Looming Threat Of A Third World War
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
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
21 minutes ago
- Time of India
Did the US really wipe out Iran's nuclear sites? Reports say Trump may have been tricked by Tehran
Despite President Trump's declaration of a complete victory, the US airstrikes on Iran's nuclear facilities have yielded mixed results. While some sites sustained damage, particularly at Fordow, doubts remain about the extent of destruction to underground facilities. Concerns linger regarding Iran's potential relocation of enriched uranium, potentially hindering but not halting their nuclear ambitions. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Did the US really wipe out Iran's nuclear sites? Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads What do satellite images reveal about the damage? What do experts think about the attack? Has Iran secretly moved its highly enriched Uranium? Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads How does this impact Iran's nuclear ambitions? FAQs US President Donald Trump announced with confidence that US airstrikes had destroyed Iran's main nuclear sites and called it a complete victory. However, expert opinions and satellite images present a different Saturday night, Donald Trump dispatched seven B-2 stealth bombers from the United States to destroy Tehran's nuclear program by dropping massive bunker-busting bombs on three enrichment facilities in Fordow, Natanz, and underground facilities may have survived, and enriched uranium may have been moved without anyone knowing. The attack may have slowed down Iran's nuclear plans, but it did not stop them, as per reports by CNN and of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Dan Caine said Sunday that a US submarine used Tomahawk cruise missiles to strike an Isfahan location where a US official estimates that approximately 60% of Iran's stockpile of already-enriched nuclear material is kept Isfahan facility was not hit by massive "bunker-buster" bombs dropped by B-2 bombers, in contrast to the other two Iranian facilities targeted in the operation, as per a report by the US used 12 bunker busters to destroy Iran's facility at Fordow, another underground location that contained centrifuges needed to enrich uranium, the facility's evident survival has prompted doubts about whether Trump's declared objective was even to commercial satellite imagery, the U.S. attack on Iran's Fordow nuclear plant seriously damaged, if not completely destroyed, the deeply buried site and the uranium-enriching centrifuges it contained, but experts said on Sunday that there was no proof of it. However, it is unknown how much damage has been done because the facility has layers of Technologies' satellite imagery from Thursday and Friday revealed "unusual activity" at Fordow, including a lengthy line of cars waiting outside one of the facility's Lewis, a weapons expert and professor at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies, has closely examined commercial satellite images of the strike sites and said the damage to the facility seems limited to aboveground structures.'They just punched through with these MOPs,' said David Albright, the head of the Institute for Science and International Security and a former U.N. nuclear inspector, in reference to the Massive Ordnance Penetrator bunker-busting bombs that the United States claimed it Eveleth, a satellite images specialist and associate researcher with the CNA Corporation, pointed out that it was impossible to confirm the destruction below ground. The hall that houses hundreds of centrifuges is "too deeply buried for us to evaluate the level of damage based on satellite imagery," he stated to Iran, prior to US attacks on its nuclear bases, the majority of its highly enriched uranium was smuggled to a hidden location. Iran claimed that it had moved its 400 kg stockpile, much of which was kept at Isfahan, and satellite photos showed convoys departing all three locations in recent days, as per a report by think that the majority of Fordow's 400 kg of 60%-enriched uranium was transferred prior to Operation Midnight Hammer, as per a report by The of 16 trucks snaking down a road near the entrance of the Fordow plant, obscured by rubble and dirt, was released by US defense contractor Maxar Technologies on June defense company TS2 Space reports that trucks, bulldozers, and security convoys swarm Fordow, where analysts observed a "frantic effort" to move shielding materials or intelligence analyst Ronen Solomon stated that transferring Iran's uranium would be "like having fuel without a car" and that they are unable to do much with it unless they develop a small-scale project that we are unaware of, as per The also warned that Iran might be concealing this and other nuclear components in places that Israel, the United States, and the U.N. nuclear inspectors are unaware would take years and rely on Tehran's capacity to restore essential equipment before Iran could produce a nuclear weapon, even though it might have the entirely; experts believe some deep underground facilities and uranium stockpiles were has the potential to rebuild, as key equipment and uranium may have been secretly relocated.
New Indian Express
24 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Israel says struck Iran's Fordo to 'obstruct access routes'
The Israeli military said it had launched air raids Monday to block access to Iran's enriched uranium facility in Fordo which was bombed by the United States at the weekend. A military statement said Israeli forces had "struck in order to obstruct access routes to the Fordo enrichment site" which US President Donald Trump said had been "totally obliterated" by the US strikes. There has been speculation that Iran might have moved out some of its known 400-kilogramme stockpile of highly enriched uranium before the US bombing of its storage sites in the early hours of Sunday. The International Atomic Energy Agency, which has been monitoring Iran's nuclear programme, called earlier Monday for access to the Islamic republic's nuclear sites to "account for" the uranium. "There needs to be a cessation of hostilities for the necessary safety and security conditions to prevail so that Iran can let IAEA teams into the sites to assess the situation," the head of the UN's nuclear watchdog, Rafael Grossi, said.
Time of India
26 minutes ago
- Time of India
Pakistan in political turmoil over Donald Trump's nobel bid after US and Israel bomb Iran's Fordow, Isfahan, Natanz facilities
Multiple political leaders and civil society voices in Pakistan have criticised the government's decision to nominate U.S. President Donald Trump for the 2026 Nobel Peace Prize. The criticism grew louder after the U.S., alongside Israel, carried out airstrikes on Iran's nuclear sites in Fordow, Isfahan, and Natanz. The nomination letter had already been submitted by Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar. It praised Trump's role in de-escalating tensions during the recent India-Pakistan conflict. However, opposition leaders now argue that the developments in Iran completely contradict the principles of peace. Political leaders strongly oppose government move Veteran JUI-F leader Maulana Fazlur Rehman openly condemned the nomination, calling Trump's actions the opposite of peaceful. Speaking at a gathering in Murree, he criticised the government's quick decision following Trump's lunch meeting with Chief of Army Staff Asim Munir. 'How can support for Israeli attacks be seen as a mark of peace?' he questioned. Former Senator Mushahid Hussain echoed this, accusing Trump of being influenced by Israeli leadership and labelling the Iran strike 'an illegal war.' He demanded that the nomination be 'reviewed, rescinded, and revoked.' PTI lawmaker Ali Muhammad Khan also responded with a direct call to 'reconsider,' highlighting U.S. complicity in Gaza. Statements continued to pour in from other political parties and public figures. PTI's think-tank head Raoof Hasan described the nomination as 'a source of shame,' while Afrasiab Khattak criticised what he called 'sycophancy' in diplomacy. Jamaat-i-Islami's Naeemur Rehman said the move hurt Pakistan's 'national dignity.' Public figures join chorus of disapproval Former diplomat Maleeha Lodhi stated that the nomination did not reflect public sentiment, while journalist Mariana Baabar remarked that the country's image had taken a hit. Author Fatima Bhutto questioned whether the nomination would now be withdrawn, summing up the mood on social media. With mounting criticism across political and public spheres, pressure is building on Pakistan's government to formally withdraw Donald Trump's Nobel Peace Prize nomination.
