Looming Threat Of A Third World War

News18

4 hours ago

Most of the countries at the centre of various conflicts around the globe have nuclear potential
By most accounts and developments, tensions in most parts of the world are currently at their peak. Conflicts in Europe, the Middle East and Asia show grave signs of escalating, suggesting the possibility of a Third World War taking place in the not too distant future.
No real guesswork is required to identify the leaders responsible for these simmering and sudden conflagrations. Five or six of them are prominent 'players", while the rest are possibly being assisted to manage their own region-wise or country-wise disputes by their more prominent counterparts.
Currently, the prominent ones are Donald Trump (United States), Xi Jinping (China), Vladimir Putin (Russia) and Kim Jong Un (North Korea). The second rung of conflict-driven leaders includes Benjamin Netanyahu (Israel), Ayatollah Khamenei (Iran), Volodymyr Zelenskyy (Ukraine) and Field Marshal Asim Munir (Pakistan).
The bottom line is that the behaviours and endgames of the leaders mentioned are difficult to predict and so is the impact of their decisions on the world community geopolitically, geo-economically and geo-strategically going forward.
Let us start with the crisis in South Asia, involving Pakistan and India, its two major players. The recent crisis emanating out of a terrorist strike in the sublime environs of the Kashmir Valley that claimed 26 civilian lives, has been the most significant one between these two nuclear-armed nations in several decades.
It saw military action unfold and wantonly violate earlier mutually decided and agreed to geographic thresholds. It saw state-of-the-art weaponised systems being used and tested for the first time, with telling impacts produced on the ground. It concluded with intense and high-level diplomatic engagement, with the US government indirectly stroking its keys, though India pointedly denied such third-party intervention.
The four-day India-Pakistan conflict following the April 22, 2025 terrorist attack in Pahalgam evolved into a very serious military crisis between the two rival nuclear states in decades. Several military and political conclusions surfaced during and after the crisis, as for example, India demonstrated her ability to deliver precise standoff attacks across large parts of Pakistan on all four days of the conflict, particularly on May 7 and May 10.
Pakistan, on the other hand, exposed its air defence vulnerability in the face of an Indian aerial attack.
Both sides also made the world aware of how seriously they viewed the threats from the air.
Politically and diplomatically, the India-Pakistan interaction, if any, remains crisis-prone, and these only have the potential to escalate in terms of severity over the passage of time. Both sides were successful in calibrating and managing their respective escalatory levels.
The crisis in South Asia was costly in terms of loss of human lives and expended or destroyed military equipment. Will those costs prompt them to proceed with care and caution in bilateral ties, out of fears of dangerous spillover effect and impact on the extended region, only time will tell. The latest confrontation, however, underscores the point that South Asia could be one of the most likely theatres of a long-drawn-out war, a nuclear war if you will, even if situation is not immediately imminent.
The Russia-Ukraine War is now in its fourth year and is showing no signs of abating anytime soon. The attempts by the Donald Trump-led administration to broker talks and peace between the two warring parties don't seem to have taken off, and is being viewed more as an attempt to sideline Europe politically, militarily and economically, while keeping the conflict in an on-again, off-again mode to secure potential transactional advantages on all three fronts.
President Trump's attempts to end the war have been in vain thus far and Washington now appears to sending signals that it may withdraw from the Russia-Ukraine negotiations if there isn't a visible turnaround.
China, on the other hand, hypothetically speaking, might use a potential US exit to get involved in Ukraine in one way or another, which could pose a geopolitical, geo-economic and geo-strategic challenge to both Europe and the US going forward. It is not a scenario the latter two will take kindly to.
China's almost non-existent reaction to Trump's Russia policy is evidence enough that the current stance of Washington on the war in Ukraine and on Russia benefits Beijing. Outcomes such as a hybrid peace in Ukraine, or a rapid deterioration of transatlantic ties and Europe possibly softening its stance toward China in a bid to gain leverage over Trump, are all possible. The US would like to contain China's expansionist designs through initiatives such as the Belt Road Initiative (BRI) and the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, etc.
Reviving the Istanbul peace process and facilitating renewed engagement by key international players is the need of the hour. Yet major questions persist such as: Can Ukraine's audacious strikes on Russia shift the war's trajectory; how long can Ukraine sustain and endure the prolonged conflict? Or, can the main actors in the ongoing war — Ukraine, Russia, US, NATO and the European Union — overcome current trust deficits to forge a durable peace, or will they facilitate a conflict or conflicts that escalate and cause more irreparable damage?
Then there is the China-US-Taiwan standoff, which has the potential of escalating into a full-blown war.
North Korea's decision to carry out multiple nuclear and ballistic missile tests has raised global concerns about its ability to strike targets far beyond the Korean Peninsula at a time of its choosing.
Current regional instability has heightened North Korea's tensions with South Korea and Japan, both major US allies in the region, and led to the increased military presence of the US and its allies. The international community has responded with sanctions and diplomatic efforts to curb North Korea, but these efforts have faced challenges, including China's reluctance to enforce sanctions on North Korea. The crisis carries a risk of escalation, with North Korea's provocative actions and rhetoric raising the possibility of enhanced military conflict.
Israel's attack on Iran to neutralise the latter's nuclear capabilities seems to project a larger objective – a change of regime in Tehran.
If media reports coming out of Iran are to be believed, most Iranians are unhappy with the state of the economy, the lack of freedom of speech, women's rights, and minority rights.
The June 13, 2025 aerial strikes have claimed the lives of the commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), the chief of staff of the armed forces, and many other high-ranking IRGC chiefs. Iran has retaliated, striking at what it claims are 'dozens of targets, military centres and airbases" in Israel. A chain reaction has started and it is unclear where it might lead.
Backed by the US, Israel could engineer a regime collapse in Iran. This could mean a population of 90 million descending into chaos, and if that were to happen, the impact on the rest of the Middle East would be massive.
The exiled opposition Mujahideen-e Khalq (MEK), which supports the overthrow of the Islamic Republic of Iran, is getting increasingly active, as is the exiled Iranian Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi. There are other political forces as well, from those who want to establish a secular democracy to those who seek a parliamentary monarchy and so on.
What would Iran's endgame be, as it does not have many? The US is keen that Tehran restart negotiations for peace and de-escalation, which the latter currently views as a very tough choice to make, given that it would suggest surrender and defeat. Carrying out attacks against Israel suits it, but then it could invite further attacks by Israel. Iran would shy away from taking on the US in a conflict.
The doomsday clock is ticking. Most of the countries at the centre of various conflicts around the globe have nuclear weapons potential. There is a clear and present danger of these conflicts spilling over and crossing their respective boundaries, and escalating to parts of the world that are presently at peace. The negative fallout of Artificial Intelligence and Climate Change also have the potential to scale up the global conflict scenario to a point of no return.
top videos
View all
However, we must remember that an escalatory war of any kind, if undertaken, needs to have public support and backing, and that is far from a given.
The author is Editor Brighter Kashmir, Author, TV commentator, political analyst and columnist. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect News18's views.
Location :
Jammu and Kashmir, India, India
First Published:
June 17, 2025, 18:01 IST
News opinion Opinion | Looming Threat Of A Third World War