The Ifs, Ands & Buts of WWIII (Part I)

World War III is civilizations worst nightmare. Why, after two world wars over the course of three decades, has one not yet started? Is one about to? Technologically, militarily, and otherwise has erupted to such a degree that the right circumstances could spell a quick and certain end to the world as we know it, and a reset of most, if not all, of our cultural progress. I wish I could say this was some fiction of propaganda, as I will find myself repeating in this series over and over but that does not seem to be the case. The realities of nuclear weapons create a scenario that is easy to understand, if not hard to accept. Hydrogen bombs and nuclear energy, in general, are highly delicate and leave a near-indelible mark on our land, air, and water. With the number of nuclear-armed nations having risen to 6, it is easy to imagine a circumstance where one willful act sets off a chain reaction which would have intended and unintended consequences, changing the circumstances of the globe itself. The implications of hypotheticals are endless, but what are the objective facts that keep us out of a world war today?

There have been two World Wars so far. They are roughly defined by involving either many of the world countries or the most populous ones, but this is itself a semantic explanation for where the phrase comes from and it originates from the free press and the impression both World Wars left on collective culture. World War hardly has a specific definition but no one would argue World War I or II do not deserve their names. What many tend to forget is that in a simpler time world war I was called "The War to End All Wars" and World War II was an impossibility, in itself, because supposedly humanity would learn its lesson. Ironically, the first objective link we can discuss between the World Wars is that many of the instigators of the second were specifically the nations that, apparently, had a front-row seat for the lessons of the first.

Austria, Britain, France, Germany, and Russia; these countries or nations were major players in how global conflict grew and compounded, to such a degree to have left such a lasting legacy on modern culture. Austria started World War I due to their historic and cultural tendency for imperialism and their kinship with Germany, which seems to have almost forced their general public into both international conflicts before that soon spiraled into World Wars. The British, in attempts to control Europe, seem inevitably to claim neutrality, an alignment with international stability, and of course, simultaneously pick a side in a growing international conflict. France performs similarly and both times, along with Britain, feigning neutrality while seeing war as almost a definite inevitability, due to what it considers international obligations, seeing the defense of its people and borders as secondary. Germany seems to take its place in the European community for granted while simultaneously, ignoring it exists or seemingly believing it will do nothing. Russia, in the case of both World Wars, has had all of Germany's problems squared. A short look at the history of Eastern Europe and nihilism is but a stone's throw away.

You are likely asking yourself how this applies today. Well, all these nations can be summed up as the EU, Great Britain, and Russia today, and almost comically, the same schism between the Germans and Slavs (Eastern and far Eastern Europe) still causes political and sociological turmoil and leads many to believe a World War is right around the corner. However, war in Eastern Europe between Russia and whoever may apply has already erupted in Syria and Ukraine. The fact that the United States has become the preeminent martial power in the West and is handling most, if not all, international conflicts seems to have stopped our comparable allies from mobilizing, creating a chain reaction where Russia seeks allies to mobilize and so on.

The United States, though seemingly the modern warmonger and chief of nations, fulfills its international political obligations for "defense of its allies", in exchange for the domain of force it provides over more territory and the fact that it remaining the most active Western and largest global military power, at the same time, makes the domino effect of comparable military forces that created the two World Wars impossible. World War II had the lasting effect of making America the first and lastingly dominant nuclear power on earth. Russia is no longer controlled by feudalists or radical socialists, who see full-scale war with the US as a glorious inevitability. Germany, it seems, is focused on managing European affairs through diplomacy and they are having trouble managing their own domestic state which leaves no money, effort, or interest available for imperialism, nearby or abroad.

Baring some critical galvanizing event that somehow links different global national consciousness together in support for a war effort, nothing can create a World War scenario within the next ten years or so. The socialists, our old enemies, have ironically chosen trade and state politics as their means of competition with capitalism. Meanwhile, in past circumstances, many of the events in Eastern Europe that have taken place in the past few years would have and did, signal a World War but today, more people have access to a more global spectrum of information. Stories that may have seemed like they were about far-off barbarous nations before, now are clearly about countrysides and nations of people just like us, dealing with their nation states sociopolitical ebb and flow the best they can. The last great event that galvanized the West for war was 9/11, and even with all the loss of innocent life, many were reluctant to sign a blank check to march on foreign soil. If the effects of that day did not lead us to a world war III and our cultural state, since that time, has been learning the lesson; that even with a seemingly invisible and unpredictable enemy, there is such thing as taking up too much investment in defense, then I doubt it is possible for there to be an event more dramatic.

All these things considered, they are only part of the equation and the average person is not actually up-to-date on international affairs. The true lesson the silent majority seem to have learned that has staved off World War for so long has been this:
-When war is presented as a foregone conclusion and every other option seems, in the context of the current narrative, to be neglecting some great responsibility, the collateral damage of war treated as negligible and compromise treated as undisciplined, absent-minded or nonsensical, one most assume someone has paid good money to sell you a war.-

I am sure many possible scenarios have occurred to you, and I have not even begun to scratch the surface of the subject.

STAY TUNED FOR PART 2.