Socio-political tension on the planet is growing, some experts predict that only a world conflict can be a detente. How realistic is it in the short term?
The risk remains
It is unlikely that today someone is pursuing the goal of unleashing a world war. If a large-scale conflict was brewing, the instigator always hoped to end it as quickly as possible and with minimal losses. However, as history shows, almost all "blitzkriegs" resulted in a protracted confrontation, involving a huge amount of human and material resources. Such wars caused damage to both the loser and the winner.
Nevertheless, wars have always been and will always be due to the desire for the possession of resources, the protection of borders from massive illegal migration, the fight against terrorism, border clashes or non-compliance with agreements.
In the event that countries nevertheless decide to get involved in a global war, according to many experts, they will certainly end up in different camps of approximately equal strength. The total military, primarily nuclear potential of the powers involved in the conflict is such that they can destroy all life on the planet dozens of times. How likely is it that the coalitions will start this suicidal war? Analysts say it is small, but still there.
Political poles
Promotional video:
The modern world order is far from what it was after the Second World War, but formally it continues to exist on the basis of the Yalta and Bretton Woods agreements of the states of the anti-Hitler coalition. The only thing that has changed is the balance of power that was formed during the Cold War. The two poles of world geopolitics today, as well as half a century ago, are defined by Russia and the United States.
Russia overcame the most difficult Rubicon, which was not painless for it: it temporarily lost its superpower status and lost its traditional allies. Nevertheless, Russia has managed to preserve its integrity, retain influence in the post-Soviet space, revive the military-industrial complex and acquire new strategic partners.
The financial and political elites of the United States, as in the good old days, under democratic slogans continue to carry out military expansion far from their borders, at the same time successfully imposing an “anti-crisis” and “anti-terrorist” position favorable to Washington on the leading countries.
China is getting more and more persistent in the confrontation between Russia and the United States. The eastern dragon, with good relations with Russia, still does not accept any of the parties to the conflict. Possessing the most numerous army and carrying out rearmament on an unprecedented scale, he has every reason for this.
A united Europe also remains an influential player on the world stage. Despite the dependence on the goals of the North Atlantic Alliance, certain forces in the Old World advocate an independent political course. The reconstruction of the armed forces of the European Union, which will be carried out by Germany and France, is not far off. In the face of a shortage of energy resources, Europe will act decisively, analysts say.
One cannot but pay attention to the growing threat posed by radical Islam in the Middle East. This is not only the expansive nature of the actions of Islamic groups in the region, which is increasing every year, but also the expansion of the geography and tools of terrorism.
Alliances
In recent years, we have increasingly seen the consolidation of various union associations. This is evidenced, on the one hand, by Donald Trump's talks with the heads of Israel, South Korea, Japan, Britain and leading European countries, on the other hand, by meetings of states within the BRICS, where more and more new international partners are involved. Not only trade, economic and political issues are being discussed, but also all sorts of aspects of military cooperation.
Well-known military analyst Joachim Hagopian stated back in 2015 that America's and Russia’s “recruiting friends” was not accidental. China and India, in his opinion, will be drawn into Russia's orbit, and the European Union will inevitably follow the United States. Is this not evidenced by the intensified exercises of NATO countries in Eastern Europe or a military parade with the participation of Indian and Chinese units on Red Square?
Adviser to the President of Russia Sergei Glazyev declares that it will be beneficial and even principled for Russia to create a coalition from any countries that do not support militant rhetoric directed against our state. Then, according to him, the United States will have to moderate its ardor.
It is very important what position Turkey will take, which is almost a key figure capable of acting as a catalyst for relations between Europe and the Middle East, and more broadly, between the West and the countries of the Asian region. What we are seeing now is Istanbul's cunning game on the contradictions between the US and Russia.
Resources
Foreign and domestic analysts are more and more inclined to the conclusion that a global war can be provoked by the global financial crisis. The most serious problem of the world's leading countries lies in the close intertwining of their economies: the collapse of one of them will entail irreversible consequences for others.
The war that may follow a devastating crisis will be fought not so much for territories as for resources. For example, analysts Alexander Sobyanin and Marat Shibutov are building the following hierarchy of resources that the beneficiary will receive: people, uranium, gas, oil, coal, mining raw materials, drinking water, agricultural land.
It is curious that, according to some experts, the status of a generally recognized world leader does not guarantee the United States victory in such a war. In the past, NATO commander-in-chief Richard Schiffer, in his book 2017: War with Russia, predicted a defeat for the United States, which was caused by the financial collapse and the collapse of the American army.
Who is first?
Today the crisis on the Korean Peninsula could trigger a trigger that could start, if not a world war, then a global conflict. Hagopian, however, predicts that at first Russia and the United States will not get involved in it. It will be civil strife with the possibility of using nuclear warheads.
Glazyev sees no serious grounds for a global war, but notes that its risk will persist until the United States abandons its claims to world domination. The most dangerous period, according to Glazyev, is the beginning of the 2020s, when the West will come out of the depression, and the developed countries, including China and the United States, will begin another round of rearmament. At the peak of a new technological leap, the danger of a global conflict will lie.
It is characteristic that the famous Bulgarian clairvoyant Vanga did not dare to predict the date of the beginning of the Third World War, paying attention only to the fact that religious strife around the world would be the cause of a possible conflict.
Hybrid Wars
Not everyone believes in the reality of World War III. Why go to massive sacrifices and destruction if there is a long-tested and more effective means - "hybrid war". The "White Paper" intended for the commanders of the special forces of the American army under the section "Winning in a Complex World" contains all the comprehensive information on this matter.
It says that any military operations primarily imply implicit and covert actions. Their essence is in the attack by the forces of rebels or terrorist organizations (which are supplied from abroad with money and weapons) on government structures. Sooner or later, the existing regime loses its ability to control the situation and gives up its country to the sponsors of the coup.
The Chief of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces, General Valery Gerasimov, considers "hybrid war" a means many times superior to any open military clashes in terms of the results achieved.
Capital can do anything
Today, it is not only the conspiracy theorists who are convinced that both world wars were largely provoked by Anglo-American financial corporations, which were extracting fabulous profits from militarization. The ultimate goal is the establishment of the so-called "American peace".
“Today we are on the verge of a grandiose reformatting of the world order, the instrument of which will again be war,” says the writer Alexei Kungurov. It will be a financial war of world capitalism, directed primarily against developing countries.
The task of this war is not to give the periphery any chance for any independence. In underdeveloped or dependent countries, a system of external currency management is established, which forces them to exchange their output, resources, and other material values for dollars. The more transactions, the more the American machine will print currencies.
But the main goal of world capital is the Heartland: the territory of the Eurasian continent, most of which is controlled by Russia. Whoever owns the Heartland, with its colossal resource base, will own the world, as the classic of geopolitics Mackinder said.
Taras Repin