2024-04-19 02:29:44
In recent years, thoughts about the nightmare scenario of the Third World War have become more and more entrenched in the consciousness of the inhabitants of a world that is becoming more and more dangerous.
Earlier this year, UK Defense Secretary Grant Shapps warned that the world could be engulfed in wars involving China, Russia, North Korea and Iran within the next five years, saying “we are moving from a post-war world to a pre-war one”.
The relief felt at the end of the Cold War in the late 1970s has been replaced by growing anxiety over Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and outrage over the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza.
Sky News spoke to experts about how likely World War 3 is in the near future and whether we really live in a ‘pre-war world’.
H. Lovatt: “The international order is cracking”
Hugh Lovatt, senior policy researcher at the European Council on International Relations think tank, believes that “the good news is that we are not heading for World War III”.
According to H. Lovatt, the conflicts taking place in different places – Ukraine, the Middle East, the Asia-Pacific region – are “separate and unrelated”.
“The Gaza war has been going on for six months and is fueling regional escalation, with Iran’s retaliation against Israel being just the latest example,” he notes.
The international community is affected by, for example, Houthi attacks on Red Sea shipping and their impact on global trade.
He said there was a risk that British troops would be drawn into a conflict in the Middle East.
“We have to put this risk in context, which is that it affects the UK, but it is not an existential risk. This is also happening at a time when the international order is cracking and under great strain. We should be very concerned about that,” warned H. Lovatt.
“The probability is now the highest since the end of the last world war”
Deborah Haynes, Sky News’ security and defense editor, says that given the level of unrest rocking parts of the world, particularly in Ukraine and the Middle East, there is already the potential for a spark to ignite World War Three.
This is not to say that global confrontation is inevitable, but it is now more likely than at any time since the end of World War II.
Iran’s decision to launch an unprecedented missile and drone strike against Israel only added to the danger.
Israel has vowed to respond, although its allies, including the United Kingdom and the United States, have called for restraint, especially since they helped ensure that the vast majority of incoming objects were shot out of the sky before they could do any damage on the ground.
If Israel decides to retaliate, the crisis can still be contained if its retaliatory strike is limited, and any further Iranian response that such an attack provokes is also limited. But those are two big ifs.
Moreover, any time even limited military action is taken, there is the risk of a mistake or miscalculation that could spiral out of control into a regional war.
What happens in the Middle East also has global implications, especially since Iran is backed by Russia and has close ties to China, while Israel’s strongest allies, led by the United States, are mostly Western nations.
This means that the crisis pits authoritarian states against democratic ones, just like the simultaneous war in Europe.
Despite promises of Western support, Russia is slowly establishing itself in Ukraine. Western allies are unable to supply the Ukrainian military with the weapons and ammunition it needs, so it will almost inevitably withdraw if the balance of military power on the ground does not change.
Vladimir Putin’s success in Ukraine could embolden the Russian president, whose country is in “total war,” to test the strength of the NATO alliance by invading a member state.
Again, this would lead to outright war between authoritarian Moscow, armed by Iran, North Korea, also aided by China, and the Western NATO alliance.
Demonstration that military force has proven effective against Western powers could further strengthen China’s resolve to follow through on its promise to reunify the island of Taiwan with the mainland, even if that means an invasion.
Such a move could also push Asia into conflict, again along the same dividing line between authoritarian states and democracies, D.Haynes believes.
Focusing attention
Edward R. Arnold, senior research fellow at the Royal Joint Services Institute (RUSI) think tank, warns that “people really need to understand what the North Atlantic Treaty is, which is the foundation of NATO.”
E.Arnold says that the public seems to believe that NATO Article 5 (the principle according to which an attack by one member is considered an attack by all members) is automatically valid.
“It is not and certainly should not be … escalation is not automatic, and there are measures to de-escalate the situation,” says the expert.
Looking at the situation in Ukraine, where NATO provides weapons and aid, he says that the risk of a misunderstanding between the West and Russia has increased.
“I think the chance of a misunderstanding increases when one ship randomly fires at another.” We have to be really prepared for what that means,” he says.
He also argues that, in a sense, the threat of a wider conflict with Russia is now receding. Kremlin forces are beginning to make progress in Ukraine, but the quality of their forces has deteriorated significantly, so they cannot pose a threat to NATO.
“Vladimir Putin will be watching quite closely what’s happening in the Middle East: how each country reacts and how they shift their attention (from Ukraine),” the expert continued. “At the moment, all this is helping V. Putin, because we, being focused on the Middle East, are not as focused as we were focused on Ukraine.”
The main path to World War III remains the same
Luigi Scazzier, a senior researcher at the Center for European Reform, spoke about the possibility of World War III as follows:
“It depends on how you define World War III. A potential conflict between Iran and Israel could escalate into a major military conflagration in the Middle East with global implications. The US would almost certainly side with Israel, and other Western countries, including the United Kingdom, may do the same.
But their involvement would be limited and it wouldn’t be World War III, especially since Russia can’t afford to support Iran and China is unlikely to. The impact of such a conflict on Europe would be primarily economic, as energy flows and trade would be further disrupted.
The main path to World War III remains a direct Western confrontation with Russia. This scenario will be more likely if Donald Trump wins and undermines NATO by tempting Vladimir Putin to attack the Baltic states. A confrontation with Russia would also be quite likely if Western forces were involved in supporting Ukraine in frontline combat roles.”
Prepared from Sky News inf.
2024-04-19 02:29:44