Is The Next World War Already Almost Upon Us?

By Robert Woodward – The 20th century was won by the United States at the end of the last world war. The 21st may be lost by it. Not because America is weak in any simple sense — it remains militarily unmatched, technologically formidable and culturally influential — but because the world that made American supremacy possible is disappearing.

Many of the more serious media outlets, including The Financial Times, have unambiguously stated that America’s “unipolar moment” has ended, and this is undoubtedly correct. But the deeper danger is not simply that US power is fading, it is that the world has entered another great transition of empire, technology, demography and ideology – the kind of transition that has repeatedly ended in war historically.

Over the last 200 years, the world has not been shaped by peace, but by the violent reordering of power. The British Empire rose from the Industrial Revolution, naval dominance and finance. Imperial Germany rose later, armed by steel, chemistry, railways and scientific industry. The Russian Empire collapsed into Soviet power. Japan became the first Asian industrial military challenger. The United States rose from continental scale, industrial capacity and technological superiority. Each shift destabilised the old order – each produced fear, fear produced alliances, alliances produced arms races, and arms races produced war.

The First World War was not an accident in the narrow sense. It was the explosion of a power system that had become too unstable to manage. Britain was still the imperial incumbent. But Germany was the industrial challenger, and Russia was vast but brittle. All this as the Austria-Hungary and Ottoman Empire were decaying. The United States was already becoming the decisive economic power, but had not yet accepted the role. An assassination at Sarajevo lit the match, but the firewood had been stacked for decades.

The Second World War was the unfinished business of the first. The empires weakened in 1918 collapsed fully after 1945. Britain and France survived as states but not as imperial masters. Germany and Japan were destroyed and rebuilt under American power. And as the Soviet Union became the rival pole, Europe, once the centre of world history, became the front line of the Cold War.

Then, in 1991, the Soviet Union fell. America appeared to have won everything. Liberal democracy, free markets, globalisation and US military reach seemed to be the final architecture of history. But that triumph contained the seeds of its own undoing.

China was invited into the world economy. Western corporations then exported production, and consumers enjoyed their cheap goods. Politicians celebrated globalisation as if it were a moral law rather than a strategic bargain, in which China used the bargain more intelligently than the West understood. It became the workshop of the world, then the creditor of the world, then the infrastructure builder of the world, and now it is slowly becoming the technological and military challenger to the world’s dominant power.

 

Great powers do not decline gracefully. Rising powers do not wait patiently forever.

 

On purchasing-power measures, China is already larger than the United States. India is rising behind it. The old Atlantic core – Europe and North America still has wealth, institutions and military capacity, but it no longer has demographic momentum. China itself is ageing fast, but India, Africa and parts of Asia are where the human future is expanding. The West faces ageing populations, lower birth rates, fiscal pressure and political exhaustion. That is not merely a social problem. It is a strategic one.

Great powers do not decline gracefully. Rising powers do not wait patiently forever. The most dangerous moment is often not when the challenger is weak, nor when it has already won, but when it believes time may no longer be on its side. Germany before 1914 feared Russia’s future strength. Japan before 1941 feared encirclement and resource denial. Russia today fears permanent strategic shrinkage. China may eventually fear demographic decline, technological containment and maritime encirclement by US alliances.

That is why the wars already burning matter so much.

Ukraine is not only a regional war. It is a test of whether borders can be changed by force in Europe. It is also a test of Western endurance. Russia has turned its economy towards war, absorbed sanctions, deepened ties with China, Iran and North Korea, and forced Europe to rearm. Whether Russia wins or loses, Europe has already changed. The post-Cold War assumption that commerce would tame geopolitics is dead.

The Middle East is another fault line in the same global fracture. The Gaza war, Iran’s regional network, Red Sea disruption, Israeli security doctrine, the Gulf hedging between America and China, and the vulnerability of energy routes all show how quickly local wars can become global systemic shocks. The Middle East remains where religion, oil, empire, nationalism and great-power rivalry overlap. That made it dangerous in the 20th century – it still is.

Then there is Taiwan. If Ukraine is the test of borders in Europe, Taiwan is the test of American credibility in Asia. China sees reunification as a historic mission. The United States sees Taiwan as central to the balance of power in the Pacific and to the semiconductor supply chain. Japan, South Korea, Australia, the Philippines and India all watch the same map with growing anxiety. A blockade, accident, cyberattack or naval collision could become the Sarajevo of the digital age.

This does not mean another world war is certain. Nuclear weapons impose caution. Global supply chains create mutual vulnerability, and populations do not generally want great wars. Modern governments are expected to deliver prosperity, not heroic sacrifice. Yet these restraints are weakening. Economic interdependence did not stop 1914, and rational calculation did not stop 1939. The belief that war would be too costly has often proved true only after the war began.

 

Cyberwar, drones, satellites, artificial intelligence and autonomous weapons are lowering the threshold for confrontation

 

The new arms race is already visible. Global military spending has reached record levels. The United States still spends far more than China, but China’s military modernisation is relentless. Russia is spending at levels that reveal a state reorganised around conflict. Europe is rearming. India is expanding its defence capacity. The Middle East remains heavily armed. Meanwhile, cyberwar, drones, satellites, artificial intelligence and autonomous weapons are lowering the threshold for confrontation.

The ideological landscape is also darkening. Democracy is retreating. Authoritarian states have learned to use markets, technology and nationalism without liberalism. Western democracies, meanwhile, are weakened by inequality, distrust, populism, debt, culture war and degraded media systems. The old claim that liberal democracy would naturally spread now looks naïve. The question is no longer whether history has ended. It is whether liberal democracy can survive history’s return.

The deeper pattern is this: empire gives way to industry; industry gives way to technology; technology gives way to military advantage; military advantage gives way to overconfidence; overconfidence gives way to catastrophe.

Britain failed to understand that its empire could not indefinitely survive the rise of continental industry and American scale. Germany failed to understand that military brilliance could not compensate for strategic encirclement. Russia’s imperial system failed, then Soviet communism failed, and now Russian nationalism is trying to recover power by force. America failed to understand that turning China into the factory of the world would eventually produce a rival, not merely a market.

The world now resembles the years before 1914 more than the years after 1991. The result of Trump’s America is that there is no single global policeman and rivals are emerging. There are rival economic systems, rival technological blocs, rival currencies, rival narratives and rival military coalitions. There are declining powers, rising powers and wounded powers. There are leaders who use nationalism to cover domestic weakness and there are populations being told that humiliation must be reversed, just as there were in the 1930s.

The next global conflict may not begin with a formal declaration of war. It may begin with a blockade of Taiwan, a NATO-Russia clash in the Baltic or Black Sea, an unexpected escalation in the Middle East, a cyberattack on financial systems, a drone strike on energy infrastructure, or a miscalculation in the South China Sea. It may unfold as a chain of connected wars rather than one single battlefield. But that is precisely how world wars become world wars: local crises reveal the structure beneath them.

The uncomfortable conclusion is that the world is not drifting towards disorder. It is already there. China’s rise, America’s relative decline, India’s emergence, Russia’s revanchism, Middle Eastern instability, Western demographic weakness and the militarisation of new technologies are not separate stories. They are one story.

The 19th century created the empires, and the 20th century destroyed them with more than one world war. The 21st century is deciding what replaces the American order unless statesmen rediscover restraint, diplomacy and strategic imagination. The answer may be decided not in summits or markets, but in war, as history has repeatedly demonstrated.

 

 

 

---