THE NEXT WORLD WAR: NOT NEAR, BUT NOT SO FAR
Abstract
The unfolding scenarios in the international system require some interrogation. The ominous threats of nuclear weapons by competing and contending powers, both major and global, give the system a complex character at a time it is relapsing into imminent anarchy. In East Asia, the crisis between China and Taiwan is experiencing massive troop and armament deployment. Also, the sticky situation between North Korea and South Korea has witnessed series of missile tests by North Korea to which South Korea has not responded other than to swagger with the U.S. in joint military drills. It is evident that the provocations are calculated. In South Asia, Iran looks unstoppable with its uranium development. The recent arms deal between North Korea and Russia was also meant to expand the scope of threat. The Russian-Ukrainian war in Eastern Europe can boast of deployment of different kinds of technological equipment and gadgets of war. This study is designed to provide theoretical understanding to these build-ups via empirical findings in order to establish their potential for escalatory tendencies into an all-out war of global proportion. The study adopts nuclear weapons and international conflict theory as its theoretical framework. There is very scarce literature on the endangerment of nuclear symmetries compelled by the overwhelming actions and desires of individual states to also develop their own nuclear capabilities like others. This paper therefore attempts a theoretical contextualization of nuclear weapons symmetries and asymmetries and the psychological and political maturity of the countries’ leaderships not to allow this grandstanding to undermine and imperil global peace.
Downloads
References
Beardsley, K., & Asal, V. (2009). Nuclear weapons as shields. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 26(3), 235-255.
Bueno de Mesquita, B., & Riker, W. H. (1982). An assessment of the merits of selective nuclear proliferation. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 26(2), 283-306.
Dina, E., & Ariane, T. (2018). Triple axis: Iran’s relations with Russia and China. Croydon, London: I.B. Tauris Co. Ltd.
Evans, G., & Newnham, J. (1998). Dictionary of international relations. London: Penguin.
Hal, B. (2023, August 3). How would China take over Taiwan? One of these strategies. http://www.ael.org. Retrieved December 6, 2023.
Jervis, R. (1989). The meaning of the nuclear revolution: Statecraft and the prospect of Armageddon. New York: Cornell University Press.
Josh, P., Alex, S., & Brad, L. (2023). Medvedev says Russia could use nuclear weapons if Ukraine’s fight back succeeds in latest threats. CNN, 86-88.
Kali, R. (2023). What is the Iran nuclear deal? http://www.cfr.org.
Karen, G. (2023, December 30). China hawk says Beijing could attack Taiwan by 2024. Bringing war to the West; CNBC News.
McFaul, M. (2018). The inside story of Russia and America. UK: Penguin Books.
North Korea crisis. (2023, December 6). Center for Preventive Action. http://www.cfr.org. Retrieved December 14, 2023.
Nuclear risk during the Russian invasion of Ukraine. (n.d.). http://wikipedia.org. Retrieved December 6, 2023.
Osgood, R. E., & Tucker, R. W. (1967). Force, order, and justice. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Robinson, K. (2023). What is the Iran nuclear deal? Council on Foreign Relations. https://www.ballotpedia.org. Retrieved February 4, 2024.
Sagan, S. D., & Waltz, K. N. (1995). The spread of nuclear weapons. New York: W.W. Norton.
Thomas, D. (2023). Errand war: An observer’s perspective on the Russian-Ukrainian war. The International Journal of Humanities and Social Studies, 11(3), 123-131.
Waltz, K. N. (1990). Nuclear myths and political realities. American Political Science Review, 84(3), 44-79.
Weuver, G. (2023). The role of nuclear weapons in a Taiwan crisis. Washington, U.S: Atlantic Council Publication.
Whiting, A. (1998). Chinese foreign policy: Retrospect and prospect. In S. S. Kim (Ed.), China and the world (4th ed.). Boulder and Oxford: Westview Press.
William, R. T. (Ed.). (2018). Empirical international relations theory. Madison, New York: Oxford University Press.
World Politics Review. (n.d.). How Iran is deploying its drone program at home and abroad: Middle East. North Africa. https://www.worldpoliticsreview.com. Retrieved July 7, 2017.
Wu, G. (2004). Passion, politics, and politicians: Beijing between Taipei and Washington. The Pacific Review, 17(2), 179-198.
Dr. Dapo Thomas is a senior lecturer in the Department of History and International Studies, Faculty of Arts, Lagos State University, Lagos, Nigeria. He is the author of the book The Political Economy of Nigeria-United States Relations, published in 2018, which explores the economics and politics of power.
Dr. Thomas specializes in relations between the United States and Global South countries, particularly Nigeria. He has authored incisive and engaging articles in several international and reputable journals. Some of these articles include: Errand War: An Observer's Perspective on the Russian-Ukrainian War, Russia's War Maxim and Paranoid Parallelism, The Nigerian Civil War (1967-1970): A Theoretical Resurrection, Nigerian Civil War (1967-1970): New Theories, Old Problems, Fresh Crises, The Evolution of the Electoral Process and the Dramatics of Bene-Clientelism in Nigeria, When the Past is Dead, What is History Doing Alive?, A Road Metaphor on Nigeria’s Foreign Policy and Corruption War, and Trial Carnivals and Molebi Theory, among others.
Dr. Thomas is a fellow of the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs, a member of the Association of Foreign Relations Practitioners of Nigeria, and also a member of the Editorial Board of the Journal of International Relations, International Law, and Diplomacy.
Author(s) and co-author(s) jointly and severally represent and warrant that the Article is original with the author(s) and does not infringe any copyright or violate any other right of any third parties, and that the Article has not been published elsewhere. Author(s) agree to the terms that the GPH Journal will have the full right to remove the published article on any misconduct found in the published article.
