Are We Close to World War 3? The Current State and Future Implications

The current geopolitical landscape is a tumultuous one, with tensions periodically escalating, especially in regions like Eastern Europe. One of the most alarming scenarios is the potential for a Third World War. However, many discussions have shifted focus from traditional warfare to a cyber war and the implications of such a conflict. This article aims to explore whether we are currently in a state of prolonged conflict, known colloquially as 'WW3', and what the future might hold.

The Current State of Conflict: Cyber War and Beyond

The statement 'WW3 is happening right now' captures the current reality quite accurately. Unlike the conventional warfare of the past, the modern conflict is being waged in the digital realm. Cyber warfare is a sophisticated and insidious form of combat, where information, technology, and networks become battlegrounds. This shifts the paradigm of war, making it more subtle and harder to detect. The ongoing conflict in Ukraine, mediated through cyber warfare, provides a stark example of how the lines between peace and war can blur.

The geopolitical tensions have never been higher. There are currently more nuclear powers than ever before, each with the potential to cause catastrophic damage. The global supply of resources is becoming more strained, and the world population is surging, putting additional pressure on these resources. With 8 billion people to feed, the task is immense, and any disruption in supply chains could have dire consequences. In this context, the idea that countries might seek to survive in bunkers while the outside world is destroyed is not far-fetched. It reflects a primal fear of survival, akin to an animal cornered.

Survival and the Apocalypse

When faced with a seemingly untenable situation, humans might resort to extreme measures to ensure survival. The concept of a 'survivalist bunker' or 'safe haven' is part of this narrative. Even the idea that a significant portion of the population might perish, leading to potential collapse, is not without precedence. This perspective is often debated among security experts and politicians. Some argue that a 90% reduction in population is the only way for humanity to continue.

The upcoming elections in the United States, particularly the role of President Trump, add another layer of complexity. Many predict that if Trump takes office, it could lead to an escalation of military conflict. The assertion that 'if Trump is elected, there will be war, first in Europe and then globally' reflects a significant concern. It highlights the potential for heightened tensions and the risk of a full-scale conflict.

The Reality of Current Conflicts

Despite the dire predictions, the actual reality of the conflict is more nuanced. The ongoing war between America and Russia, which is being played out in Ukraine, is a prime example of a prolonged cyber and conventional conflict. Russia has been able to achieve significant progress in the Donbass region, making it unlikely to resort to a larger-scale, global conflict. NATO, despite its rhetoric, is not in a position to intervene militarily in Ukraine, as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Article 5 is not applicable to the conflict.

Some of the smaller NATO member countries, like Poland and the Baltic states, are eager to counter Russian aggression. However, they lack the necessary military capabilities to take significant action. Their approach often involves calling for the involvement of larger NATO countries. Unfortunately, the larger countries, such as the United States and the United Kingdom, are too cautious to become directly involved, given the risks of a full-scale conflict.

Potential Outcomes and Future Projections

The underlying question is whether any party has the incentive or willpower to escalate the conflict to the level of a Third World War. Given the current dynamics, it seems highly unlikely. Russia, having made significant progress in the Donbass region, has no immediate need to escalate the conflict. Similarly, NATO members like Poland and the Baltic states, while eager for intervention, lack the necessary military muscle to initiate such a conflict.

The idea of small nations like Poland bringing added value to the conflict is questionable. Ukraine already possesses significant resources and equipment, making it challenging for additional troops to offer substantial benefits. As such, neither side has a compelling reason to escalate the situation to the point of a full-scale global conflict.

In conclusion, while the geopolitical landscape is tense and conflicts in cyberspace persist, the existing dynamics make it improbable that we will witness a Third World War in the near future. However, the continued rise in global tensions and the increasing sophistication of cyber warfare suggest that vigilance is essential. The scenarios of survival and apocalypse, though extreme, are not unfounded within the realm of theoretical possibilities.

Key Takeaways Current conflict is primarily cyber-based. Resource scarcity and population growth add to global tensions. Smaller NATO countries seek intervention but lack capability. Risk of WW3 is minimal given current dynamics.