Documentary project about what the third world war will be like. When might World War III start? Will there be a war in the Russian Federation?
The continuous crises observed around the world make us think about the possibility of a new global conflict. Without risking predicting this event using traditional analytical methods, Lenta.ru invited people who are professionally involved in describing the future to discuss the topic: science fiction writers. We offered several domestic authors the same set of questions in order to obtain a cross-section of opinions on the issue. Sergey Lukyanenko, Kirill Benediktov, as well as Yana Botsman and Dmitry Gordevsky, working under the common pseudonym Alexander Zorich, kindly sent their answers. We arrange them in chronological order, in the order in which they were received. Dmitry Gordevsky, Yana Botsman Yana: But other scenarios have a high probability. If we talk about simply a “big war”, understanding it as a major regional conflict (“democracies against the DPRK”, “democracies against Iran”, the war between the Gulf monarchies, India against Pakistan, the crusade of NATO and Russia in Africa, and the like), then the probability is close to 100 percent. If we talk about a world war, I would give 60 percent. It is not a fact that this world war will correspond to the classical ideas about it, that is, with the use of strategic nuclear weapons. Dmitry: By the way, I believe that the threat of world war is firmly recognized in both the Russian Federation and the PRC, and perhaps this year the creation of a Russian-Chinese military-political alliance will be announced. On the possible participation of Russia Dmitry: Most likely, as in 1941, Russia will defend itself from attack from the outside. Which will almost certainly be coordinated with the rebellion within. Yana: It seems to me that “democracies” simply must have such plans in relation to Russia and China. At the same time, the scale of hostilities can be very serious, with the use of hundreds of aircraft and thousands of tanks, nuclear weapons can be used and the like - but the discursive design will be without the word “war” at all. “Stabilization actions”, “mediation efforts”, “pacification” - in that spirit. Dmitry: But the most curious thing is that an absolutely classic total war is possible, straight from the textbook for the General Staff Academy of the 1980s. This is due to the fact that the state apparatus and the military mobilization machine today are fundamentally the same as they were a hundred years ago. And in some conditions, the most cunning politicians will only have time to command “Car, start.” And then everything will go just like in the nuclear dystopias of the 1950s-1960s. Yana: As for other types of weapons of mass destruction, it seems that officially (that is, on behalf of the government) they can only be used in line with the use of nuclear weapons. Over the past 15 years, the Americans have been throwing such hysterics around chemical weapons that hardly anyone in their right mind would dare to use them, even in a very large regional conflict. Dmitry: In this case, perhaps we will get a pre-Columbian world in which the Caliphate and the Indians will exist for a long time in complete or almost complete isolation from both Americas. Then, of course, the fourth world war is inevitable, in which huge armadas of dreadnoughts will play a key role. Possibly sailing or steam. When the new conquistadors under the banners of the Prophet leave Oran, and in Gibraltar they are met by the ocean monitors of the Latin Empire, an unprecedented and exciting spectacle awaits the flotophiles of the post-nuclear era! Yana: There is also a scenario in which the Third World War itself will become an apotheosis and, so to speak, a global showcase of fundamentally new technical capabilities. This will happen if the option “Oh, it’s not us, it’s the singularity” is adopted in order to conduct military operations with decisive goals against Russia or China. For this purpose, armadas of various combat drones will first be created and a full-fledged global missile defense system will be put into operation. Then the forms of action of the army of robots will be tested on some serious regional enemy (for example, Iran). Then, in “Hour H,” suddenly a certain Skynet “itself will begin” military operations against Russia exclusively with the help of robots. Of course, such a scenario goes beyond the ten-year horizon that we discussed. Sergei Lukyanenko On the likelihood of war Secondly, the great world powers (including, but not excluding the USA, Russia, China, Germany, Britain, etc.) have lost the memory of the horrors of war, which was a deterrent throughout the second half of the twentieth century. Thirdly, quite a lot of forces have appeared, both state and anti- or quasi-state (primarily global terrorism), which are interested in global war as a means of achieving their interests and breaking the existing world order. Most likely, a “big war” will be a consequence of these accumulated contradictions, which will be used by interested forces with no resistance from the great powers, hoping to take advantage of the situation in their favor. On the possible participation of Russia About the appearance of a possible war and new forms of combat operations On the possible use of weapons of mass destruction and their consequences About the consequences of a possible war in general Will a possible new war be an impetus for the development of civilization, like the First and Second World Wars, or will it cause degradation? Of course, it will become an impetus for development, including art, science, technology, and even philosophy. There is nothing good about this, but humanity does not know how to grow up except through crises and murders. Of course, if it doesn't come to a global nuclear war. There won’t be much choice here: degradation, a radical breakdown of the existing civilizational model, a complete change of leaders. However, humanity will survive in this case too. Humans are very adaptable creatures. Kirill Benediktov On the likelihood of war This will happen, firstly, due to increasing competition for the resource base - primarily for the Arctic, and secondly, due to the increasing pressure experienced by the so-called West (this concept in this case includes both Russia and China) from the Islamic world. Islamic terrorism was born not yesterday, but at least half a century ago, but now it has already strengthened and acquired quasi-state forms. In a sense, the “big war” is already underway - and not only in Syria and Iraq, but also on the streets of European cities, in Russia and the USA. If we talk about a world war, then its instigators will most likely be traditional states, and not quasi-state entities. It is, in my opinion, incorrect to speculate about which particular state will decide to do this. Now there is only one superpower on the planet that can take on the risk of starting a new “big war,” and there is no reason to assume that this situation will change in the next ten years. The problem is not who exactly will start the war, but whether events will develop according to a pre-planned plan or will spin out of control, causing a “domino effect.” Of the global scenarios, the most dangerous seems to be a possible conflict between the United States and China, the preconditions for which have already been laid: the deployment of American THAAD missile defense systems on the territory of South Korea, the long-running conflict around the Spratly Islands (in which the United States does not formally participate), around the Diaoyu (Senkaku) Islands. in the East China Sea and, most importantly, around the artificial islands created by China in the South China Sea. These islands are created by expanding the area of reefs and small islands - and not because China lacks land, as is sometimes thought. Around each artificial island are territorial waters (12 miles) and a 200-mile exclusive economic zone. According to the UN Shipping Convention - at least in its Chinese interpretation - the free movement of foreign fleets is impossible within a 200-mile zone. Cunning China has placed these artificial islands in such a way that compliance with the letter of the Convention will deprive the US fleet of the ability to freely move between the Indian and Pacific Oceans in a straight line, they will be forced to go through Australia. The United States, as a thalassocracy, that is, a power whose power rests primarily on its ocean-going fleets, is unlikely to agree with such a limitation of its capabilities. This, in fact, is where the legs grow for the concept of “Pacific containment of China,” adopted by Washington back in the days when Mrs. Clinton was Secretary of State. It is unlikely that China views the scenario of war with the United States as desirable, but for it, protecting these islands is a matter of not only economic prestige, but also geopolitical survival. And if a large-scale clash between the US and Chinese navies occurs somewhere in the South China Sea, it is not at all excluded that this will lead to a third world war. Another scenario that cannot be ignored is a strike on Iranian nuclear facilities, carried out either jointly by the Israeli and US air forces, or only by the Israeli air force with the diplomatic support of Washington. This scenario was very likely during the second presidential term of Bush Jr., then it seemed to cease to be relevant in connection with the “Iranian détente” under Obama, but now, unfortunately, it becomes workable again due to Donald Trump’s extremely negative attitude towards Iran and its nuclear program. However, Russia has every chance to use its political influence to prevent such a scenario. On the possible participation of Russia Before Donald Trump won the US elections, the risk of a new global conflict emerging in the European theater of operations was quite high - at least real. Tension was deliberately escalated throughout the Baltic-Black Sea arc, where - in the softest underbelly of Russia - the puppet formation “Ukraine” has been rotting and bursting for three years. Forceful scenarios for seizing the Kaliningrad enclave from Russia were considered. However, those players who were ready to play the military card suffered defeat (perhaps temporarily), and the current administration is not too interested in spending considerable resources to destabilize the situation along Russia's western borders. Therefore - at least for the next four years - Russia can breathe easy. And the best thing is to use the provided respite to further build up your military and economic potential, because sooner or later, I repeat, humanity cannot avoid a global war. About the appearance of a possible war and new forms of combat operations Local wars will continue to be waged mainly by proxy, “cannon fodder,” as is happening now in the Donbass or Syria. The intervention of the great powers will be mainly targeted, while they will avoid direct confrontation whenever possible. As for the “big war,” it will be a war of cruise missiles and drones. In ten years, the new theater of military operations may become near-Earth space, and the target will be constellations of satellites providing navigation, communications and the Internet. At the end of last year, Elon Musk submitted an application to the US Federal Communications Commission to implement a project involving sending 4.5 thousand spacecraft weighing 386 kilograms into space. The operation of this constellation of satellites will allow every inhabitant of the Earth to use the Internet at speeds of up to 1 Gb/sec, so the failure of such a constellation will mean a kind of “blackout” in entire regions of the planet. War in the Arctic will most likely be waged by small groups of special forces, in some cases without identification marks - something like the notorious "little green men". Due to the characteristics of a theater of war, where a raid by a special forces group is enough to destroy a localized enemy base, such groups can carry out assigned tasks and dissolve into “white silence”, leaving no traces and making it impossible to make claims to any particular party. On the possible use of weapons of mass destruction and their consequences Maybe Kim Jong-un is capable of this, although he does not give the impression of a gloomy maniac a la Hitler or Pol Pot, seeking to take as many people as possible to hell with him. In addition, Kim Jong-un can easily do without nuclear weapons: his artillery located along the North-South demarcation line is enough to wipe Seoul and all its 25 million inhabitants off the face of the earth. And in the USA this is well understood - it is no coincidence that just these days the 8th US Army stationed in Seoul is being redeployed to Pyeongtaek - this is 70 kilometers south of the capital. The use of strategic nuclear weapons in a large-scale military conflict will most likely mean the end of civilization as we know it. That is why strategic nuclear weapons should not be considered as weapons, but rather as a “great pacifier.” As for other weapons of mass destruction, judging by the attempts to use them in Syria and Afghanistan, they cannot stand comparison with nuclear weapons, and it is irrational to rely on them in a global war. The worst scenario is in which tactical nuclear weapons fall into the hands of such enemies of Western civilization as ISIS. In this case, events may become uncontrollable. About the consequences of a possible war in general Will the new war be an impetus for the development of civilization, like the First and Second World Wars, or will it cause degradation? It is true that wars generally give a powerful impetus to the development of technology. Even Heraclitus in the 6th century BC postulated: “War is the father of everything and the king of all; war is generally accepted, enmity is the law, and everything arises through enmity.” The space race between the USSR and the USA, as a result of which the USSR was the first to launch a man into space, and the Americans were the first to land on the Moon, was a direct product of the Cold War and a kind of performance, the purpose of which was to show a potential enemy that he was defenseless against an attack from space. It is interesting that in the early 1980s, when Reagan launched the Star Wars program (SWI), well-informed Americans came to the Soviet Union, trying to convey to the leadership of the USSR the true goals of this program: the development of new technologies, in particular, laser welding of metals in a vacuum. If we discard all the ideological and propaganda nonsense surrounding the SDI program, it could be turned into a platform for the joint development of a new technological structure with production facilities in orbit, especially since laser welding technology was initially based on the developments of Soviet scientists. Unfortunately, for a number of reasons this was not done. Propaganda has defeated common sense.
On the likelihood of war
Dmitry: As a science fiction writer, I really want to answer that the instigator of the world war will be aliens on large black starships. They, of course, will first destroy all the world's capitals, but then NATO, Russia and China will unite and kill all the invaders. After which the technocratic utopia and terraforming of Mars will begin. But we must admit that the likelihood of such a development of events is not very high.
Yana: Russia can distance itself from a major regional conflict, especially from the Korean topic. But if we are talking about a world war, then what would a world war be without Russia?
Dmitry: Today it is easy to imagine the actions of one side (the aggressor) against the other side in the form of a creeping occupation, perhaps even formally approved by the government of the target of aggression. Well, for example, in some region there are “international terrorists”, the government itself (or one of the governments - the one that is recognized by the aggressor as “legitimate”) allegedly cannot cope with them and is calling on a “strong partner” for help. In principle, many episodes of the Entente countries’ intervention against Russia in 1918-1922 looked something like this - that is, one cannot say that the technology is fundamentally new. Another question is that it can be applied at a new qualitative level and used up to the complete dismantling of one or another large state.
Dmitry: The use of tactical nuclear weapons by the United States in a regional war in the next ten years is very likely. One can expect the use of nuclear weapons in India's war with Pakistan - I don't know what they formally consider them to be - tactical or strategic. It is easy to imagine Israel using a bomb in the Near or Middle East. The full-scale use of strategic nuclear weapons by the United States and the Russian Federation is possible only in a “classical” third world war, which is still relatively unlikely (no more than 25 percent in the next 10 years, in my opinion).
Yana: It feels like only a “classic” third world war with the full-scale use of strategic nuclear weapons can seriously influence the world. In this case, the economic and political role of the United States and the traditionally developed regions of Eurasia will be qualitatively reduced, and Latin America, Arabs, and Indians will get a historic chance.
Dmitry: We are clearly facing a case where it is easy to make diametrically opposed judgments. Above, speaking about the sailing dreadnoughts of the Caliphate, I actually already outlined one point of view: technical degradation.
I rate the likelihood of a “big war” quite high. Unfortunately, in the world, firstly, a lot of contradictions of various kinds have accumulated, the resolution of which by the “big war” method can be perceived as the most logical.
In one form or another, unfortunately, we cannot help but participate. The main thing for us is that this form should be as close as possible to the US participation in World War II - “on foreign territory, with little bloodshed, looking like a tempting place for the flight of minds and capital.”
I would suggest the term “mosaic war” or “mosaic warfare”. That is, it is quite possible that two-thirds of Europe or two-thirds of the Middle East will burn - while in the remaining unaffected enclaves life will be completely peaceful and even decidedly prosperous. I repeat: our task as a country is to be one of those territories to become a beneficiary of the post-war world, like Switzerland or the United States in World War II.
The use of weapons of mass destruction is almost inevitable, at least at the level of a “dirty bomb”, homemade toxic substances, and the destruction of strategic infrastructure facilities (dams, nuclear power plants, chemical plants). Unfortunately, until it comes to this and humanity is collectively horrified (despite the falsity of such an insight), the war will not be stopped. Moreover, it will most likely be stopped by the great powers using the same weapons of mass destruction or carpet bombing.
Oddly enough, there will be no special consequences for civilization. This war is unlikely to elevate the Arab world or Southeast Asia as a whole. If it doesn’t come to a global war, then the leaders will not change, but will only change places within the top ten. But there will be an inoculation against war for the next half century.
Unfortunately, I regard the likelihood of a “big war” in the next decade as high. It is clear that making such forecasts is a little dishonest - if suddenly a war does not happen, you can always say with a light heart: “Well, I was wrong, but how glad I am about it.” But I'm not sure that the situation can be described in such terms at all. The only mistake here can be in the timing - in three years, five years, ten, fifteen or twenty, a big war will still happen.
If this is just a “big war” - say, a war on the Korean Peninsula, even with the use of nuclear weapons, then I sincerely hope that Russia will be able to limit itself to the role of a mediator and peacemaker. Vladimir Putin managed to refuse George W. Bush’s very persistent offer to join the coalition during the second Gulf War (2003). If the war takes on a global scale, no one will be able to sit out.
None of the wars of this century were similar to the wars of the 20th century. The further into the future, the less familiar the forms that war takes will be, although its essence, goals and objectives will remain unchanged: defeat the enemy, destroy his military potential, take control of his resource base, impose his will on the enemy. In the case of the United States, it is worth adding another important motivation: maintaining a dominant position in the world.
Theoretically, there are no obstacles to this, but in the same way there are no obstacles to the use of “dirty bombs”, which, allegedly, can be assembled almost in a garage and accessible to advanced terrorists - and not a single similar terrorist attack has occurred since the existence of nuclear weapons. the program, thank God, did not happen. The use of nuclear weapons is possible as a last resort, when a regime possessing such weapons decides to make the “last argument of kings,” realizing that it has nothing more to lose.
A major war will inevitably have an impact on the world economy, which, according to many experts, is at a dead end and has exhausted all its development potential. The end of the Second World War gave birth to the Bretton Woods system, and the end of the Cold War was marked by the Washington Consensus. World War III will almost certainly lead to a reorganization of world trade and financial markets, but no one can predict what this new system will be called. Perhaps the Beijing Agreement.
This depends on whether strategic nuclear weapons will be used in the third world or whether it will be carried out by conventional (or unusual, but non-nuclear) means. In the first case, new Dark Ages await us; in the second, a sharp breakthrough into the future, perhaps comparable to the technological breakthrough of 1944-1969.
This article may seem scary. But we all live in a time when the start of a new war on a global scale is becoming a real prospect. In the article we will answer the question of whether the start date of the Third World War is predicted or not.
Modern warfare
In the minds of most people who grew up watching films based on the Great Patriotic War, the standard of military operations looks like a cutout from a film. Reasoning logically, we understand that just as ridiculous a saber from 1917 would look in the hands of a Soviet soldier in 1941, it would be strange to observe the picture of barbed wire cut at night by partisans in our time.
And you must admit, having weapons of mass destruction in the form of nuclear charges, bacteriological crops and climate control, it is paradoxical to expect a repetition of the classics in the form of a bayonet and a dugout.
The quiet panic, gradually eroding Internet users and skillfully fueled by the media, is felt in the thousands of requests received hourly. People are so convinced of the inevitability of trouble that they hardly ask questions - will it happen? The clumsy formulation sounds much more relevant: when is the exact date set for the start of the Third World War?
And this is already scary.
Battle for resources
The era when the main contribution to the winner were forests, fields, rivers and the defeated people has passed forever. Today, the greatness of a country is dictated not by population or rich history of victories, but by the possession of underground treasures: oil sources, natural gas deposits, coal seams, uranium deposits.
The date of the start of World War III is not kept silent. It simply passed so long ago that its exact date is unlikely to remain in our minds. The dream of the drivers of trade policy has come true - the economy and the struggle for first place in the leadership elite have become at the forefront of the main life values.
Here it is worth recalling the main method of trade relations, which works everywhere and at all times. The most choice piece never went to those bargaining and fighting for it - there was always a third person standing on the sidelines and sympathetically watching the fight.
Based on events: how can this be
Many will interfere, but only one will get it. It is no secret that the main threat to Russia is attributed to the United States, but the events unfolding around the world's largest leaders suggest that the general tension creates only the appearance of a real threat. The flow of information masterfully maintains the highest bar on the scale of mass hysteria, while the war unleashed by a powerful power (read - the USA) began a long time ago.
Events in Ukraine, Iraq and Syria speak not of spontaneous, but of carefully thought-out actions, which were worked on by hundreds of analysts with such a wealth of strategic experience that simply does not exist in any of these countries. After all, we are not talking about random clashes reminiscent of previous “yard to yard” fights - we are talking about a war that drags on the masses. And here all sorts of peacekeeping missions with the introduction of friendly troops armed with friendly weapons only fuel the hostile mood.
The EU readily accepts information in the form in which the United States presents it; the European Union, apparently, has neither the time nor the initiative to investigate. Like a bull to a red rag, the leaders of the European Union will react to the slightest movement by the United States towards military action against Russia.
This will give the Chinese government, which has been restraining itself for a long time, a reason to talk. The stagnation of American troops in the Pacific region has long been poisoning the existence of the patient Chinese, whose hand is already tired of trembling over the nuclear button. Israel's reaction is also predictable - the long-awaited nod of consent from the United States will allow them to attack Tehran, but how long Israel itself will survive after this is a big question. The last salvos on Iraq will hardly have time to die down before the Libyan, Omani, Yemeni and (where would we be without them) Egyptian bombs will simply sweep away the hapless aggressor.
Anyone else curious about the start date of World War III? Then we discuss further.
A look from the outside - how it will be
It is useful to listen to what retired Colonel General Anatoly Lopata, former Chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and First Deputy Minister of Defense of Ukraine, thinks about the events, scary to say, coming. Looking ahead, we note that the former Secretary of Defense's remark about the location of the future battlefield completely coincides with the opinion of British Air Force Colonel Ian Shields.
When asked by journalists what World War III essentially is and when it will begin, Anatoly Lopata calmly explained that the war is in full swing and the aggressor country in it is called - who do you think? - of course, Russia. And even in relation to America, at least in the fact that it responds with sympathy to the Assad regime in Syria (!). At the same time, the Colonel General admits that the United States is forced to reckon with the Russian Federation and this will remain unchanged, due to the latter’s enormous economic and military potential.
The date of the start of the Third World War, according to the expert, thus belongs to the distant past, but its development to the scale of epic battles belongs to the future, which we still have to live to see. Anatoly Lopata even shared a mysterious figure - 50. In his opinion, it is after this number of years that warring powers will collide in the vast expanses of space.
Analysts' forecasts
Joachim Hagopian, known since 2015, warned that the recruitment of “friends” by the countries of the USA and Russia is not accidental. China and India will follow Russia in any case, and the EU countries will have no choice but to accept America’s policies. For Korea, Hagopian predicted military neutrality in relation to both powers, but a rather violent internecine war with the likelihood of the activation of nuclear charges. It can be assumed that the day when the powerful weapon is activated is the date the Third World War began.
Alexander Richard Schiffer, an interesting personality and former head of NATO, in his book: “2017: War with Russia,” predicted the defeat of the United States due to financial collapse, followed by the collapse of the American army.
Vladimir Zhirinovsky, as always, is unambiguous and says what the majority is delicately silent about. He is confident that America will not begin any open action until all the countries involved in the military conflict squabble among themselves to the point of collapse, and, exhausted, lay down what remains of their weapons. Then the US will magnanimously gather the dejected losers and emerge as the sole winner.
Sergei Glazyev, Advisor to the President of the Russian Federation, proposes to create a coalition that does not fundamentally support military policy against Russia. According to him, the number of countries that are officially ready to speak out in favor of abandoning armed conflict will be such that America will simply be forced to curb its appetites.
As Vanga believed
Vanga, the most famous Bulgarian seer, either could not or did not want to predict the date of the beginning of the Third World War. In order not to confuse minds with specifics, the clairvoyant only said that she sees religious strife around the world as the cause of the war. Drawing a parallel with current events, we can assume that the date of the start of the Third World War, which Vanga never predicted, falls during the period of terrorist acts of the ISIS group disguised as offended religious feelings.
Using exact dates
How not to mention the world-famous American Horatio Villegas, whose vision of fiery spheres striking the earth from the sky became a sensation in 2015. Adapting completely materialistic tasks to the act of clairvoyance, Horatio hastened to announce that he knew the date of the start of the Third World War - 05/13/2017. It is with regret or great joy that we note that no one was able to observe the fireballs on May 13th.
We can only hope that people who were expecting big events in March 2017 were not too upset when they lost confirmation of the words of astrologer Vlad Ross. Let us recall that this person also named the date of the beginning of the Third World War - 03/26/2017, which did not find a response in reality.
Socio-political tension is constantly growing in the world. And some experts predict that everything could result in a global conflict. How realistic is it in the near future?
Risk remains
It is unlikely that anyone today is pursuing the goal of starting a world war. Previously, if a large-scale conflict was brewing, the instigator always expected 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 existed and, unfortunately, will arise, because someone wants to have more resources, and someone protects their borders, including from mass illegal migration, fights terrorism or demands the restoration of their rights in accordance with with previously concluded agreements.
If countries still decide to get involved in a global war, then, according to many experts, they will certainly be divided into different camps, which will be approximately equal in strength. The combined military, primarily nuclear, potential of the powers that will hypothetically take part in the clash is capable of destroying all life on the planet dozens of times over. How likely is it that the coalitions will start this suicidal war? Analysts say that it is not great, but the danger remains.
Political poles
The modern world order is far from what it was after the Second World War. However, 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 half a century ago, are determined by Russia and the United States.
Russia crossed the Rubicon, and it did not pass without a trace and painlessly for it: it temporarily lost its superpower status and lost its traditional allies. However, our country managed to maintain its integrity, maintain influence in the post-Soviet space, revive the military-industrial complex and acquire new strategic partners.
The financial and political elite of the United States, as in the good old days, under democratic slogans continues to carry out military expansion far from its borders, while at the same time successfully imposing beneficial “anti-crisis” and “anti-terrorism” policies on the leading countries.
In recent years, China has been persistently wedging itself into the confrontation between Russia and the United States. The Eastern Dragon, while maintaining good relations with Russia, nevertheless does not take sides. Possessing the largest army and carrying out rearmament on an unprecedented scale, he has every reason to do so.
A united Europe also remains an influential player on the world stage. Despite the dependence on 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 energy shortages, 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 increasing extremist nature of the actions of Islamic groups in the region every year, but also the expansion of the geography and tools of terrorism.
Unions
Recently, we are increasingly observing the consolidation of various union associations. This is evidenced, on the one hand, by the summits of Donald Trump and the leaders of Israel, South Korea, Japan, Britain and other leading European countries, and on the other, by the meetings of heads of state within the framework of the activities of the BRICS bloc, which attracts new international partners. During the negotiations, not only trade, economic and political issues are discussed, but also all kinds of aspects of military cooperation.
The famous military analyst Joachim Hagopian emphasized back in 2015 that the “recruitment of friends” by America and Russia is 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. This is supported by the intensified exercises of NATO countries in Eastern Europe and the military parade with the participation of Indian and Chinese units on Red Square.
Advisor to the President of Russia Sergei Glazyev states that it will be beneficial and even fundamentally important for our country to create a coalition of any countries that do not support bellicose rhetoric directed against the Russian state. Then, according to him, the United States will be forced to moderate its ardor.
At the same time, it will be of great importance what position Turkey will take, which is perhaps the 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 play on the differences between the United States and Russia.
Resources
Foreign and domestic analysts are inclined to conclude that a global war could 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 have dire consequences for the others.
The war that may follow a devastating crisis will be fought not so much over territory as over resources. For example, analysts Alexander Sobyanin and Marat Shibutov build 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, from the point of view of 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 Schieffer, in his book “2017: War with Russia,” predicted defeat for the United States, which would be caused by financial collapse and the collapse of the American army.
Who is first?
Today, the trigger that could launch the mechanism, if not a world war, then a global collision, could be the crisis on the Korean Peninsula. Joachim Hagopian, however, predicts that it is fraught with the use of nuclear charges and at first Russia and the United States will not get involved in it.
Glazyev does not see 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 emerge from depression, and developed countries, including China and the United States, will begin the next round of rearmament. At the peak of a new technological leap, there will be a threat of global conflict.
It is characteristic that the famous Bulgarian clairvoyant Vanga did not dare to predict the start date of the Third World War, indicating only that its cause would most likely be religious strife around the world.
"Hybrid Wars"
Not everyone believes in the reality of World War III. Why commit mass casualties and destruction if there is a long-tested and more effective means - “hybrid war”. The “White Book”, intended for commanders of special forces of the American army, in the section “Winning in a Complex World” contains all the comprehensive information on this matter.
It says that any military operations against the authorities primarily involve covert and secret actions. Their essence is an attack by rebel forces or terrorist organizations (which are supplied with money and weapons from abroad) on government structures. Sooner or later, the existing regime loses control over the situation and hands over 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 that is many times superior in results to any open military clashes.
Capital can do anything
Nowadays, not only conspiracy theorists are confident that both world wars were largely provoked by Anglo-American financial corporations, which made fabulous profits from militarization. And their ultimate goal is the establishment of the so-called “American peace.”
“Today we stand on the threshold of a grandiose reformatting of the world order, the instrument of which will again be war,” says writer Alexei Kungurov. This will be a financial war of world capitalism, directed mainly against developing countries.
The goal of such a war is to not give the periphery any chance of any independence. In underdeveloped or dependent countries, a system of external exchange control is established, which forces them to exchange their output, resources and other material assets for dollars. The more transactions there are, the more American machines 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 - this is what the English geopolitician Halford Mackinder said.
Today, news broadcasts every day broadcast about brutal terrorist attacks, military operations unfolding in the Middle East and neighboring Ukraine, and heated disputes between the heads of developed states. This state of affairs is frightening and the question is increasingly popping up in the world community: Will there be World War 3 in 2018?
Perhaps now we can try to resolve this dilemma by turning to the forecasts of analysts and great prophets. True, opinions on this matter are ambiguous, so you should not rely entirely on them.
Experienced political scientists are confident that the mechanism of war was launched several years ago, when the government was overthrown in Ukraine. The new government did not skimp on harsh statements, and their minions tried in every possible way to sow the seeds of hostility between the two fraternal peoples.
A full-scale information war began, which incited hatred and contempt in the hearts of former relatives, friends and neighbors. On various forums, on social networks and news portals, real “virtual” battles took place, where commentators did not skimp on expressions and each side provided irrefutable facts about the guilt of the enemy.
If even two fraternal peoples who for a long time shared victories and defeats among themselves were able to come to a serious conflict, then what can we say about other countries that are ready to “throw out” anger and aggression at the first call.
Some political observers insist that World War III began when the United States launched Operation Desert Storm to overthrow the supposedly undemocratic president in Iraq. The “Storm” brought America control of all the country’s natural resources.
There is a theory that Russia and America are two powerful powers that could become the instigators of the Third World War. It is from them that the danger of a military conflict now emanates, because tension is already felt in those places where their interests come into contact.
There are experts who argue that misunderstandings with America arise due to the strengthening ties between China and Russia. The United States understands that it is losing ground and is trying in every possible way to discredit Russia in the eyes of the world community.
Various methods are used to make the Russian Federation weaker:
- reduction in oil prices;
- EU sanctions;
- involving Russia in the arms race;
- encouraging mass protests in the Russian Federation.
Thus, America is trying to come to the situation that collapsed the USSR in 1991.
Psychic prophecies about World War III
Throughout the history of mankind, many seers foreshadowed the beginning of the Third World War. Some of them even claimed that this battle would lead to the complete destruction of our race and the emergence of new, unique creatures.
Nostradamus at one time saw the development of two world wars, but regarding the third he did not give any clear answers. Although he did not deny the fact that a large-scale battle is possible due to the fault of the Antichrist, who will be distinguished by cruelty and inhumanity.
In turn, the famous Bulgarian clairvoyant indicates that the Third World War will begin with a small state in Asia and spread throughout the planet. Judging by her comments, it will be Syria.
The reason for full-fledged military action will be an attack on the leading figures of the four developed powers. Vanga said that the consequences of a new war would be terrifying.
Pavel Globa gives more optimistic forecasts regarding the Third World War. He argues that only a timely cessation of hostilities in Iran will prevent the development of a full-scale world war.
Will there be a war in the Russian Federation?
Expert and political analyst I. Hagopian is confident that full preparations for a war between America and Russia are already underway. He published his guesses on the Internet portal “GlobalReasers”. Hagopian states that in this battle America will most likely receive support from:
- Australia;
- NATO countries;
- Israel.
At the same time, Russia will find allies among China and India. The expert claims that America is moving towards bankruptcy and in order not to become completely impoverished, its government will decide to take possession of the wealth of the Russian Federation. He emphasized that as a result of such a military conflict, some countries could completely disappear from the face of the earth.
Similar forecasts were made by former NATO leader A. Shirreff. As proof, he even published a book detailing the course of the battle. The military confrontation will begin in the Baltic states, which Russia will decide to “take control of.”
But this state of affairs will cause discontent among the residents, NATO will support the Baltic states and the Third World War will begin. On the one hand, the plot of this book seems fabulous and frivolous, but if you take into account the fact that the story was written by a retired general, the chances of its implementation increase.
In addition to war outside the state, Russia also faces internal strife. The tense economic situation will provoke discontent among the population, mass rallies and robberies will begin. However, this situation will not last long and by the end of 2018, experts say, the state will begin its gradual recovery and get out of the crisis hole.
Could World War III break out in 2018?
If so, here are five risk areas where this could happen, as identified by Aftonbladet.
“There is an increased risk,” says Isak Svensson, professor of peace and conflict studies at Uppsala University.
Republican Senator Bob Corker has warned that Donald Trump could lead the US "on the path to World War III."
There is a risk that he is not entirely wrong.
According to Isak Svensson, professor of peace and conflict studies, three factors are more likely to prevent war than others.
All of them are now collapsing, largely due to Trump and growing nationalism.
1. International organizations
“One of the goals of the UN, OSCE (Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe), the EU and similar organizations is to reduce the risk of armed conflict. But with Trump continually trying to dismantle international cooperation, these organizations may be weakened. This will affect the risk of war,” says Isak Svensson.
2. International trade
During his election campaign, Trump accused China of “raping” the American economy. Therefore, many experts expected that he would introduce customs duties on Chinese goods, which would result in a full-fledged trade war.
“That hasn't happened yet, but at least he has signaled that he is not particularly interested in promoting free trade,” said Isak Svensson.
3. Democracy
The two democracies have never fought each other. But the wave of nationalism that is sweeping the world could rock democracies.
“Populist nationalism targets democratic institutions: universities, courts, media, electoral bodies and so on. This is noticeable in the US under Trump, in Hungary, Poland and Russia, for example,” says Isak Svensson.
The threat from nationalism
Svensson sees how nationalism threatens all three factors that prevent war.
“Nationalism is not only present in peripheral countries, it is now spreading among the main players in the international arena: in the USA, in the UK in the form of Brexit, in the EU with its Poland and Hungary, which can weaken European cooperation. India and China are very much influenced by nationalist ideologies, as are Türkiye and Russia. All this, together with Trump, negatively affects these three factors. There is a considerable risk of interstate conflicts,” says Isak Svensson.
However, he does not believe that a major global war is likely.
“The likelihood of this is low. In general, interstate conflicts are very unusual, and they are becoming less common over time. But if this happens, then events unfold very intensely,” says Isak Svensson.
Here are the hottest spots of tension.
North Korea
States: North Korea, USA, Japan, China.
North Korea conducts test explosions of nuclear weapons and is constantly developing new missiles. One of the newest missiles tested this summer is capable of striking the United States, but it is unclear whether North Korea could equip it with a nuclear warhead.
North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un and US President Donald Trump exchanged hateful verbal provocations, including Trump promising to meet North Korea with “fire and fury.”
The US is allied with South Korea and Japan, which also feel threatened by North Korea. And this closed dictatorship, in turn, receives support from China.
“In the short term, the most problematic area is the Korean Peninsula,” says Niklas Swanström, head of the Institute for Security and Development Policy.
“At the same time, the likelihood that China will defend North Korea is very low. This will only happen if there is a threat to China's direct interests, that is, if the US sends troops to the Chinese borders or something like that."
Isak Svensson agrees that Korea is the area of greatest concern because the situation there is unpredictable.
“It’s not very likely, but it’s possible that something will happen there. Everyone is on edge, there are various exercises and demonstrations of strength to each other, there is a high risk that something will go wrong. This can start the process even if no one actually wants it. No one is interested in bringing things to a full-scale war, but there is still a risk of this,” says Isak Svensson.
The biggest problem is poor communication, says Niklas Svanström.
“There are no security structures in Northeast Asia. Military confrontation can escalate very sharply.”
South China Sea
Countries: USA, China, Taiwan, Vietnam, Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei.
Here is one of the most serious sources of tension, according to Isak Svensson.
“There is incredibly great military potential there. The likelihood of something happening is small, but if it does, the consequences will be catastrophic. There are nuclear weapons, and there are alliances between different countries, so they can drag each other into all sorts of complications in relations.”
At first glance, the conflict is centered around hundreds of small islands and cays near China, Vietnam, Malaysia and the Philippines. About half of the islands are under the control of one of the four countries.
China, Taiwan and Vietnam all claim the entire Spratly archipelago, and the Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei also have their own claims.
In early 2014, China began clearing seven reefs between the islands under its control and establishing bases on them.
The situation is marked by ever-increasing tensions between China and the US, as a rising Chinese power increasingly challenges the US as the world's sole superpower.
“This century will be marked by the relationship between the US and China,” says Niklas Granholm, research director at the Total Defense Institute, FOI.
“There is a shift in power and influence in the international system. In relative terms, China's power is growing and the US's is declining. It is the conflicts that may arise around this division of power that will become most important. We can talk about China's position in relation to Taiwan, China in relation to Japan, relations with North Korea. There are a lot of things that can make a difference,” adds Niklas Granholm.
Niklas Svanström also believes that the relationship between China and the United States is the most dangerous in the long term.
“The only option for a third world war that can be imagined obviously involves China and the United States. I can’t say that this worries me, in my opinion, indirect conflicts may arise, that is, the war will be fought in a third country,” says Niklas Svanström.
India - Pakistan
States: India, Pakistan, USA, China, Russia.
The disputed northern province of Kashmir is effectively divided between India and Pakistan. There have been several wars between countries over the rights to this area, and new conflicts are constantly breaking out.
After 18 Indian soldiers were killed in a terrorist attack on a military base in September 2016, India's Home Minister tweeted:
“Pakistan is a terrorist state that should be labeled as such and isolated.”
Pakistan vehemently denied any involvement in the incident.
“Relations between India and Pakistan are always turbulent. Right now it doesn’t look like there will be a strong escalation, but nothing points to any big moves towards their rapprochement in the future,” says Isak Svensson.
Both countries are nuclear powers, and each is believed to have more than 100 nuclear warheads.
“It’s easy to imagine an inadvertent escalation to a full-blown nuclear war that no one wants but could be provoked by terrorism,” Matthew Bunn, a nuclear weapons analyst at Harvard’s Belfer Center, told the Huffington Post.
India has a policy of not being the first to use nuclear weapons. Instead, an attempt was made to increase the ability to respond to provocations by rapidly sending armored columns deep into Pakistani territory.
Militarily weaker Pakistan responded by introducing short-range Nasr missiles that can be equipped with nuclear warheads.
Many experts fear that such a development, in which Pakistan feels forced to use tactical nuclear weapons to defend itself, could quickly turn a small conflict into a full-scale nuclear war.
Niklas Svanström, however, believes that the likelihood of a world war is low.
“Other countries there have no interests related to security policy. Pakistan has close relations with China, and India has close relations with Russia. But neither Russia nor China will risk starting a large-scale military confrontation. I also find it difficult to imagine that the United States would intervene in such a conflict.”
India - China
Indian Army General Bipin Rawat said in early September that the country must prepare for a two-front war against Pakistan and China.
Shortly before this, a ten-week confrontation between China and India over the definition of the border ended in the Himalayas. Chinese road construction workers, accompanied by military personnel, were stopped by Indian troops. The Chinese claimed that they were in China, the Indians claimed that they were in Bhutan, an ally of India.
According to Bipin Rawat, such a situation could easily escalate into a conflict, and Pakistan could then take advantage of this situation to its advantage.
“We must be prepared. In the context of our situation, war is very real,” Rawat said, as reported by the Press Trust of India.
The border between China and India has long been a point of contention, but the atmosphere is now quite relaxed. But even as China and Pakistan have moved closer economically, aggressive nationalism suggests that may be changing.
“It’s difficult to see any hints as to why conflict might break out there, but there is an increased risk of this happening. Both countries' economies are growing rapidly, and both countries are fueled by rather aggressive nationalism. The unresolved territorial issue is of course a clear risk factor,” says Isak Svensson.
Niklas Svanström does not think that China will gain much from this conflict, and India simply cannot win a war against China. Conflicts will continue, but on a limited scale.
“The only situation that could lead to a full-scale war is if India recognizes Tibet as an independent country and starts supporting the Tibetan military movement that is fighting against China. I regard this as something extremely unlikely,” says Niklas Svanström.
Baltics
States: Russia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, NATO military alliance.
One of the biggest risks that could now lead to conflict is Russia's growing ambitions against Europe, believes Niklas Granholm, director of research at the Total Defense Institute, FOI.
“Russia has thrown out the rulebook that has been in place since the early 1990s to define European security,” says Niklas Granholm. — The main milestone in this matter was the war against Ukraine, when in 2014 there was an invasion of this country and Crimea was annexed, which marked the beginning of the conflict in eastern Ukraine. Russia has demonstrated great faith in military means. The Baltic region once again found itself on the line of confrontation between East and West, which seemed completely implausible to many just a few years ago.”
The cause of the conflict may be ethnic Russian minorities in the Baltic countries, says Isak Svensson.
“In Ukraine, Russia has shown that it is willing to use military force to, in its view, protect Russian-speaking minorities. Thus, there is a hidden risk of Russian intervention in the Baltics if an internal crisis begins in any of the countries. Such a scenario is quite imaginable. It’s quite unlikely today, but possible in the future.”
Follow us
