Most US and EU residents are confident in the imminent start of World War III
The third world war may start soon. The world is teetering on the brink of the largest conflict in history. As shown by a poll by YouGov, most Westerners live in anticipation of the apocalypse.
As The Independent clarifies, during the analysis, nine thousand people were interviewed in nine countries, including the United States, Britain, Germany and France.
The respondents said that, in their opinion, the establishment of peace on Earth in the coming years is unlikely, but a major international armed conflict may begin soon. In particular, 64% of those polled predict world war among Americans, 61% among the British.
The inhabitants of the Nordic countries believe in such a development of events less. For example, about 39% of Danes believe that the planet is seriously threatened with a global conflict.
Anthony Wells, head of political and social research at YouGov, says that France and the United States are most afraid of a major conflict, but for different reasons. So the Americans, paradoxically, explain their fears of a world war with the imminent assumption of office of President-elect Donald Trump.
59% of Americans surveyed call Russia the main threat, 71% of Britons share their fears. Moreover, there are more Russophobes in Great Britain than, for example, in Finland or Germany, which are geographically located much closer to Moscow. In France, people are most afraid of the threat of an escalation of terrorism. First of all, Islamic. More than 81% of those polled are convinced that new terrorist attacks are expected in the near future.
In general, residents of each of the countries participating in the study, with the exception of Finland, stated that the likelihood of terrorist attacks in their countries is extremely high.
Promotional video:
Are such sentiments in Western society a consequence of the influence of the media, or is there a real motive for them?
- The question of the emergence of a new hot world war has been actively discussed in Russian political science for several years now, - says Boris Shmelev, head of the Center for Political Research at the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, head of the Department of International Relations of the Diplomatic Academy of the Russian Foreign Ministry.
- The new Concept of Russian Foreign Policy says that the outbreak of such a war is unlikely. But, as we can see, such a formulation does not at all exclude such a possibility.
As for public sentiments in Western countries, one must understand that they are mainly influenced by propaganda. For several years now, hysteria has been whipped up in the media about the threat posed by Russia. One can recall the speech of Breedlove, the former commander of the NATO military group in Europe, who “predicted” an imminent war with Russia. Two months ago, US Army Chief of Staff Mark Milli also stated that war was imminent. We have heard a number of similar statements. As a result, even people who are inclined to soberly assess the situation begin to fear a real military disaster.
Moreover, the scenario of a future war implies that on the one hand the West will fight, and on the other, Russia and China. Since the bulk of the population is not devoted to the intricacies of political scientists, they do not delve deeply into the world situation, people believe what they say in the media. Mostly on television. As you know, our actions in Crimea and Syria became the main pretext for anti-Russian propaganda. We were appointed the main aggressor. True, in recent years, more and more people have been trying to appoint China to this role.
"SP": - Can we talk about the inevitability of the Third World War?
- You have to understand that the world is full of contradictions. The paradigm of international relations is changing. A unipolar world is changing to a multipolar one. World economic relations are changing. The world economy itself is changing. New centers of economic power are emerging. In such a situation, a clash of interests of major powers is inevitable, which in turn protect the interests of global companies and financial structures. As you know, global financial capital imposes its own development conditions on the world. He seeks to unify the whole world to suit his interests. Some countries, mostly Western, even benefit from this. Many other states, on the contrary, are losing. And this cannot but cause conflicts and friction. That is, the prerequisites for a clash of world powers exist. Since the world's major players would like to redefine the rules of the game,based on their interests. To some extent, this also applies to Russia.
As for the inevitability of a global conflict, it should be noted that the very concept of war is now changing significantly. The old formula that war is the continuation of politics by other means requires revision. War today may not necessarily take the form of armed clashes. It takes the form of information wars, financial wars, cyber wars, color revolutions, and so on. The consequences of such wars are sometimes no less and even more destructive than head-on military clashes. And if we talk about the above methods, then the Third World War is already underway. The information war against Russia has been going on since the second half of the 90s, and now it has only taken on the most acute forms. An information war is being unleashed against China. There is an economic war between Russia and the West, a diplomatic war.
"SP": - Is it realistic to start a new "hot" world war, which is likely to become thermonuclear?
- Yes, as I said, such a possibility cannot be ruled out. This war can arise both between Russia and the United States and between the United States and China. However, the contradictions between Russia and the West are not yet insoluble. By and large, politicians in the West understand that Russia does not pose a threat to them. Yes, there are contradictions in the problem, but they can still be resolved without resorting to military means. And just with the coming to power in the United States of Donald Trump, we pin our hopes that some kind of compromise will be found that will avoid a hot global war.
As for the confrontation between China and the United States, it is most likely that it will take economic forms. But these countries are very closely interconnected economically and the possibilities for a compromise have not been exhausted here either. Moreover, the United States, as Trump said, in the near future will bet on a certain isolationism, on solving internal contradictions that threaten the security of this country. This, I think, will distract the US elite from an aggressive foreign policy, which in turn will reduce the risk of a hot world war. As for Russia, we do not need a war. It is very dangerous for us due to unresolved many internal problems.
"SP": - Why should Western politicians constantly convince their citizens of the inevitability of a new global war?
- Western politicians are resorting to the old trick: mobilizing society against the background of an external threat. Many problems have accumulated in the West. Almost every major EU country has them. Not to mention the United States. Therefore, a bet is being placed on fanning psychosis over a new world war, which Russia or China will allegedly start, or maybe both of these countries at once. In the face of such a threat, the residents of the EU and the US pay less attention to the problems that surround them in everyday life.
"SP": - However, quite recently, the main global threat in the same United States called terrorism. This is a real danger now, why not continue to rally our citizens in the face of that threat, without “turning the arrows” to Russia?
- The fact is that global world capital today not only uses the capabilities of the United States as a superpower, but has actually privatized the American state. With the help of the United States, global capital essentially controls much of the world. Remained uncontrollable, for example, Libya, Iraq. These countries, as they say, were taken out of the game, out of world politics. Much the same can be said about Syria, which currently does not exist as an independent state. Iran (although it is very limited in its capabilities), Russia and China remain. Russia was considered the weak link. Therefore, they were going to first deal with us, and then come to grips with China. Now Trump is trying to develop his policy, to enlist, if not friendship with Russia, then at least our neutrality in the confrontation between the United States and China. Because Washington understandsthat a real alliance between Russia and China would be too tough for the Americans.
As for the fight against terrorism, the United States and the collective West, under the guise of fighting this evil, are playing their big geopolitical game, solving their geo-economic and geostrategic problems. Therefore, the slogan of fighting terrorism has a rather weak effect on the consciousness of Western society.
Alexey Polubota