The world is in an increasingly fragile balance. There is good news, but also more signs indicating the danger of a world war.
In 2022, shortly after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, American journalist Bret Stephens published an article in the New York Times titled „This Is How World War III Begins”. After more than four years, he questions to what extent he was right, in an analysis published in the same newspaper.
His argument was based on the origins of the Second World War, which did not simply start with Germany's invasion of Poland on September 1, 1939. On the contrary, the war was the result of an accumulation of regional conflicts and crises – starting with Japan's invasion of Manchuria in 1931 – which gradually merged into a single global conflict.
This escalation, fueled by the convergence of totalitarian states' ambitions and the divisions or hesitations of democracies, led to catastrophe.
Another factor was the revolution in technology and military tactics, which gave dictatorships an initial advantage in offensive capabilities.
Another advantage was their readiness to inflict – and endure – a level of brutality and suffering that their opponents initially hesitated to match.
The Only Good News
In 2022, the world witnessed a similar scenario: decades of Western policy of appeasement towards Vladimir Putin had given the authoritarian Russian leader the conviction that he could escape punishment for almost anything.
His increasingly close ties with North Korea, Iran, and, especially, China - confirmed by the commitment to an "unlimited partnership" with Beijing, announced just weeks before the invasion - bolstered his confidence. The spectacle of American weakness displayed during the chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan just six months prior also played a role.
However, Ukraine did not turn out to be France in 1940, as Stephens had feared. It resembled more closely Britain, ready to fight - as Churchill said in that same month - "however long and hard the road may be."
The Biden administration, despite its fatal hesitations regarding allowing Kyiv to wage war on Russian soil, at least contributed to ensuring that Ukraine did not lose.
Furthermore, Ukraine retained its technological advantage, pioneering the use of equipment and tactics that ultimately prompt a long-delayed rethink of how future wars will be fought.
That's the good news.
And Now, the Bad News
Unfortunately, there are quite a few:
Firstly, just like in the '30s and '40s, the arenas of conflict have multiplied and are beginning to merge.
- Russia's failures on the battlefield do not seem to have tempered Putin's appetite for risk-taking; on the contrary, he is expanding his campaign – through barely veiled attacks and threats – against states like Moldova, Poland, and Germany, while his political allies repeatedly call for direct strikes on Europe and the use of nuclear weapons against Ukraine.
- The Hamas attack on Israel in 2023 gradually escalated into a war between Israel and Hezbollah, Houthis, and Iran, then into a conflict between Iran, the United States, and the Gulf states. More recently, Ukraine launched long-range strikes in the Caspian Sea area to disrupt the delivery of Iranian military equipment to Russia. Decisions made in one theater of operations directly influence the situation in another: the consumption of missile interceptors in the Middle East means that only a few can currently be allocated to Ukraine.
Secondly, the "Axis of Authoritarians" has become a fully operational military alliance.
- Russia is providing assistance to North Korea for the modernization of its armed forces, while Pyongyang has responded by delivering millions of artillery projectiles and is reportedly prepared to send thousands of additional troops to fight in Ukraine.
- China supplies Russia with most of the electronic components used in its drones and other military equipment.
- Russia has provided Iran with essential information on targets, thus facilitating attacks on American bases and ships in the Middle East.
- In the event of a Chinese attack on Taiwan, Beijing could request Moscow's support, counting on the intervention of Russia's powerful submarine fleet in the Pacific, as outlined in a new report by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI).
Thirdly, the West is in a state of chaos.
- President Trump criticizes America's allies' weakness. Allies criticize Trump's aggressive attitude, caprices, immaturity, lack of honesty, and incompetence. Both sides are right. The recent wave of tariffs imposed by the US on Canada is a telling example: a politically unwise, economically counterproductive measure that undermines strategic capability.
- Nevertheless, none of this changes the fact that a country like Canada — reliant on trade and boasting the world's longest coastline — barely has a navy worthy of the name. Or that its government's "new strategic partnership" with China is immoral, unwise, and unfounded, as the analysis author points out.
Fourthly, America is not militarily prepared.
- The war against Iran revealed not only a shortage of ammunition – a factor contributing to the premature end of the conflict – but also America's acute sensitivity to human casualties and economic costs; this gave Iranian leaders an asymmetric advantage, considering their own tolerance for human suffering.
- The war in Ukraine demonstrated that even the most sophisticated American military technology becomes morally outdated, in the face of the emergence of AI-assisted drone warfare. The tanks provided by the US and its allies to Kyiv during the Biden administration "now sit largely unused, hidden in forests and covered in cobwebs," as reported this week by the New York Times.
- Despite this, Pete Hegseth – the Defense Secretary obsessed with testosterone – decided last week to gradually dismantle an army drone unit, apparently because it was supported by generals who were not to his liking.
- Issues faced by the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln during its long missions are a national scandal. However, the situation should draw attention to the historically reduced size of the fleet and the exhausted industrial base of the United States, struggling to build and maintain ships. The fact that Democrats are blocking the defense funding bill does not help the situation.
Fifthly, we may be on the brink of a major economic crisis. A major difference between the '30s and the present is that, unlike that period, we are not experiencing a global economic recession.
- However, signs of an abrupt and severe recession are everywhere. What will happen if – or when – the momentum of artificial intelligence falters, just as the dot-com boom did in the early 2000s? Or if a currency crisis in Japan leads that country to start selling its US government bonds?
- Legendary investor Stanley Druckenmiller recently warned in the Wall Street Journal that Treasury Department bond buyback programs were practically doomed to fail: ultimately, the burden of a $40 trillion public debt will be felt in much higher interest rates and the risks they pose for all sectors of the American economy that have relied too long on cheap credit.
- A severe recession in the US or a global financial panic will inevitably exacerbate all the aforementioned trends.
In times of economic crisis, democracies almost always become more hesitant to take risks, while dictatorships tend to adopt a risk-taking attitude. It is a historical pattern worth noting as we continue to drift, almost unconsciously, towards the approaching storm, warns Bret Stephens.
T.D.