Are we sleep walking towards WW3 -- World War III Scenarios

Are we sleepwalking towards a conflict that will alter the world as we know it. "History doesn't repeat but it does rhyme." That quote is often attributed to the great American writer Mark Twain, but its sentiment speaks to us through the ages. History can appear as inevitable even as we fail to see it. The French diplomat and political scientist, Alexis de Tocqueville, said of the French Revolution: "Never was any such event, stemming from factors so far back in the past, so inevitable and yet so completely unseen." In a new century, simmering tensions and geo-strategic alliances would tip the world into all-out war. Historian Christopher Clarke's book Sleepwalkers reveals how the assassination of Habsburg heir, Archduke Franz Ferdinand, on June 28 1914 in Sarajevo triggered a domino effect that pitted the reigning global power Britain against the rising Germany. The world thought it couldn't happen — Germany and Britain were each other's single biggest trading partners; the royal families were blood relatives — yet it did. How? political leaders become hostage to events. "Causes trawled from the length and breadth of Europe's pre-war decades are piled like weights on the scale until it tilts from probability to inevitability," he wrote. This is written in Clark's book where he details how events then mirror events now. history might yet again repeat itself in ways no one could predict. Founding dean of the Harvard University Kennedy School, Graham Allison, fears the world is lurching towards conflict unseen since World War II. He puts his case in a new book, Destined for War: Can America and China escape Thucydides' Trap? Thucydides? He was the Greek Historian whose writings about war 2,000 years ago resonate still. "It was the rise of Athens and the fear this instilled in Sparta that made war inevitable," he writes. Then it was Athens-Sparta. In 1914 it was Germany-Great Britain and now China-United States. "As far ahead as the eye can see, the defining question about global order is whether China and the US can escape Thucydides's trap. Most contests that fit this pattern have ended badly," Allison writes. Any clash between the US and China is potentially catastrophic, but as much as we may try to wish it away, right now military strategists in Beijing and Washington are preparing for just an eventuality. Global think tank the Rand Corporation prepared a report in 2015 for the American military, its title could not have been more direct — War with China: Thinking Through the Unthinkable. It concluded that China would suffer greater casualties than the US if war was to break out now. However, it cautioned, that as China's military muscle increased so would the prospect of a prolonged destructive war. Where would such a conflict spark? The entire Asia region is a tinderbox. The faultlines are many: India-Pakistan, North and South Korea, China-Japan. In Asia there are many unknowables. Who is prepared to say for certain, that Kim Jong-un will not launch a nuclear strike? Would a downed plane in the South China Sea push China and the US over the brink? Would an attack in Kashmir bring the nuclear armed stand-off between India and Pakistan to the brink? What would happen in Taiwan declared independence? What's to stop any of this happening? As Mr Auslan writes: "Risk that should be falling is instead rising. As Asia's nations become wealthier and have more resources to devote to their militaries, they seem less interested in avoiding confrontation." Wars come not from love/hate, but from a chain of unpredictable events that fall like dominoes. No power really wanted to start a world war in the past. The challengers just kept pushing their luck, until the defenders had it enough and replied in a way things escalated. In 1914, not many in the world really cared about a Bosnian separatist killing some royal dude from Austria. In the past, such incidents have led to lot smaller conflicts - usually just diplomatic spats. However, in that particular case the result went beyond just angry words & diplomatic heat, with people from every continent pulled into a tussle. So let's all imagine a possible World War 3 scenario : Let's assume the year 2030, by then China is the world's largest economy, with US in second, followed closely by India in third. China might then have a large domestic consumption requiring less export dependence. The fairly wealthy domestic population would also demand a much more important role as the "Middle Kingdom". Since China depends less on global trade for its economic growth, its leaders would be bolder in carving a place for itself & be more assertive - even more than America is now. In the meanwhile, India might grow to be a more important economy for world trade - as it needs exports far more to pull people out of poverty. In general, India is following the path of China with a delay of 15-20 years. Sort of, India becomes China, China becomes USA and USA becomes UK. Indo-Pakistan nuclear conflict . In that world, let's say a splinter army group within Pakistan smuggles a nuclear bomb and explodes it in India. Pakistan is the only nuclear power with a shaky government and that is where a rogue bomb can originate. But, India might not wait to ascertain if it is some rogue army group who did it or if it was the government of Pakistan. The retaliation would be quick and India would shower with nuclear warheads. There would also be a domestic pressure for a full scale invasion. Just like what happened in World War 1, when Austria declared war on Serbia after its Archduke was assassinated by terrorists. This would alarm China and would quickly bring China into the game. With India, China and Pakistan at war, it already involves nearly half the world’s population. China might also be able to pull its "string of pearls" - including Nepal and Sri Lanka to choke India. As India starts choking and unable to completely fight off China, it would send emissaries to US, Japan and Europe, threatening to use nuclear weapons on China if they don't help through conventional means. While Israel did help India in the previous Indo-Pak wars, the Indo-Israeli relationship has become far more stronger and it is possible for Israel to take an even more overt stance, especially if some other Islamic nation joins Pakistan. With 3 of the world top 4 largest armies joined in war and more than a quarter of the world trade & economy threatened, the rest of the world would have to join in. India has a very strategic location in the important Indian Ocean through which a large chunk of world trade moves .This rally does not play much in world’s politics: and an ocean very critical to world history - everything from founding of religions to discovery of new continents. Not allowing China to dominate the Indian Ocean is important for both the USA and Japan. It might not be in the interest of the world's second and fourth largest economies to let India sink or start a nuclear Mutual assured destruction with China. This could bring USA and Japan on board. Especially if Japan continues to grow the presently warming relationships for the next 20 years, it could be more assertive in East Asia. There might also be newer technology involving missile defense systems etc that might partly remove the fear of nuclear weapons. At the start, the outside powers might be involved in a light way, but if USA starts goading Taiwan to make use of the opportunity to declare freedom [freedom from what?] or lets the Philippines/Vietnam in making a move in the troubled South China sea, things could get escalated quite quickly. Or the local opinion in China might force the leaders to use the opportunity to capture Taiwan or punish Japan, for their hidden alliance with India. During World War 1 & World War 2, escalations happened from unexpected quarters. Japan, US and India have already been some ground work on this. South China Sea Dispute: US, Japan, India To Hold War Games Near Disputed South China Sea and Why America, India and Japan are Playing War Games at Sea . Triple alliance vs Triple entente With USA and Japan on board, Russia might be forced to reluctantly take a side, even if it would be loathe to fight India. It would be like Italy during the World Wars, but eventually picking China over India. By then, Russia might also be selling more arms to Pakistan/China than to India [which might be buying more from USA or producing at home]. Russian presence behind China/Pakistan, would make US even more assertive in backing India. Thus, it will be the triple alliance of Russia-China-Pakistan on one side and USA-Japan-India on the other side. Just like in the previous world wars, you might be fighting a side with which you had traded for a long time. Just like in World War 1, the India-Pakistan encounter would be a triggering encounter in a mesh of alliances built by the world's two largest economies. Like Germany of then, China is quite superior [especially on land] & might go a little bit on its own. Like UK of early 20th century, USA could be a declining power, but one with a formidable navy. Each side would have multiple nuclear weapon powers and an array of dazzling new technologies, providing quite a balance , leading each side to think they could win . Does India/Pakistan even matter ? This is a valid question. If the war is local and limited to just these two states, probably it might not impact the world much. However, once things go nuclear and bigger powers step in, it gets out of control. That's what happened in the previous world wars. Do you think the US cared about Serbia in 1914 and Poland in 1939? No. They were not even in the radar of US government, let alone the American public. But, 2 years later, US was embroiled in their biggest wars in a continent they never wanted to interfere in. In 1914, US public opinion was evenly divided between England and Germany. In the 1930s, US was deeply isolationist. Still, in both cases the US put its might with the side fighting Germany. Another mistake we make is that just because common voters don't know/care doesn't mean the same for geopolitics. How many common Americans knew anything about Korea, Vietnam or Iraq before the US got into some of its messiest wars? Those countries themselves were less important - what was important is a much bigger power game. In the 1960s, the US almost destroyed the world over an island - Cuba - that most Americans have never ever seen to be fair, Soviet nuclear weapons a few miles from Miami is not just a fight “over an island”. India-Pakistan are not any less relevant than Vietnam, Korea and Cuba - that all threatened a World War 3. Especially with Pakistan's large arsenal of nuclear weapons whose safety is a big question mark, escalation is a possibility. Reasons why this might never happen: US appears to track Pakistan's nuclear weapons & could secure them if they are at the risk of getting used by a rogue group within the army. China has historically avoided getting into alliances and conflicts. USA/Japan might not like to face head on with China especially with nuclear Mutual assured destruction MAD. The toothless UN might intervene with more punitive actions against the first user of nuclear weapons. Other candidates: Ukraine-Russia-West: Less likely because, there are no major powers immediately bordering Ukraine. Also, unless China throws in the hat or a nuclear Mutual assured destruction is in activation, the conflict would involve less only about 10% of humanity - not necessarily world war. Islam vs West/Rest : This is the classic clash of civilizations. It is less likely because nationalism is in general stronger than religion and the individual Islamic nations might not unify against the outside power. Also, none of them have a world class navy or air-force, letting the conflict be easily contained in one region. North Korea vs Japan/South Korea: The leader ruling North Korea might be trigger happy. However, if he uses the n-weapon, nobody in the world including China , would come to his aid. Without n-bomb, it will be toast by Japan alone without a need for a widespread war. So let's us know in the comment section below what you think ! is a World War 3 possible , plausible , imminent , or can be all avoided !