Escalation hotspots: Where conflict risks are rising most rapidly

Drawing on novel LLM methods developed by the Institute for Economics & Peace (IEP), the Global Peace Index 2025 identifies countries where underlying conditions suggest the potential for large-scaled armed conflicts. These nations are not only grappling with internal instability but also face intense external pressures, deteriorating economic conditions and international disengagement. 

At the forefront of these escalation hotspots is Kashmir, where tensions between India and Pakistan remain perilously high. An April 2025 terror attack significantly escalated hostilities, pushing both nuclear-armed states close to open warfare. The situation in Kashmir exemplifies the fragility of ceasefire agreements in volatile geopolitical settings and underscores the dangers posed by non-state actors capable of triggering international crises. 

South Sudan, another country at high risk of escalation, continues to experience ethnic violence, militia fragmentation, and unresolved political grievances. Despite the 2018 peace agreement, the failure to establish effective governance and integrate rival factions keeps the country trapped in cycles of violence. The GPI notes that South Sudan is one of the most fragile states in the world, with consistently low scores across the Positive Peace pillars. 

Ethiopia and Eritrea remain volatile, with tensions simmering after the Tigray conflict and continued disputes over border regions and political control as landlocked Ethiopia openly seeks access to the Red Sea. Although large-scale combat operations have decreased, the situation remains fluid and unpredictable. The GPI identifies both countries as at risk of renewed large-scale violence due to unresolved historical grievances, ethnic divisions, and economic instability. 

In the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), conflict dynamics are driven by the proliferation of armed groups and weak central governance. The GPI records over 8,400 conflict-related deaths in 2023 alone, with instability concentrated in the eastern provinces. Despite being resource-rich, the DRC suffers from institutional fragility and a long-standing absence of state authority in many regions, which continues to fuel insecurity and humanitarian crises. A peace deal between Rwanda and DRC appears imminent though the potential for further escalation of conflict in eastern DRC to other regions remains high.

Syria also remains an escalation hotspot, despite the fall of the Assad regime. The transitional period has opened new political and military fault lines, and competing interests among local factions, regional powers, and global actors have made the peace process more complex. The country continues to rank near the bottom of the GPI, with ongoing violence and a deteriorated security environment. 

IEP’s conflict escalation risk matrix integrates indicators such as urban conflict origin, accessibility of terrain, external support, heavy weapons access for non-state groups and the presence of private military actors, among others to highlight where conflicts are most likely to intensify. The identification of these six escalation hotspots: Kashmir, South Sudan, Ethiopia, Eritrea, the DRC, and Syria, reflects the convergence of structural fragility with immediate security threats. 

These regions are not only conflict-prone but are often located in broader zones of geopolitical competition and transnational insecurity. The Sahel, for example, while not specifically listed among the top six, continues to exhibit signs of regional destabilisation due to terrorism, arms flows, and environmental stressors. Conflict in one state can easily spill over into neighbouring countries, creating regionalised crises. 

The GPI 2025 finds that only nine per cent of conflicts today result in a decisive military victory, and just four per cent end with negotiated settlements. This reflects the broader shift toward ‘forever wars’ – low-intensity, long-duration conflicts that resist traditional resolution strategies. These conditions are particularly prevalent in the escalation hotspots identified by IEP. 

Addressing escalation hotspots requires more than a crisis response, but rather sustained investment in Positive Peace. Strengthening governance, improving political inclusivity, supporting economic resilience and investing in civil society, are all vital to preventing future large-scale conflict. 

IEP’s work continues to provide an evidence-based roadmap for anticipating and mitigating conflict risks. The world’s attention must now focus on these emerging escalation hotspots to prevent the next wave of violence and humanitarian crises.

— Download the Global Peace Index Press Release
— Request a Media Interview
— View the Global Peace Index Interactive Map