In today’s world, with the modern media and information network that we have — and that you are using right now, we can be alerted to anything, at any time. I’ve found that the information propagated by this network is negative more often than not, which is an unfortunate negative effect. I can be notified of any terrible thing whenever it happens, and recently that’s often related to rising international tensions. Here’s the thing: while this is something that causes concern to me, it isn’t something that I’m incredibly distressed by.

While nuclear annihilation via mutually assured destruction (MAD) is a constant possibility in today’s world, and the political and foreign policy stance of certain world leaders today  definitely suggests that the likelihood of such a cataclysmic conflict between nuclear powers is not unrealistic. However, it’s not in the interests of any dictator to take such a drastic action as the deployment of nuclear arms, because the use of such a weapon would immediately incite retaliation from the West, resulting in the destruction of that country and thereby the leaders’ position of power and privilege.

One modern example of said global tension that could lead to MAD would be the Russo-Ukrainian war. Depending on the views of Russia, and how they might react to Ukrainian victories or progress into Crimea, that could lead to an escalation of the war. However, several factors lead me to believe that the Russian state most definitely does not want the war in Ukraine to go nuclear, nor does the US. Despite the absolute failure of conventional Russian forces during an over year-long “special military operation” that was predicted to last 13 days. Putin has not used nuclear weapons. Whether he could immediately deploy the full complement of Russia’s nukes is also debatable as the missile silos are meant to be reloaded, meaning that not all weapons could be deployed at the same time, and the missiles that Russia has are liquid-fuel and very unreliable propellant. Finally, the nature of his position means that should Russia be obliterated in war, either by nukes or by conventional means, the blame falls upon Putin, whose political position, while strong, would not withstand such a downturn in public opinion. Putin knows this and as a result has expended immense resources trying to dissuade the West from directly interfering in the Russo-Ukrainian war, such as propaganda and misinformation being disseminated through social media.

The other major world power that takes a heavy anti-Western stance with its policies and ideals is China which, under the leadership of President Xi Jinping, has become more aggressive, notably in regard to the South China Sea and Taiwan. Furthermore, China is incredibly internally repressive, utilizing mass monitoring, population control, and rights violations, such as unannounced imprisonment with no ability to contact friends or family, and subsequently being sent to “reeducation camps.” In effect, China is highly repressive, but such repression is tolerated so long as the standard of living remains high, producing a prosperous upper-middle class, so the general populace is relatively unconcerned with the level of repression. However, should this change, as we saw with the immensely restrictive COVID policies enacted in China, that won’t hold true. Should China take aggressive action against Taiwan or Western (US) interests, the realities of globalization will come into effect. The nearly 25 billion dollar trade deficit that the US has with China would almost certainly come into effect, and if the Western response to the Russo-Ukrainian war is any measure, heavy sanctions on China will be enacted, crippling their economy and thereby reducing the standard of living throughout the country. If this happens, the CCP, and thereby President Xi, will fall out of power. 

The possibility for global war between major world powers exists and while it’s always a possibility, the chance of such a conflict seems incredibly unlikely, as the aftermath of such a war would undoubtedly result in a change of leadership, something that no individual who wants to remain in power is going to want. So while news cycles of concern over global tensions are without a doubt prevalent, keeping a cynical, and somewhat pessimistic view of world leaders and countries, remembering that nobody in power wants to give that power up or have their quality of life degraded, is one strategy to cope with the unfortunate realities of humanity’s capacity for destruction.