1. World War III 1
Running head: World War III
World War III: Fictitious Scare or Frightening Possibility?
Mario Fernando Miralles II
ISS 3130 - Fundamentals of National Security
Professor Yvette Wooley

2. World War III 2
Abstract
This term paper questions the likeliness of another world war. It covers some of the strategic
moves by the key nations of the international community, primarily focusing on Russia and
China among a few others. Analyzing their trends will identify whether the world is moving
closer or further away from another major war or whether the possibility exists at all. The paper
shows how these world issues affect US national security. It also mentions the course of action
taken by the US and it concludes with my own personal judgement of whether I believe that
World War III is more or less likely.

3. World War III 3
World War III: Fictitious Scare or Frightening Possibility?
Our generation is witnessing an incredible technological advancement in all aspects of
militaristic functions, the devastating power of nuclear weapons, and a host of complicated
security issues throughout the globe. Could these elements be the recipe needed for a disastrous
World War III? This paper examines three key topics: the situation in the Middle East, the
crucial South China Sea, and the effects of US Foreign Policy in these areas. This paper focuses
on the major countries involved within them such as Russia, China, Japan and others which are
largely shaping the direction of this conversation. It also analyzes how these various strategies
and events could bring about a potential third world war.
The Middle East: State and non-state actors
It could be said that the Middle East is considered to be the world’s battlefield. Although
some of the struggles taking place in that region are not the most conflicting1 they are certainly
among the most significant. The Middle East has always been a hotspot since the dawn of
civilization and there is an abundance of historical content and past transgressions available to
justify all of the ongoing conflicts. However, most analysts would agree that the US invasion of
Iraq in 2003 in response to the terrorist attacks of September 2001 has been the most significant
event in development of the current mess in the Middle East. The toppling of Iraqi dictator,
Saddam Hussein, created a power vacuum in the region which strengthened Iranian influence
and the rise of non-state actors such as ISIS, Al-Nusra, and other forces.
1
Countries like South Sudan, Somalia, Sudan, the Central African Republic, the Democratic Republic of
Congo, North Korea, Nigeria and Russia are among the most conflicted countries in the world at the
moment. Most of these countries are from the African continent. Although these conflicts differ, a
majority of them are due to civil warfare and weak governmental structures.

4. World War III 4
In retrospect, many (including President Barack Obama) have concluded that the US
invasion had many unintended consequences. “[ISIS] is a direct outgrowth of Al Qaeda in Iraq
that grew out of our invasion, which is an example of unintended consequences” (Obama as cited
in Hussain, 2015). Because of the instability of the region, many state actors have involved
themselves in sorting out this mess. The spillover caused by the Syrian civil war of 2011 has also
pushed neighboring countries into action by de facto such as Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq. Yet,
other major countries have taken sides and have involved themselves in the matter; most notably
Russia and North Korea. There have also been talks about China and Cuba potentially joining in
on the action although Cuba denies recent reports indicating that they sent 300 troops into Syria
(Trotta, 2015).
The impact of these actors
There’s no denying the role that the United States played in disrupting the status quo of
the Middle East. Prior to the Persian Gulf War of 1991, Iraq fielded the 5th largest army in the
world (Border & Jehl, 1990). It maintained a unified foundation within its borders and a tense
rivalry with Iran. Nowadays, its military and governmental power is weak, its country is being
overrun by rebel factions and it has had no choice but to latch onto Iran as a result of US
withdrawal in 2011 by the Obama administration (Montopoli, 2011). This withdrawal left the
country weak and prompted the rise of ISIS, an extremist militant group keen on establishing a
caliphate by taking over cities in Iraq and Syria.
Syria and Iraq’s weakness has created new opportunities for major players to enter into
these conflicts. The United States and its allies fight in the hopes of establishing their own
version of democracy in the region and to rid the world of terrorist group. On the other hand,
Russia and its allies are pursuing a different strategy. They are in full support of Syria’s

5. World War III 5
President, Bashir al-Assad (a contradiction to US foreign policy), and claim to be fighting ISIS
and other extremist groups as well with their bombing campaigns (Vinograd, 2015). Western
powers view Russia’s recent engagement more as a threat than as a useful resource; this could
further complicate an already complicated situation.
Turkey and the NATO factor
A country that could trigger a spark to a possible World War III is Turkey. Turkey has
been fighting a major corruption scandal since 2013 when top officials in the Turkish
government were involved in money laundering and other criminal activities. This sort of
misconduct has produced distrust from its citizens. On October 2015, Turkey’s capital city of
Ankara suffered the deadliest terror attack in the country’s history when two explosions killed an
estimated 95 people and wounded hundreds more (Fraser, 2015). Although many blame ISIS or
the Kurdish separatist group known as the PPK, many Turks believe that these bombings were
caused by their own Turkish government.
Coupled with this current instability is the threat of a showdown with Russia. There have
been recent reports that Russia has jeopardized its relations with Turkey. Russia has bombed
rebels backed by the Turkish government and they have also violated Turkey’s airspace
(Johnson, 2015). Turkey is a member of NATO and as stated in Article 5 of the Treaty “an attack
against one Ally is considered as an attack against all Allies” (NATO 1949). Should a
miscalculated Russian missile find its way into Turkish borders it could certainly fuel the start of
World War III.
South China Sea: Maritime disputes
The geopolitical positioning and proximity of Japan and China in the South China Sea is
a worrisome place of international interest. Disputes over contested territories and overlapping

6. World War III 6
jurisdiction, most notably the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands, have created some intricate conflicts in
the area. Japan’s Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, explained that “the sources of instability include
not only the threat of weapons of mass destruction, but also – and more immediately – efforts to
alter the territorial status quo through force or coercion. And those efforts are taking place
largely at sea” (2014). China recently advanced a plan to begin creating artificial lands in this
region and to settle troops on these islands which has raised numerous concerns.
This recent aggression by China could ultimately lead to what is known as an air defense
identification zone (ADIZ) which would impose limitations on the movements of air and
maritime activities. In a worst case scenario, this strategy would backfire in a dangerous way.
Japan has already enhanced its association with countries like the Philippines, Vietnam, and
Australia in order to send a message. According to an article in Reuters, Japan’s collaboration
with these countries would include the building and strengthening of position in the area,
advisement on medical issues, and naval exercises with the various countries (Kelly & Kubo
2015).
Capabilities buildup
Analysts looking at the situation assess that China may have a major advantage over
Japan in the areas of cyber security and ballistic missiles. China has tried to access Japan’s
servers and websites and has also pursued the capability to gain leverage in this regard against
the United States (Bush, 827-828). China’s population size and productivity also offers the
nation an enormous advantage. The CIA World Factbook states that China is “the world leader in
gross value of industrial output.” This could allow China to quickly mass-produce weapons like
cruise and land missiles (well within Japan’s range) with relative ease.

7. World War III 7
This capabilities race will ensue due to the general mistrust from both sides. Although the
growing conditions of world globalization and economic interdependence has somewhat deterred
an escalation of the situation, analysts believe that tensions would rise should an economic
downturn occur. China has recently experienced an economic slowdown which has been at its
lowest rate since 2009 and is below Beijing’s official target (Peston, 2015). The international
community may expect a political or militaristic buildup around the South China Sea should
these trends continue.
US protection and the Japanese Constitution
Of course, China must be wary of the US presence lurking in the area. “The Obama
administration has authorized the US Pacific Command to send warships into the disputed South
China Sea, and China is threatening to confront the naval presence as part of an aggressive
buildup in the region” (Gertz, 2015). The US also has a firm agreement with Japan as part of
Article 5 of the US-Japan mutual security treaty. The treaty ensures that the United States will
rush to the aid of Japan should an external attack occur within Japanese territories:
“Each Party recognizes that an armed attack against either Party in the territories under
the administration of Japan would be dangerous to its own peace and safety and declares
that it would act to meet the common danger in accordance with its constitutional
provisions and processes.” (Bush 3543-3545)
The United States: Effects of US Foreign Policy
At this moment, the role of the US as the current unipolar hegemonic power has
influenced its foreign policy initiatives to act as the policeman of the world. This begs the
question of whether America’s strong involvement is preventing or enticing a third world war.
Many view America’s policies as interventionist and as a threat to the sovereignty of affected

8. World War III 8
nation-states. Others see fervent US involvement as a moral responsibility to enforce justice and
provide security. The US agenda has generally gone unchallenged; yet, could recent action by
Russia in the Middle East and China’s growing international role abroad force the US to rethink
its strategy?
Since the end of the Cold War, America has been the primary actor of most major
military operations in the Middle East. After the Persian Gulf War, the toppling of Hussein and
Qaddafi and now the crises in Syria are directly linked to America’s militaristic endeavors as a
result of its general War on Terrorism and dangerous weapons. Additionally, the Obama
administration has been emphasizing on its “Pivot to Asia” a move that would shift the focus of
US interest from the Middle East towards Asia (Schiavenza, 2013). All of this meddling has
been met with extreme opposition. The possibility exists of further anti-American sentiment
from countries like China should the US attempt to determine the complicated situations in the
region.
Dangers towards US national security
How would US interventionism affect its own national security? The biggest threat to
national security is undoubtedly the use of weapons of mass destruction. Nuclear weapons pose
the biggest threat which, as of today, there are nine countries in possession of such devastating
technology: the US, France, China, the UK, Pakistan, India, Israel, and North Korea for a
combined 16,300 nuclear weapons (Friedman, 2012). Among those, Russia, China, and North
Korea could pose a slight danger although the chances of an attack would seem mostly unlikely.
Yet, with the continuous desire of ambitious countries to pursue nuclear capabilities, it would be
imperative for the US to monitor this issue closer than any other.

9. World War III 9
Could a nuclear capable US adversary like Iran, Venezuela, or Cuba pose a significant
threat? There’s no doubt that for the sake of proximity some absolutely would and the closer the
country the more likely the chance a war could occur. There’s also the chance that a country may
strike a US ally which could risk the start of another world war as was presented in the section
regarding NATO forces. National security threats are not just limited to physical forces. The rise
of cyber-attacks presents a new challenge in homeland protection as well.
Continue or re-evaluate?
Threats could surface from all places which were showcased famously by the actions of
Edward Snowden and his leaks of sensitive US information. External threats, such as those by
hackers from China, have initiated a new frontier in security concerns. Could a revealed US
secret be so offensive or damaging enough as to initiate a world war? Many analysts have
pondered as to whether the US may need to re-think its national security strategy. Even the US
Director of National Intelligence, James R. Clapper, has chosen to take the intelligence
community on a new path of transparency and improved communication.
There will always be an ongoing debate about whether the US should do more or less
around the world. It is always a topic of national debate but it seems as though the general public
has shown some war weariness. Most Americans would like to see the US pull back from its
many conflicts around the world. The question then becomes, how much should the US remove
itself from the conflicts, if at all? And, would a reduction in US involvement reduce conflict or
pave the way for US adversaries to further interject instead?
Conclusion
The dangers of another world war are everywhere. Some analysts would argue that
unwanted US presence around the world further exacerbates world issues. This paper shows the

10. World War III 10
various ways in which major state actors such as the US, Russia, and China has a significant role
to play in whether World War III could be looming. As was seen in the start of World War I, it
only takes one trigger event to set the cogs of war in motion. While World War III may seem
hypothetical and unrealistic, any one of these events discussed may turn this into a dangerous
reality at any moment’s notice. There will never be a definitive answer on the likeliness of World
War III unless it happens. But a majority of analysts agree that if countries continue to prod at
dangerous situations, such as those explained in this paper, the likeliness of another world war
would be inevitable.

11. World War III 11
References
Abe, Shinzo (2014). Securing the Rule of Law at Sea. Project Syndicate. Retrieved from:
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/shinzo-abe-appeals-to-asia-pacific-
leaders-to-adhere-to-agreed-principles-in-resolving-maritime-disputes.
Broder, J. & Jehl, D. (1990). Iraqi Army: World’s 5th Largest but Full of Vital Weaknesses:
Military: It will soon be even larger. But its senior staff is full of incompetents and only a
third of its troops are experienced. LA Times. Retrieved from:
http://articles.latimes.com/1990-08-13/news/mn-465_1_iraqi-army
Bush, Richard C (2010). The Perils of Proximity: China-Japan Security Relations. Kindle
Edition.
CIA.gov: The World Factbook. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/resources/the-world-
factbook.
Fraser, Suzan (2015). Suicide Bombings Kill 95 People at Ankara Peace Rally. ABC News.
Retrieved from: http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/reports-20-killed-turkish-
capital-bomb-attack-34386194
Friedman, Howard S. (2012). 9 Countries In the Nuclear Weapons Club. Huffington Post.
Retrieved from: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/howard-steven-friedman/countries-with-
nuclear-weapons_b_1189632.html
Gertz, Bill (2015). The looming military showdown in the South China Sea: Gertz. Asia Times.
Retreived from: http://atimes.com/2015/10/the-looming-military-showdown-in-the-south-
china-sea-gertz/

12. World War III 12
Hussain, Dilly (2015). ISIS: The “unintended consequences” of the US-led war on Iraq. Foreign
Policy Journal. Retrieved from: http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2015/03/23/isis-
the-unintended-consequences-of-the-us-led-war-on-iraq/
Johnson, Keith (2015). Turkey Slams Russia for Syria Attacks, Warns Could Severe Energy
Ties. Foreign Policy. Retrieved from: http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/10/08/turkey-slams-
russia-for-syria-attacks-warns-could-sever-energy-ties-erdogan-putin-turkish-stream/
Kelly, Tim and Nobuhiro Kubo (2015). Testing Beijing, Japan eyes growing role in South China
Sea security. Reuters. http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/11/us-japan-southchinasea-
idUSKBN0M62B920150311.
Montopoli, Brian (2011). Obama announces end of Iraq war, troops to return home by year end.
CBS News. Retrieved from: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-announces-end-of-
iraq-war-troops-to-return-home-by-year-end/
NATO (1949). Collective defence. Retrieved from:
http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_110496.htm
Peston, Robert (2015). China’s economic growth slows to 6.9%. BBC News. Retrieved from:
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-34536052
Schiavena, Matt (2013). What Exactly Does It Mean That the U.S. Is Pivoting to Asia? And Will
It Last? The Atlantic. Retrieved from:
http://www.theatlantic.com/china/archive/2013/04/what-exactly-does-it-mean-that-the-
us-is-pivoting-to-asia/274936/
Trotta, Daniel (2015). Cuba denies it has sent troops to Syria to help Assad. Reuters. Retrieved
from: http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/18/us-mideast-crisis-cuba-
idUSKCN0SC00D20151018

13. World War III 13
Vinograd, Cassandra (2015). Syria War: Russia Insists Its Warplanes Are Bombing ISIS Targets.
NBC News. Retrieved from: http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/isis-terror/syria-war-
russia-insists-its-warplanes-are-bombing-isis-targets-n436736