Future Scenarios of the Current War

When we talk about a possible war, it is important to understand: it is already underway. Though technically by peaceful means, we have already been attacked. Only not with bombs and shells, but with subversion along the whole front of reality. But it is only for now ...

The prospects for a new world war have been spoken since the end of the Second World War, when the “cold confrontation” of the West and the USSR or NATO and the Warsaw Pact countries began. It developed into the Caribbean crisis, and then into US rivalry already with modern Russia.

We endlessly hear the accusations that Russia is a threat to the whole world, although in fact the United States means only its own world. But the big problem is that Washington and its allies are trying to create, on the basis of this threat, an axiom for putting it at the forefront of international politics.

The United States has withdrawn from the INF Treaty and is already calling into question the Nuclear Disarmament Treaty - START-3. All this makes the military and experts around the world talk about new scenarios of new world war. But what can it be like? It’s definitely not at all what we expect from the experience of the past world war and many local armed conflicts.

What war scenarios depend on

They depend on the goal. What could be the goal of a collective West in a war against the East? To establish control over the East with the complete elimination of resistance, in order to enjoy resource and strategic advantages.

From objectives to objectives: by military means inflict an enemy a defeat in which it would recognize its unconditional surrender.

From tasks to the necessary means and necessary resources: the use of the armed forces of the West from key bridgeheads while providing the necessary transport and logistics infrastructure, taking into account distances and climate.

And then it remains to calculate the procedure.

Immediately exclude the use of nuclear weapons. First, the attacking side can get hit by the counter blow. Secondly, it deprives the war of a goal - why control the defeated side if it is impossible to use its resources and territory?

Further, intervention is less possible. Approximately for the same reasons: the risk that the war enters the nuclear phase is too great.

What is left? Only the scenario of drawing the Enemy into a war, where there would be no formal participation of the West, but in which the Enemy would have exhausted its political and economic resources.

Should Americans be first?

In Asia and Europe today they understand that Russia cannot be blamed for all mortal sins. German Chancellor Angela Merkel has already stated that the US withdrawal from the INF Treaty is a dangerous precedent. Other European leaders supported Washington’s position largely by inertia, due to allied dependence on the United States. Asia is also not unanimous in the opinion of Moscow’s responsibility for anything. Especially when you consider that in reality no responsibility of Russia or casus belli exists.

Nevertheless, the first scenario of a large-scale war is based precisely on the initiative of the United States. This basic premise is clearly visible in the words of a number of high-ranking American military officials, representatives of the establishment, and politicians. They talk about the endless "Russian threat", in the name of the struggle with which NATO is stubbornly moving to the East. But why should the Americans be the first?

The United States and NATO countries are diligently accumulating forces on the border with Russia. With a certain accumulation of these forces, the United States will sooner or later become the party that will not endure and will begin open hostilities, because the NATO soldiers are becoming more and more.

There is absolutely no logic in this: an open clash can very quickly lead to a push of a nuclear button. This means that neither side will achieve its strategic goals, but it will definitely receive a blow that will lead, as the NATO generals like to say, to “unacceptable damage”.

Nevertheless, it is enough just to look at the rhetoric of the generals in order to understand that the first scenario is quite possible. This is what the head of the US Navy's naval operations, Admiral John Richardson, said in early February:

"The United States should not only think about retaliation ... We need to think about how we can strike first..."

Thus, it is the Americans who have every chance of sooner or later becoming the party that pulls the “trigger” of world war first.

Aggressors - DPRK and Iran

The US military cones believe that Iran and North Korea are causing a nuclear threat to America and the whole world. The scenario in which the North Koreans and Iranians are the first to uncover their guns is in fact unlikely. However, the risk of such a start of world and nuclear war is high due to the fact that the West can respond with a blow to any attack of Tehran or Pyongyang.

At the beginning of the year, the Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford University published a report that assessed the degree of nuclear threat to North Korea.

As one of the authors of the report, the former director of the American arms laboratory in New Mexico, Siegfried Hecker, said in an interview with Reuters, the analysis of satellite images showed that nuclear fuel production in North Korea continued in 2018. Since May, the DPRK could produce 5-8 kg of weapons-grade plutonium.

At the same time, the DPRK does not reach its US with its missiles, but it can strike at Japan or South Korea. Given that she has no final agreement with the West, the development of weapons in the DPRK continues.

Therefore, it does not matter whether the DPRK is threatened by the United States. It is important that Washington sees this as a threat, has military bases in Japan and South Korea and is preparing to "respond to aggression." Trump says that he almost managed to get along with Kim Jong-un, but in reality this is not at all the case.

Another thing is Iran. The Islamic Republic agreed to place its nuclear facilities under the control of the IAEA, but Trump said it was a “bad deal” and destroyed it. Now, new sanctions are imposed on Tehran. The United States also supports Israel, the worst enemy of Iran, and is hindering Iranian forces in Syria. This is a new pretext for a war that can begin in the Middle East, and where new powers can gradually be drawn, starting with the United States itself.

Iran’s militarism, however, is not denied by the head of the republic, Hassan Rouhani. February 11 in Iran was a big holiday - the 40th anniversary of the Islamic revolution. Rouhani stated:

"We have not asked and will not ask anyone for permission to develop various types of missiles."

Therefore, another scenario: Iran opens fire on its opponents in the Middle East, and then falls under the response of the United States and other countries. We note that Tehran would hardly dare to do something similar. Knowing this, Washington continues to threaten Iran and push it with sanctions for aggression.

China and Russia

The scenario of a world war in which Russia or China will be unleashed is much more difficult to imagine. Russia does much more to save the world than anyone else. While the US created new terrorist groups in the Middle East, Russia fought against them. The “Islamic state” in Syria was defeated only after connecting the Russian Aerospace Forces to the fight against terrorists.

At the same time, Russia and China are nuclear powers. This means at least a stimulus for the United States. And if we recall all the American rhetoric in 2018, sanctions against Russia, Washington’s trade war with Beijing, then the likelihood of conflict cannot be ruled out. However, it is worth recalling that Russia and China are one front in the UN Security Council and are blocking the openly militant initiatives of Washington.

In the US, the daily media are reminded of the so-called "Russian aggression." And we can say that in the information field, the war is already in full swing. The Americans, meanwhile, are not betting on open opposition to Russia — that would be suicide. The United States is weakening Russia, so that at a decisive moment, then, it will give commands to its military, and Russia would not be able to respond to this with nuclear weapons.

This goal is served by the slow and systematic undermining of our country's security, regional conflicts, and finally, the creation of a US missile defense system in space by 2020. These factors are not able to make an aggressor out of Russia, but unfortunately, they can weaken it.

Therefore, when we talk about the scenarios of the new world war and the prospects for nuclear war, it should be understood that the confrontation has already begun. It goes surreptitiously, but this does not mean that Russia does not defend itself. Therefore, the attack from the United States and Europe, NATO countries is today the greatest and already realizable threat. The aggression of Iran and the DPRK is unlikely, but is possible in the case of serious provocations. Russia and China, however, have all the necessary forces, but they do not pursue a policy that would allow them to be recorded as aggressors.