What Should Markets Fear More: War in Israel or Debt in America?

Financial markets do not fear headlines; they fear sustained changes to cash flows, discount rates, and systemic stability. The emotionally charged question of whether markets should fear war in Israel or debt in the United States more is therefore not a comparative moral inquiry, nor a geopolitical ranking exercise. Rather, it is a structural assessment of which risk more profoundly and persistently alters the global cost of capital. While war introduces acute volatility and tail risk, the long-run trajectory of US public debt represents the more pervasive and structurally consequential threat to global asset pricing. The distinction lies in duration, transmission mechanisms, and systemic reach.

The war that began on October 7, 2023, constituted a severe geopolitical shock for Israel. The immediate financial response was swift: currency pressure intensified, sovereign spreads widened, and uncertainty surged. In response, the Bank of Israel announced a program to sell up to $30 billion in foreign exchange reserves, alongside additional liquidity measures designed to stabilize financial markets and ensure orderly functioning (Bank of Israel, 2023a). Such intervention was not a signal of fragility, but rather of institutional credibility. Indeed, Israel entered the conflict with comparatively strong macroeconomic fundamentals, including moderate public-debt-to-GDP ratios and substantial foreign exchange reserves (Bank of Israel, 2024a).

Despite the scale of the security crisis, Israeli capital markets demonstrated notable resilience. By late 2025, the TA-35 and TA-90 indices had reached record highs, outperforming many global benchmarks despite the ongoing conflict (Times of Israel, 2025). Concurrently, macroeconomic data indicated a rebound in economic activity during 2025, with growth returning as labor market conditions stabilized and inflation moderated (Reuters, 2026). The Bank of Israel’s annual and wartime economic assessments underscore that while the real economy absorbed meaningful shocks – particularly through labor shortages and defense-related disruptions – the financial system remained functional and policy credibility intact (Bank of Israel, 2024b).

This pattern is consistent with the broader empirical literature on geopolitical risk. Caldara and Iacoviello (2022) demonstrate that geopolitical shocks exert statistically significant but often transitory effects on equity markets, with persistence contingent upon spillover into global trade, energy markets, or financial plumbing. In other words, war primarily transmits through risk premia and earnings expectations. Unless it escalates into a systemic supply shock or great-power confrontation, markets gradually reprice and adapt. The Israeli case illustrates how credible monetary institutions, deep capital markets, and fiscal flexibility can mitigate the long-term financial consequences of even severe security events.

Public debt, by contrast, operates through a fundamentally different channel. The United States does not merely issue sovereign bonds; it issues the benchmark risk-free asset that anchors global valuation models. US Treasuries form the foundation of collateral markets, pricing curves, and international reserve holdings. When the trajectory of US debt shifts, the implications are neither localized nor episodic – they reverberate through the global discount rate.

Recent fiscal projections underscore the scale of the issue. According to reporting on the Congressional Budget Office’s February 2026 outlook, debt held by the public stands near 100 percent of GDP and is projected to rise toward approximately 120 percent over the coming decade under baseline assumptions (Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, 2026; Reuters, 2026). Data from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis confirm that federal debt held by the public as a share of GDP remains near historical highs (Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, n.d.). Simultaneously, the US Department of the Treasury documents continued structural increases in borrowing to finance persistent deficits (US Department of the Treasury, 2026).

The significance of this trajectory extends beyond solvency arithmetic. Elevated debt alters the equilibrium relationship between fiscal and monetary policy. As interest expenditures consume a larger share of federal revenues, markets begin to price higher term premia to compensate for inflation risk, rollover risk, and potential fiscal dominance dynamics. The result is not necessarily an abrupt crisis but a sustained upward drift in real yields. Because equity valuations, private equity hurdle rates, real estate capitalization rates, and emerging-market spreads are all benchmarked – directly or indirectly – to the US risk-free rate, even modest increases in Treasury yields can compress asset valuations globally.

The International Monetary Fund has warned that global public debt exceeded $100 trillion in 2024 and that major advanced economies are central contributors to medium-term fiscal pressures (International Monetary Fund, 2024a, 2024b). Within that context, US debt assumes outsized importance because of the dollar’s reserve currency status. If investors demand higher compensation for holding Treasuries, the transmission mechanism is universal. Credit conditions tighten worldwide, refinancing risk rises for leveraged sectors, and capital allocation decisions adjust accordingly. This process unfolds gradually, but its persistence makes it structurally more consequential than episodic geopolitical shocks.

To be clear, this argument does not trivialize war risk. Should a regional conflict expand to disrupt energy supply chains, maritime trade routes, or great-power deterrence, its macroeconomic impact could quickly exceed that of fiscal imbalance. In such a scenario, inflation expectations would surge, commodity markets would spike, and central banks would confront renewed policy dilemmas. However, even in that tail-risk scenario, the fiscal consequences would compound the underlying debt trajectory, as defense spending rises and deficits widen. The interaction between geopolitical escalation and already elevated public debt would amplify, rather than replace, the structural risk embedded in sovereign balance sheets.

The critical analytical distinction, therefore, lies in probability-weighted persistence. War in Israel represents a high-intensity, low-frequency risk with potentially severe but conditional spillovers. US debt represents a medium-intensity, high-persistence force that continuously influences the global cost of capital. Markets can absorb localized conflict when institutional credibility, liquidity provision, and macroeconomic buffers remain intact. They struggle more profoundly when the anchor of global risk-free pricing shifts upward in a sustained manner.

In baseline probabilistic terms, therefore, markets should fear US debt more – not because war is insignificant, but because debt redefines valuation frameworks across all asset classes. The repricing of duration risk, the steady elevation of real yields, and the cumulative tightening of financial conditions exert a compounding influence on equities, credit, and real assets worldwide. In short: although war may shock, debt reshapes.

For investors and policymakers alike, the implication is strategic rather than rhetorical. War demands contingency planning and hedging against fat-tailed volatility. Debt demands structural adjustment – credible fiscal reform, growth-enhancing productivity policies, and coordination between monetary and fiscal authorities to preserve long-run stability. The day the geopolitical map changes, markets will fear war. Most other days, they quietly reprice debt.

—

References

Bank of Israel. (2023a, October 9). Bank of Israel activity in the foreign exchange market [Press release].

Bank of Israel. (2024a). Bank of Israel annual report 2023.

Bank of Israel. (2024b, October 1). The economy and economic policy during the war (Chapter 1).

Caldara, D., & Iacoviello, M. (2022). Measuring geopolitical risk. American Economic Review, 112(4), 1194-1225. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20191823

Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. (2026). CBO’s February 2026 budget and economic outlook.

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. (n.d.). Federal debt held by the public as percent of gross domestic product (FYGFGDQ188S) [Data set]. FRED.

International Monetary Fund. (2024a). Fiscal monitor, October 2024: Putting a lid on public debt (Executive summary).

International Monetary Fund. (2024b). Fiscal monitor, October 2024: Putting a lid on public debt.

Reuters. (2026, February 11). US budget deficit to keep growing amid tax cuts and tariffs, CBO forecasts show.

Reuters. (2026, February 16). Israel post-war economy to grow further in 2026 after 3.1% gain in 2025.

Times of Israel. (2025, December 28). Tel Aviv shares break record highs in 2025 despite war, outpacing global markets in 2025.

U.S. Department of the Treasury. (2026). Understanding the national debt (America’s finance guide).