Global Risks Report 2024 23