Post #420 Are We on the Brink of World War III?

The Zone of Major Conflict

I don’t think it is too alarmist to suggest that we could be at the beginning stage of World War III. The ingredients for another world war are present in two locales: the Middle East and central Europe. The Israel-Hamas conflict already involves the US, Britain, Iran, Yemen, Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, and Syria. But so far, that conflict has not spiraled into a regional war such as might be triggered by another Israel-Iran exchange of fire. Europe is the far more dangerous situation: The zone of conflict embraces many more countries; the two primary nuclear-weapon states face each other; and Russia, a once-great power with unresolved grievances, is waging an aggressive, genocidal war. There are still other defining elements: Ukraine’s declining capability for self-defense; deep political divisions in Europe and the US that are compromising their ability to deter and defend against Russia; the attractiveness of appeasement in some countries in hopes of fending off the aggressor state; and Russian disinformation campaigns in the US and Europe.

Economic globalization further undermines defense of Ukraine. Russia’s war economy, contrary to expectations, has prospered, fueled literally by oil and gas sales to China and India. Most developing countries have tried to stay out of the Russia-NATO confrontation—a stance that mainly benefits Russia, since those countries are too trade- and fuel-dependent to honor sanctions. The fact that an independent country has been attacked, war crimes have been committed, and Russia’s leader is a wanted man have thus failed to generate outrage in the Global South.

Europe on Edge

These developments remind some observers of the pre-World War II era, others of the worst days of the Cold War. Three very recent events provide further reason for concern: Russian military advances in Ukraine amidst heavy bombardments of key cities and power plants; the death of Aleksei Navalny and further crackdowns on dissent in Russia; and the long holdup of a military aid bill for Ukraine in the US Congress. Putin may sense that his army is in the ascendancy, giving Russia an opportunity to fulfill its imperial destiny. His most important critic is dead, and with that Russia’s democratic hopes. And in the US, Putin can count on pro-Russian dupes in the Republican Party to parrot his lines and stall further aid to Ukraine. Added to these factors is the Biden administration’s preoccupation with China and Israel, which has drawn key resources away from the Russian threat.

            In Europe, Ukraine’s dire military situation is at the center of discussion among security experts. Yet the sense of urgency is not universally shared. A wait-and-see viewpoint also exists, potentially compromising a unified European policy on Russia. At the annual Munich Security Conference in late March, there was a good deal of discussion about preparing militarily for a possible Russian attack on a NATO member. Sweden, Poland, Germany, and the Baltic countries reportedly are already acting as though Russia is at their gates. Germany has just sent the first contingent of troops to Lithuania. Poland’s president says his country is willing to deploy NATO nuclear weapons on its territory. Norway is sending fighter jets to Ukraine. There is much talk in NATO about also sending Patriot missiles to Ukraine for desperately needed air defense. Yet not all countries are so ready to adjust their military budgets and deplete their arsenals for Ukraine’s sake.

To be sure, the prospect of a Trump presidency should be incentive enough for Europeans to prepare for worst cases. Trump has made crystal clear his admiration for Putin, his unwillingness to contest Putin’s dictatorial rule or his territorial ambitions, and his lack of support for NATO. Trump might not, as President, formally pull the US out of NATO, but he well might end financial and military participation in it. And his recent statement essentially inviting Russia to have its way with NATO members that don’t pay their bills is a shock to the alliance system.

A Contest of Will and Luck

These developments may be prelude to the kind of miscalculation that precipitates war—a Russian missile that lands in a NATO country, a Ukraine drone strike in the heart of Russia, an attack on the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant in Ukraine. Any conflict with Russia risks escalating to the nuclear level. Putin has from time to time engaged in loose talk about using a nuclear weapon—a threat that has sometimes been taken seriously in Washington, sometimes discounted by strategy experts. But even if the MAD (mutual assured destruction) theory operates to prevent a nuclear exchange, a conventional war in central Europe would be catastrophic enough.  

Finally, we should keep in mind the several other places around the world where serious turmoil exists: the China-India border, the Korean peninsula, the South China Sea, the Taiwan Strait, and central Africa (where Russian military advisers are prominent). All these areas are influenced by the new Cold War that has emerged in Europe.

At the moment, confronting Russia is a contest of will as much as of capabilities. The US and especially the Europeans must demonstrate to Putin not only that he has no hope of defeating Ukraine but also that he cannot make any inroads in NATO and cannot exploit America’s political divisions. Putin’s apparent belief that he has the momentum and can keep Europe divided is the essential factor that NATO must overcome if diplomacy to end the fighting is to have any chance.