The Third World War – Efforts to Prevent It
The crisis we are entangled in today is unprecedented in human history. Although there is a fundamental cause underlying all these challenges, each problem manifests uniquely. Addressing these issues requires a fundamental shift in thinking and a bold approach. Conventional examples and solutions are inadequate in this scenario.
If we analyze the most terrifying issues of today, one by one, the possibility of a Third World War stands at the forefront. Advanced weaponry was developed during the first two world wars. However, now, nuclear power has reached a stage beyond what was previously conceivable. The discussions surrounding nuclear bombs and hydrogen bombs are growing in intensity.
Equally destructive are chemical bombs, which, due to their sheer numbers, could be deployed at any moment. A single bomb could obliterate entire metropolises like New York, Moscow, Paris, and London within seconds. If such bombings continue for even a minute without interruption, no major city would remain on Earth. The poisonous gases released would not only affect urban areas but would also spread to the remotest villages, contaminating air, water, and food, posing an existential threat to humanity.
If nuclear warfare is not halted, the Earth itself could be shattered, turning into cosmic debris floating between Mars and Jupiter. Unlike localized warfare, the effects of nuclear radiation would impact the entire world, spreading devastation indiscriminately. This nuclear threat is currently one of the most pressing global issues.
Previously, nuclear weapons were confined to Russia and America, but now they are possessed by France, Britain, China, and other nations. This proliferation makes it impossible to predict when, how, or by whom these weapons might be used, further complicating global security.
Understanding the Root of the Problem
To find a solution, we must first understand how this situation arose and escalated. The nuclear bomb was revealed to the world following Hitler’s defeat, when America developed and deployed it against Japan. Japan, unable to recover from the devastation, surrendered. Observing this, powerful nations concluded that they could similarly dominate their adversaries through nuclear force.
This led to an arms race, with Russia and America taking the lead, forming two opposing military blocs. However, now the situation has become such that neither side can advance nor retreat. If they continue producing nuclear weapons, the world faces destruction. If they halt production, they risk falling behind adversaries who may develop superior weapons.
The fear of being outpaced by rivals prevents any nation from taking the bold step of halting nuclear experiments. However, continuing these experiments only increases the number of deadly weapons stockpiled. The enormous financial burden of nuclear programs also raises the question—how much more investment can be justified for destruction?
The Crisis of Nuclear Waste
One overlooked but equally dangerous consequence of nuclear development is radioactive waste. The ash and byproducts generated in nuclear weapons factories are highly toxic and nearly impossible to dispose of safely. If the production of nuclear arms continues unchecked, the challenge of handling radioactive waste may become even more critical than the weapons themselves.
Some may think that a direct attack, similar to what happened in Japan, could bring immediate results. However, unlike in the past, today’s global dynamics have changed. Countries like China, Iran, and Israel, once technologically behind, are now capable of retaliation. Additionally, alliances and external interventions make unilateral action nearly impossible.
The Paradox of Military Strategy
Currently, nations are trapped in a paradox—starting a war is difficult, but stopping it is even harder. The cost of maintaining the status quo is so high that it is unsustainable in the long term. Taxpayers bear this burden, and how long they can continue to do so is uncertain.
No country today wants to initiate war, but mutual distrust prevents peace efforts. Words and diplomatic agreements have lost credibility. The only viable solution is to step back from the brink and de-escalate. However, one side must take the initiative. Expecting both sides to simultaneously agree on disarmament is unrealistic. Even if agreements are made, there is no guarantee of adherence.
Thus, instead of preparing for war, nations must cultivate the inner strength to take the first step towards peace. Mahatma Gandhi demonstrated this principle effectively. The British had immense military power and could have crushed opposition easily. Yet, Gandhi chose non-violent resistance, confronting the threat with moral courage. Despite the power imbalance, he emerged victorious because of truth and inner strength. Even if one were to fail, this approach is still far superior to the devastation of war.
The Role of Subtle Refinement in Preventing War
To instill this wisdom, I am utilizing the power acquired through subtle refinement (sūkṣmīkaraṇa). I am exerting influence to redirect both sides away from conflict. My goal is to make nations realize that stepping back is not weakness, but intelligence. Through this pressure, the current tensions will gradually dissolve. A new environment of responsibility and rational thinking will emerge, replacing aggression with strategic restraint.
Cold wars will eventually transition into prolonged ceasefires. Over time, these ceasefires will stabilize into lasting peace, preventing the catastrophic consequences of full-scale war.
The solution lies not in escalation but in de-escalation. It requires wisdom, courage, and self-restraint. If humanity can cultivate these qualities, the threat of a Third World War can be averted.