WORLD TOWARDS WORLD WAR 3?
Fernando A.G. Alcoforado
PhD em Planejamento Territorial e Desenvolvimento Regional
Fernando Alcoforado*
This article aims to demonstrate that the world may be heading towards the 3rd World War as a result of the conflict that seems insoluble, bringing together, on the one hand, the United States and its western allies and, on the other, Russia, China and their allies. What makes the possibility of World War 3 increasingly likely is the current escalation of conflict between Russia, on the one hand, and the United States, NATO, and Ukraine, on the other. Furthermore, the United States is articulating the constitution of an Asia-Pacific NATO to militarily confront China. The world is heading towards the outbreak of the 3rd World War because the proliferation of wars interests US imperialism and its war industry, which are partners in order to achieve their objectives, the first, to maintain their world hegemony and, the second, to increase its profitability from the sale of weapons. With the wars and the consequent military expenditures, US imperialism seeks to maintain the growth of its economy and achieve its geopolitical objectives of maintaining its domination in the world and, in turn, the arms industry seeks to maximize its profits with the sale of weapons to US government and its allies. The threat of a new world war is also strengthened by the failure of the international system to ensure world peace.
The contribution of the war industry in the birth and expansion of US imperialism
The umbilical relationship between US imperialism and the arms industry began with US military spending in World War II, which was the main factor that contributed to pulling the US out of the economic depression that occurred with the crash of the New York Stock Exchange in 1929 and not civil spending on the New Deal, the economic program adopted by President Roosevelt. It should be noted that World War II (1939-45) was the process through which the United States emerged from economic stagnation after the New York Stock Exchange crash in 1929 to double its national wealth in the post-war period, asserting itself as a hegemonic power of the first order that it maintains until today. A deep relationship took place between the United States government and the American arms industry during World War II, when the United States became an imperialist power based on the permanent war industry and the military occupation of almost all countries with the installation of military bases around the world [1]. It is difficult to determine the actual number of US military bases in the world. The first reason is that there are confidential US military bases. It is not known exactly how many there are, nor where they are located. In addition, even publicly known bases undergo constant changes because many are activated and deactivated according to the interest of the moment. The most recent survey shows 742 US bases outside the United States, which include land and sea installations.
Figure 1 shows US military bases inside and outside the United States [10].
Figure 1- US military bases in the world
From the 2nd World War, the war and the economy based on the arms industry became the resources par excellence used by the US government to promote the expansion of US imperialism. Spending on the acquisition of weapons involves heavy credits that the US government will seek from the private financial system, which means that there is a close relationship between military spending and the increase in circulating speculative capital, establishing strong promiscuous political relationships between the great groups of finance capital, the arms industry and the US government. The expansion of military spending driven by the wars sponsored by US imperialism from the 2nd World War to the present has made the military-war sector stand out in the US economy as a whole.
The strengthening of US imperialism with the constitution of NATO
After the 2nd World War, US imperialism clashed in the Cold War with the former Soviet Union, when this country and the United States were indirectly fighting each other. There was no direct confrontation between them due to the risk of a destructive nuclear conflagration. In this period of the Cold War, the United States and its European allies united in the military plan to face the Soviet Union and its allies with the constitution of NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) in 1949 under the leadership of the United States. In turn, the Soviet Union formed a military alliance with the socialist countries creating the Warsaw Pact. Regarding NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) [7], it is important to note that it was created in the context of the Cold War, in 1949, with its main objective to contain the expansion of socialism in Western Europe. One of NATO's pillars is to guarantee the security of its member countries, which can occur diplomatically or with the use of military forces. NATO member countries provide part of their military contingent for eventual actions of this size, since the organization does not have its own military force.
Until the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1989, NATO had 16 countries: 1) Germany; 2) Belgium; 3) Canada; 4) Denmark; 5) Spain; 6) United States; 7) France; 8) Greece; 9) Holland; 10) Iceland; 11) Italy; 12) Luxembourg; 13) Norway; 14) Portugal; 15) Turkey; 16) United Kingdom. To meet the geopolitical interests of the United States and the arms industry, NATO expanded, after the end of the Soviet Union, attracting 14 more countries that were part of the socialist system of Eastern Europe, such as Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Montenegro, Poland, the Czech Republic and Romania. With the accession of these countries began the siege of Russia that would be completed with the incorporation of Ukraine to NATO (Figure 2).
Figure 2- The siege of Russia by NATO in Europe
It is worth noting that most of the operations carried out to date by NATO have been carried out in the Northern Hemisphere, such as in Afghanistan, Kosovo, North Africa, and the Middle East, among others. After 1990, NATO carried out the invasion of Iraq under the leadership of the United States. There was also a US-led NATO intervention in the Bosnian War that led to the dissolution of the former Yugoslavia in 1992. In addition to military cooperation between its member countries, NATO also contributes to the United Nations (UN) as its armed wing intervening in areas considered dangerous by the latter organization. In the 21st century, under the leadership of the United States, NATO has engaged in missions in Iraq (2004) and Afghanistan (2003), fought piracy in the Gulf of Aden and the Indian Ocean, in addition to carrying out missions during the Arab Spring, with the overthrow of the Gaddafi government in Libya in 2011 and the attempt to overthrow President Bashar El-Assad of Syria in 2013.
The Cold War, the conflict that was established between the United States and the Soviet Union, after the 2nd World War, and the creation of NATO became the new and continued impetus to the North American arms industry, contributing to the strengthening of the military-industrial complex. From the Korean War (1950) to the present day, US military expenditures amounted to unprecedented amounts. In addition to the Korean War, the United States launched the Vietnam War and, more recently, together with its European allies, five large-scale wars of aggression — those in Iraq, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Libya, and Syria — and in the process they profited from spoils such as oil resources, while the peoples of these countries suffered terribly from imperialist terror in all these wars of aggression. The most recent targets for the United States and its allies have been the attempt to overthrow the Assad regimes in Syria and the Ayatollahs in Iran.
The recent attempt to incorporate Ukraine into NATO would serve the geopolitical interests of the United States because it would complete the siege of Russia and, at the same time, of the American arms industry, which increased its arms sales even before the Russian invasion by strengthening the army Ukrainian with weapons and military training. Russia's invasion of Ukraine has further increased the supply of weapons to this country and to NATO countries to deal with a possible war with Russia. The strengthening of the Ukrainian army and the supply of weapons explain Ukraine's military resistance towards the Russian army during the invasion of the country. The US arms industry is making a lot of money from the war in Ukraine.
NATO's expansion into Europe to face Russia and the creation of an Asia-Pacific version of NATO to face China
There is no doubt that there is a geopolitical interest of the United States to encircle and weaken Russia, but another major interest in the conflict is of the arms industry because the existence of the conflict represents a greater volume of arms and ammunition sales. Recently, the US Congress voted on a bill called “Protect Ukraine” worth $500 million to supply Ukraine with weapons. The same is happening with other NATO member countries. Nearly all countries in the region are purchasing weapons, military equipment and ammunition from the US arms industry. The United States government and its arms industry are primarily responsible for the outbreak of a new world war because, in addition to promoting the siege of Russia in Europe with NATO, it is intending to build an Asia-Pacific version of NATO to face China. China denounced the creation of an Asia-Pacific version of NATO on the news.cgtn website [5].
It is quite evident the US military strategy of expanding NATO in Europe to encircle Russia and building a new Asia-Pacific version of NATO to fight China. This is because Russia and China constitute an obstacle to the world domination of the United States, respectively, from a military and economic point of view. The new Asia-Pacific version of NATO also appears to face China's defense system in Asia (Figure 3). The new Asia-Pacific version of NATO tends to intensify the US conflict with China in the same way that NATO does with Russia.?
Figure 3- China's defense system in Asia
The risk of the outbreak of the 3rd World War is placed as a real possibility of happening, including the use of nuclear weapons. Figure 4 presents the countries that have nuclear weapons [8].
Figure 4- Countries with nuclear weapons
It should be noted that, as of 2019, there are approximately 3,750 active nuclear warheads and 13,890 total nuclear warheads in the world [6]. There are currently 12,705 nuclear weapons belonging to nine countries: the United States, Russia, China, France, the United Kingdom, Pakistan, India, Israel and North Korea. Russia and the United States have 90% of the world's nuclear weapons. Together, all nuclear-armed NATO countries have 6,065 warheads, while Russia has 5,997.
领英推荐
Military spending as economic, geopolitical and imperialist support for the United States
It is no coincidence that the United States is one of the countries that benefit most economically from armed conflicts, as the largest arms exporters in the world are Americans. In addition to the sale of ammunition and weapons, the United States also monetizes with security contracts and military training, which makes many members of the US Congress understand wars as a machine that generates jobs and money. Peace, for the United States, is neither desired nor pursued by its governments because it could cost its economy dearly. The United States is the country with the most powerful army in the world because, in addition to having the third largest army in terms of active soldiers, it is also the one that invests the most in the armed forces [3]. The United States invests 740 billion dollars in the army, while China, the second largest investing country, has a budget of 178 billion dollars.
The United States also has the most advanced technology for combat and defense. Currently, Russia has the second most powerful military force in the world. Formed in 1992, after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the Russian army was one of the most invested in recent decades. Russia is also one of the few countries that produce its own military equipment, having the largest number of tanks and rocket projectors among all armies in the world. China has the largest army in the world by number of active soldiers. China is also the second most funded in the armed forces, behind only the United States. The great development of China in recent years makes experts project that the Chinese army will become even stronger in the coming decades.
Global military spending reached its highest level since the end of the Cold War in 2018, fueled by rising military spending by the United States and China, the world's two largest economies, according to figures released by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (Sipri) [2]. In 2018, the United States and China accounted for half of the world's military spending. This is the highest figure since 1988. The United States accounted for 36% of total global military spending, close to the combined spending of the next eight countries on the list, according to Sipri. China represents 14% of global investments and in the last ten years they grew by 83%. Since 2013, China has devoted 1.9% of its GDP to armaments. Saudi Arabia, India and France follow them. In sixth place is Russia, which, for the first time since 2006, is no longer part of the top five on the Sipri list. One of the reasons for the drop in Russian investments, verified since 2016, is the economic sanctions of the West due to the conflict with Ukraine, which increased its military expenditures by 21% compared to the previous year, spending 4.8 billion dollars. In seventh place is the United Kingdom. Germany comes in eighth place.
Figure 5 presents the highest military expenditures in the world by country [9].
Figure 5- The highest military expenditures in the world by country
In addition to serving the geopolitical interests of the United States, military spending has also become the means that the system began to resort to trying to prevent the outbreak of crises in the world capitalist system and avoid the loss of profitability in the non-war economy. Public indebtedness, with which military expenditures are associated, rose, making the United States the most heavily armed, but also most indebted, economy in the world. The North American capitalist economy became war-dependent [4]. Some argue that military spending is positive because it creates demand and creates employment. This is the first argument that is usually presented to explain the “positive” effect of the arms industry. Another argument is that government military orders stimulate well-paid jobs in the arms industry and in the state defense structure (administration, etc.) that result in purchases from the productive sector of the economy.
It can be said that, of all the imperialisms that have emerged throughout history, US imperialism has committed the greatest crimes against humanity for having promoted countless wars of aggression and for having sponsored regimes of terror such as military dictatorships deployed through coups d'état in Latin America in the 1960s and 1970s, including Brazil. With the support of local governments subordinate to their interests, the US government and its allies sponsored all possible acts of state terrorism, which include illegal arrests and detentions, torture, murders, among other actions. Thousands of people in Asia, Africa and Latin America have suffered from these acts of state terrorism. With 102 wars in its bellicose "curriculum", the United States is probably, in history, one of the countries most involved in military actions in the world that began with the annexation of land from Mexico to its territory.
The birth of the unified global empire under the leadership of the United States
A new event occurred in 1975 when all the imperialist countries were unified constituting the contemporary global unified empire represented by the G7, which is the group of the most industrialized countries in the world, composed of Germany, Canada, United States, France, Italy, Japan and the United Kingdom with the participation, also, of the European Union. Organizations such as the IMF, World Bank, WTO (World Trade Organization) and NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) work articulately with the member countries of the G7 aiming at achieving the objectives of unified global imperialism or global empire. In the Ukraine war, global unified imperialism or global empire is present with the united actions between the United States and its allies in the European Union to carry out economic sanctions against Russia and the supply of weapons to Ukraine.
The unity of action of the United States and the countries of the European Union makes it evident that a new world order is in force in the world with the global empire exercising world power under the leadership of the United States. The inter-imperialist contradictions responsible for the 1st and 2nd World War disappeared. All imperialist countries are united in constituting the unified imperialism or global empire that represents a concrete threat against world peace and against the sovereignty of all countries in the world because it is a single world power, without borders, above any capitalist power. From the above, it can be said that humanity is threatened with destruction by the warmongering rage of the global empire under the leadership of the United States. The chance of the outbreak of a new world war is very great. What to do in the face of this? Peace lovers around the world need to mobilize to prevent this catastrophic World War 3 scenario from taking place.
How to prevent the outbreak of World War 3
In order to definitively rule out new risks of the outbreak of the 3rd World War and to bring about peace on our planet, it is necessary that all peace-loving peoples and countries not aligned with the belligerents mobilize worldwide to oppose the new world order imposed by the global empire unified articulating in defense of a new international system capable of guaranteeing world peace. They should fight for the new international system to work based on a Planetary Social Contract democratically approved by all the peoples of the world. The Planetary Social Contract would be the Constitution of planet Earth that would govern the relations between countries, between human beings and between both and nature. For the elaboration of the Planetary Social Contract, there should be the convening of a World Constituent Assembly with the participation of representatives from all the countries of the world elected for this purpose. The Planetary Social Contract should establish the existence of a democratic world government, a democratic World Parliament and an International Supreme Court. This would be the way to avoid the empire of a single country or the domination of a group of countries over the others and the anarchy of many. This initiative would put pressure on the rulers of the belligerent countries and on their peoples to adhere to the new international system that defends world peace.
To ensure democratic practice and governance on planet Earth, world power should be exercised by the world Parliament that, in addition to electing the President of the world government, should draft and approve international laws based on the Planetary Social Contract. The world Parliament should be composed of a determined and equal number of democratically elected representatives of each country for this purpose. The President of the World Government should be elected with more than 50% of the votes of the World Parliament and will only exercise the command of the World Government as long as he has the support of the majority of the parliament. If, by a majority of the parliament, there is a need to replace the President of the World government this must be done. The world government must have an organizational structure capable of dealing with international relations, the military issue, the global economy, the global environment, the fight against organized crime, among other issues, to dialogue with the world Parliament and the countries that are part of the international system.
Parliamentarians should elect the governing body of the world Parliament, which would have an appropriate organizational structure. The International Supreme Court should be composed of high-level jurists from the world chosen by the world Parliament who would act for a determined time who would elect the President of the Court to fulfill a mandate for a determined time. The International Supreme Court should judge cases involving disputes between countries, crimes against humanity and against nature practiced by national States and by rulers in the light of the Planetary Social Contract, judge conflicts that exist between the world government and the world Parliament and act as guardian of the Planetary Social Contract. The World Government will not have its own Armed Forces and must rely on the support of the Armed Forces of the countries that would be summoned when necessary.
Therefore, with the new international system, the UN could be restructured and have its headquarters transferred from the United States to a peace-loving or of traditional neutrality country such as Switzerland. These are, therefore, the measures that should be adopted in the short term to definitively end wars in the world.
REFERENCES
1.????ROSSINI, Maria Clara. Quantas bases militares os Estados Unidos têm fora de seu território? Available on the website <https://super.abril.com.br/coluna/oraculo/quantas-bases-militares-os-estados-unidos-tem-fora-de-seu-territorio/>.
2.????DW. Gastos militares globais atingem maior nível em 30 anos. Available on the website <https://www.dw.com/pt-br/gastos-militares-globais-atingem-maior-n%C3%ADvel-em-30-anos/a-48531464>, 2019.
3.????JORNAL PORTUáRIO. Saiba quais s?o os 24 exércitos mais poderosos do mundo em 2022. Available on the website <https://jornalportuario.com.br/interna/economia-mudial/saiba-quais-sao-os-24-exercitos-mais-poderosos-do-mundo-em-2022#:~:text=For%C3%A7as%20da%20frota%20da%20marinha,mais%20investe%20nas%20for%C3%A7as%20armadas>.
4.????DANTAS, Gilson. O setor bélico norte-americano em sua condi??o de estímulo econ?mico: algumas notas para um debate contemporaneo. Available on the website <https://www.unicamp.br/cemarx/ANAIS%20IV%20COLOQUIO/comunica%E7%F5es/GT3/gt3m4c4.pdf>.
5.????NEWS.CGTN.China opposes attempts to build an 'Asia-Pacific version of NATO'. Available on the website <https://news.cgtn.com/news/2022-05-13/China-opposes-attempts-to-build-an-Asia-Pacific-version-of-NATO--1a0v2CxO34Y/index.html>.
6.????PODER 360. Rússia e EUA têm 90% das armas nucleares do mundo. Available on the website <https://www.poder360.com.br/europa-em-guerra/russia-e-eua-tem-90-das-armas-nucleares-do-mundo/>.
7.????ALCOFORADO, Fernando. The real cause of the war in Ukraine and the current wars in the world. Available on the website <https://www.academia.edu/72694048/THE_REAL_CAUSE_OF_THE_WAR_IN_UKRAINE_AND_THE_CURRENT_WARS_IN_THE_WORLD>.
8.????MALHEIRO, Jo?o. Armas nucleares. Quantas existem e quantos países as têm? Disponível no website <https://rr.sapo.pt/especial/mundo/2022/02/28/armas-nucleares-quantas-existem-e-quantos-paises-as-tem/274403/>, 2022.
9.????MELLO, Michele. Gasto militar mundial bate recorde e supera US$ 2 trilh?es em 2021, aponta relatório. Disponível no website <https://www.brasildefato.com.br/2022/04/25/gasto-militar-mundial-bate-recorde-e-supera-us-2-trilhoes-em-2021-aponta-relatorio>.
10. ALMEIDA, Jorge. Bases planetárias dos EUA: O império do terror. Disponível no website <https://www.oladooculto.com/noticias.php?id=250>.
* Fernando Alcoforado, 82, awarded the medal of Engineering Merit of the CONFEA / CREA System, member of the Bahia Academy of Education, the SBPC- Brazilian Society for the Progress of Science and IPB - Polytechnic Institute of Bahia, engineer and doctor in Territorial Planning and Regional Development from the University of Barcelona, university professor and consultant in the areas of strategic planning, business planning, regional planning, urban planning and energy systems, was Advisor to the Vice President of Engineering and Technology at LIGHT S.A. Electric power distribution company from Rio de Janeiro, Strategic Planning Coordinator of CEPED- Bahia Research and Development Center, Undersecretary of Energy of the State of Bahia, Secretary of Planning of Salvador, is author of the books Globaliza??o (Editora Nobel, S?o Paulo, 1997), De Collor a FHC- O Brasil e a Nova (Des)ordem Mundial (Editora Nobel, S?o Paulo, 1998), Um Projeto para o Brasil (Editora Nobel, S?o Paulo, 2000), Os condicionantes do desenvolvimento do Estado da Bahia (Tese de doutorado. Universidade de Barcelona,https://www.tesisenred.net/handle/10803/1944, 2003), Globaliza??o e Desenvolvimento (Editora Nobel, S?o Paulo, 2006), Bahia- Desenvolvimento do Século XVI ao Século XX e Objetivos Estratégicos na Era Contemporanea (EGBA, Salvador, 2008), The Necessary Conditions of the Economic and Social Development- The Case of the State of Bahia (VDM Verlag Dr. Müller Aktiengesellschaft & Co. KG, Saarbrücken, Germany, 2010), Aquecimento Global e Catástrofe Planetária (Viena- Editora e Gráfica, Santa Cruz do Rio Pardo, S?o Paulo, 2010), Amaz?nia Sustentável- Para o progresso do Brasil e combate ao aquecimento global (Viena- Editora e Gráfica, Santa Cruz do Rio Pardo, S?o Paulo, 2011), Os Fatores Condicionantes do Desenvolvimento Econ?mico e Social (Editora CRV, Curitiba, 2012), Energia no Mundo e no Brasil- Energia e Mudan?a Climática Catastrófica no Século XXI (Editora CRV, Curitiba, 2015), As Grandes Revolu??es Científicas, Econ?micas e Sociais que Mudaram o Mundo (Editora CRV, Curitiba, 2016), A Inven??o de um novo Brasil (Editora CRV, Curitiba, 2017),?Esquerda x Direita e a sua convergência (Associa??o Baiana de Imprensa, Salvador, 2018), Como inventar o futuro para mudar o mundo (Editora CRV, Curitiba, 2019) and A humanidade amea?ada e as estratégias para sua sobrevivência (Editora Dialética, S?o Paulo, 2021).