Has World War III Already Begun?
By: Rachel Marsden
While recently commemorating the World War I centenary at an Italian military 
cemetery, Pope Francis declared: "Even today, after the second failure of 
another world war, perhaps one can speak of a third war, one fought piecemeal, 
with crimes, massacres, destruction." The pope's observation begs the question: 
If World War III has already started, would we even know it? Or would it only be 
evident in the rearview mirror?
Ask 10 people you know to identify the thunderclap that started World War II. 
The answer would vary, depending on the perceptiveness of the person being asked 
and their geographic location. Former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill 
was warning anyone who would listen about Nazism long before Hitler's rise to 
power in the early 1930s. America, by contrast, was only fully pulled into the 
war when Japan attacked Pearl Harbor in December 1941.
Likewise, most people would probably say that the Cold War started in earnest 
around the time of the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962. They likely wouldn't 
consider a much more discreet but equally significant event: the defection, on 
September 5, 1945, of Igor Gouzenko, a cipher clerk at the Soviet Embassy in 
Ottawa, Canada, who fled his post carrying 109 documents detailing Soviet 
infiltration of the West.
Did anyone who was alive in 1945 believe that the Cold War had already started? 
Well, history has effectively and retroactively determined that it had indeed 
begun by that point. The same could be of the events underpinning the multitude 
of dire warnings from Churchill long before history ever considered those events 
significant.
So has World War III already started? And if it has, does it fit the description 
offered by the pope?
A Third World War would be highly decentralized, complex, covert and tactically 
diverse, and it would transcend the state-vs.-state paradigm. Wars currently 
underway in the world are either ideological in a purely religious sense, or 
strictly economic with a view toward maximizing profits (as opposed to peddling 
communism or capitalism as ideologies). Both of these phenomena are occurring 
simultaneously.
The Islamic State terrorists in Syria and Iraq, Boko Haram in Nigeria, Uighur 
extremists in China, and various other Islamic extremist groups throughout 
Africa, Asia and the Middle East -- with recruitment efforts that reach into 
developed Western nations -- are belligerents in one type of conflict: religio-ideological. 
They're essentially guerrillas of widely varying backgrounds, pulled from all 
over the world to fight with groups largely lacking in hierarchy and 
organization.
The second set of belligerents is comprised of nation-states, engaged in 
similarly decentralized economic warfare that isn't strictly limited to their 
own geographic boundaries or any politico-ideological agenda. The emphasis on 
economics rather than on homeland perimeter defense or the defense of political 
ideology is what makes the current set of nation-state conflicts different from 
World War II and the Cold War.
China, for example, has been gobbling up resources in South American and African 
countries without firing a shot. It's this kind of warfare that explains why 
nation-states engage in economic intelligence activities from within their 
foreign embassies -- a fact that former NSA contractor Edward Snowden apparently 
found shocking enough to disclose publicly. The disclosure of such top-secret 
intelligence can cause grave harm to national interests by hampering a country's 
competitiveness. Whether an economic disadvantage ultimately translates into a 
national-security detriment is a matter of debate. But it's not a stretch to 
imagine that a country taking an economic hit would experience an overall 
decline in resources, including a decline in national security.
Both types of contemporary warfare -- religio-ideological and nation-state 
economic -- feature new tactics that we haven't seen before, most of which 
involve the leveraging of new technology for the purpose of psychological 
warfare. Two common examples are using social-media platforms to distribute 
information and propaganda, and using cyberattacks to gain publicity or evoke 
public fear.
Arguably, there are currently enough conflicts around the globe in both 
categories to retroactively constitute flashpoints in WWIII. What remains to be 
seen is whether the religio-ideological "hot" wars might somehow merge with the 
nation-state economic "cold" wars, taking us past a point of no return and 
toward the worst possible outcome.
The ideal scenario would be for the nation-state conflicts to cool and take a 
back seat until its players can figure out how to get a grip on religio-ideological 
warfare -- the solutions to which have continued to elude them all. Otherwise, 
religio-ideological conflict may go down in history as the lone fuse that 
ignited WWIII while the superpowers were all collectively distracted.
COPYRIGHT 2014 RACHEL MARSDEN