China, Iran and North Korea are watching Russia's war against Ukraine.
Politicians and experts around the world began to talk about the inevitable global “fire”. US presidential candidate Donald Trump said that we are “on the threshold of World War III war.” Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky said that Putin is preparing to attack NATO, which certainly means World War III. Kremlin propagandist and editor-in-chief of Russia Today Margarita Simonyan said that World War III will definitely happen “in the near future.”
This is discussed in The Telegraph column.
British Defense Secretary Grant Shepps argued two weeks ago that we had moved “from the post-war world to the pre-war one.” Shortly after, Chief of the British Armed Forces Patrick Sanders said the UK was “living in increasingly dangerous times” and added that army recruitment had more than doubled in December amid growing fears of confrontation with Moscow.
Sendars' statement is most troubling because the British Chief of the General Staff was extremely accurate in his forecasts, not least regarding the start and course of the war in Ukraine.
Public discourse has very suddenly caught up with what historians and geostrategists have been saying for years, namely that a departure from a unipolar world is inevitable.
So, In 2017, Harvard scholar Graham Ellison wrote a scientific paper: “Doomed to War: Can America and China Avoid Thucydides’ Trap?”
Allison argued that in the 20th century, the displacement of one hegemonic state by another always involved conflict.
In the seven years following the publication of this book, America's relative strength continued to erode, and illiberal states—most notably Russia, China, and Iran—moved from a loose anti-Western Entente to a strong alliance.
“What if America's gradual decline turns into a sudden retreat? What if Donald Trump, the likely winner of the November presidential election, does not support Ukraine and withdraws from NATO,” the material says.< /p>
Trump says 'real danger' comes from supporting Ukraine: 'If you want peace, stop getting involved in foreign conflicts.'
Trump is notoriously unpredictable. He can, according to former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, still support Ukraine. But everything he says says otherwise. In addition to general isolationism, Trump accuses Ukraine of its episodic role in his impeachment. He speaks more warmly of Russian President Vladimir Putin than of Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky.
“Putin, looking beaten after the failure of his initial invasion, now believes he only has to hold out 10 months (until US elections – ed.) Other despots are drawing similar conclusions. From the Iranian-sponsored strike on US troops in Jordan to Venezuela's threats on Guyana. This is what it looks like when the unipolar order falls apart.”
Will general disorder escalate into World War III
It may very well be. China could invade Taiwan, a country that the US is committed to defending. Chinese President Xi Jinping promised reunification within five years and made it clear to Americans that he really meant it.
The war in Taiwan will absorb all of America's attention, giving Putin the best opportunity to settle scores with the Baltic countries, Poland, Finland. Even without a war in Taiwan, Trump's isolationism could leave Europe unprotected.
As Russia's oil and gas facilities come under attack, the aggressor country, already paying the price for converting more than a third of its economy to military production, will be left without money. This will send its own signal to Xi Jinping.
Russia's third authoritarian ally is Iran, which has managed to build state-of-the-art military drones despite 30 years of economic isolation, further proof that , that trade sanctions are useless, and force is needed to deter.
“Iran is poor, its regime is unpopular, but it maintains a stable number of international troublemakers, including Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis. Avoiding World War III means containing Russia, containing China and, last but not least, a settlement Iran – either by overthrowing the ayatollahs (an honorary title given to Shia Muslims by decision of the people, the highest title of Shia mujtahid – ed.), or by separating them from their allies. Attacking from time to time, as the US did, will not help.” .
However, it all depends on the desire to spend more on defense – in Britain and Europe.
“If we don’t rearm, we are doomed not just to war, but to losing it,” says The Telegraph.
Related topics:
More news
