Robert Farley, a professor at the United States Army College of War, called the South China Sea, Ukraine, the Persian Gulf, and the Korean Peninsula the most likely locations in 2019 of World War III
The famous American analytical magazine The National Interest decided to intimidate its own and global audience with forecasts of the possible emergence of the Third World War in 2019, which was voiced by the professor of the US Army Military College Robert Farley. Without even asking in his article the question of whether the Third World War is currently in principle, the scientist authoritatively pointed out four regions of the world where in the coming year it is likely to break out: the South China Sea, Ukraine, the Persian Gulf and the Korean Peninsula. It is clear that the issue is not only about the “point of view” of a particular analyst with connections in the military establishment of his country, if an authoritative American magazine trumpeted its forecast to the whole world.
According to Professor Farley, for the first time since 1945, the conflict between the great powers has escalated again. This threat did not exist at all for two decades after the fall of the Berlin Wall. It was not so strong even during the years of the “cold war”, when the USA and the USSR several times came quite close to the beginning of the “hot” war. New circumstances are the strengthening of the power of China and, “apparently, the complete rejection of Russia of the international order.” In the latter case, Moscow’s refusal to unconditionally accept any Western policy, especially one that is directed against Russia’s vital security interests, is clearly meant.
Moreover, judging by the “hierarchy” of “hot spots”, China considered being the main threat. In this we can agree with him.
South China Sea
An American professor rightly links the tense situation in the South China Sea with trade disputes between Beijing and Washington. Noting the “heated rhetoric”, the problem of reciprocal trade tariffs and sanctions, Farley points out that the US and China so far have avoided a hard peg between trade war and existing problems in the South China Sea. However, as relations deteriorate, either one or the other side can go on escalating the situation — beyond the bounds of dollars, words, and going to court. The professor repeats and stresses that if Washington and Beijing consider that their trade relations, which have ensured the growth of the world economy in the last 20 years, are under serious threat, and decide that “further conflicts are inevitable,” then they can “take off their gloves” in South China Sea.
In other words, there may begin a military conflict that will escalate into the Third World War.
Farley put Ukraine on the second place in danger of calling the Third World War. Recalling the recent Ukrainian provocation in the territorial waters of Russia, the ongoing conflict (around the Crimea and the Donbass), the possibility of “unrest” in Ukraine, the professor predicted the possible actions of Russia in 2019. He suggested that before the March presidential elections in Ukraine, Moscow would not do anything. However, in the face of tensions between the US and Russia, even a small shift can threaten the difficult balance that has been established in the past few years, which can plunge Eastern Europe into chaos.
The political and military crisis in the Middle East, the increase at the initiative of the United States of economic pressure on Iran, the war in Yemen – it does not seem that they will soon stop. The civil war in Syria is suppressed, but it can “flare up again,” as the United States and Russia continue to support their “partners and henchmen.” A possible political crisis in Iran is capable of destabilizing the entire region, which could push this country, on the one hand, to a more “aggressive behavior” and, on the other, to make it a “desirable target for the enemies”.
Kurds, Turks, Syrians, Iraqis, Farley lists, are able to start “open conflict at any time.” This can be facilitated by the risky policies of the new Saudi leadership. As a result, “given the strategic importance of the region, any instability can lead to conflict between the United States, Russia and even China.”
Acknowledging that tensions on the Korean Peninsula have greatly decreased over the past year and that, thanks to agreements between the leaders of the DPRK and the United States, the prospects for lasting peace are certainly brighter than at any time after the mid-1990s, Farley noted that remain. Since Pyongyang didn’t really make any significant concessions to Washington, their relationship “may deteriorate very quickly,” as advisors to US President Donald Trump know. Taking into account the dual position of neighboring countries, the situation on the Korean Peninsula remains much more dangerous than one would have expected according to the most optimistic estimates.
The American professor believes that the cause of the Third World War may serve, at first glance, less critical conflicts that do not attract so much attention to themselves: destructive conflicts may erupt in the Baltic, in Azerbaijan, Kashmir or even in Venezuela. Therefore, “if the Third World War begins, it may well come from a completely unexpected direction.”
Surprisingly, he did not mention the Arctic at all, the strategic and economic importance of which is steadily increasing due to global warming, and especially Central Asia. Although virtually everything is ready there for a powerful explosion that will hit Russia and China a lot and which will become practically inevitable if the US surrenders Afghanistan to Islamic Terrorists, which they seem to be doing in the very near future.
What is the message?
In conclusion, Farley points out that the fundamental prerequisite for future conflicts is “the decline of relations between China and the United States”, and concludes that the destruction of US military hegemony and the global international order accompanying it means that the near future is likely to become more dangerous than the recent past.
So what are we dealing with? With a serious analysis of geopolitical threats, a real concern about the prospects of the outbreak of the Third World War or some propaganda construct designed to intimidate the target audience? Of course, we are talking about the latter. This is an attempt to overshadow the hybrid war actively being waged by the United States against Russia and China by the invented threat of the Third World War, which, based on the composition of its potential participants, cannot but be not nuclear if one of them does not rush to admit defeat at an early stage.
How do world wars arise?
World wars are being prepared for decades, and they do not flare up when terrorist shots are fired – in Sarajevo or elsewhere – or serious regional conflicts like the Sino-Japanese war in 1937 begin. A terrorist outburst or local conflict will be the reason for the start of World War only in one case: when it is fully prepared, when the necessary team of participants is created by the organizers. What happened in 1914 and 1939. The first global conflict was prepared mainly by England (with the participation of American capital and France) with the aim of crushing Germany, their enemy and rival, and Russia – the geopolitical rival in the past and economic – in the future, their ally.
The second global conflict was prepared mainly by the USA – by the hands of Germany, the USSR and Japan. At a late stage, they were joined by Britain and France, who did not know all the details of the American plan, on the basis of the fear of communism. The purpose of the Second World War was to weaken the leading countries of the world and especially Europe, to destroy the colonial empires for the sake of global hegemony of the USA, the creation of the “American century”.
This was completely misunderstood by Hitler’s Germany, which had risen on American investment and technology, hoping to conduct a victorious local war with Poland because of the “Polish corridor”, as well as the Stalinist USSR, which had planned a “liberation campaign” with the aim of “exporting communism” to Europe. As, however, did not understand England and especially France.
When World Wars Do Not Occur?
Since then, the rules of the game have not changed. Neither the Caribbean crisis, nor the Vietnam war, nor the forceful actions of the USSR in the GDR, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Afghanistan, nor the Korean war, in which the USA fought with China and partly the USSR, did not lead and could not lead to a global war. As well as several accidental failures in the air defense systems of the USA and the USSR, which signaled a nuclear attack by the enemy. Because the Third World War of the usual type between the major nuclear powers of the world after Hiroshima and Nagasaki became completely meaningless, as long as its participants could repeatedly destroy each other.
Under these conditions, the United States made an absolutely reasonable bet on the internal undermining of its main adversary — the USSR — by skillfully seducing its elite and detaching China from it. All this was completely successful and led Washington in 1991 to a peaceful victory over the USSR.
At the same time, for decades, China was turned into a loyal producer of consumer goods, a source of enrichment for the American elite and the middle class. The Third World War is all the more senseless nowadays, when the hegemony of the United States fails, Europe turns its back on America, and China and Russia again became allies. Americans do not like to suffer losses and wage wars, in which they have little to shine. They have the only chance to strengthen their positions: to lead sophisticated hybrid wars against their opponents and try to restore the power of their real economy.
In the US, they are well aware that China is almost too hard for them. Russia in Washington is considered not such a “tough nut to crack.” Therefore, the main blow is now delivered precisely to Russia. But not on the battlefield, where the risk of a surrender is great. Especially if the conflict will occur next to Russia – in Ukraine, to which the Russians have a special relationship: as to their land and their people. Or, say, in the Arctic. There is simply nothing to do there with one serviceable US icebreaker.
The war with China in the South China Sea, where the latter has turned coral reefs and small islands into real “aircraft carriers”, also does not promise any laurels to the Americans. Although their fleet is still stronger than the rapidly growing Chinese.
Under these conditions, the Americans have no other way how to scare their potential opponents, as well as themselves. To try to mobilize and catch up on a military unit.
The United States exaggerates the danger of possible threats and understates the scale of the hybrid war already unleashed against Russia, China and other inconvenient Washington countries.
It should be understood that the Americans are unlikely to go into open conflict with Russia. Because Russia is still a nuclear power. They are unlikely to go into open conflict with China – for the same reason. Instead, the Americans focused on a hybrid war.
At the same time, the Third World War in a hybrid form is already underway, its elements were the Ukrainian provocation in the Kerch Strait, and pressure on UN members to adopt a resolution on the Crimea, and hype in connection with the “Skripal case”, and the so-called “Russian intervention” in american election
The probability of the Third World with the use of nuclear weapons is currently low, but the likelihood of local conflicts through a hybrid throw-in of information and influence on minds is high.
By Sergey Latyshev