How WW3 Will Create ALL NEW Global Alliances

World War III is projected to dismantle traditional alliances and establish unpredictable, fluid global partnerships driven by immediate survival needs, resource control, and shifting geopolitical interests.

• Traditional alliances are expected to collapse, replaced by dynamic, interest-driven partnerships.

• Resource control and technological dominance will dictate new global alliances.

• A multipolar world with constantly shifting power dynamics is the likely outcome of World War III.

A future global conflict, World War III, would fundamentally reshape international alliances, moving away from rigid, treaty-bound blocs to a more fluid, multipolar system. Unlike past wars where clear lines were drawn, future partnerships would be based on constantly recalculating immediate needs, resource control, and technology, potentially uniting former adversaries and dividing long-standing allies. This shift would create a world where no single power dominates and change is the only constant.

Past Alliance Dynamics

• 00:00:26 Historically, global conflicts like World War I escalated due to rigid alliance structures where nations were bound by promises made generations prior, leading to a catastrophic chain reaction following the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand. In contrast, the Korean War demonstrated alliance flexibility, with major powers like the USSR and China calibrating involvement based on risk, preventing a wider global war. This historical difference highlights how uncertainty in alliance commitments can prevent global escalation, or alternatively, force nations to seek new partners.

Current Global Alliances

• 00:05:04 Today's alliances display significant internal complexities; the Western bloc, anchored by NATO, possesses immense economic and military power but shows signs of strain with members like the US, Britain, Germany, and France having differing priorities and commitments. Conversely, the 'Axis of Upheaval'—comprising Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea—is united by mutual opposition to Western hegemony rather than shared values, relying on economic ties, military cooperation, and leveraging resources like oil and critical minerals. However, these alliances, like those in World War II, lack strong internal cohesion, making them potentially unstable under pressure.

Emerging Swing States

• 00:11:18 In a future global conflict, key swing states like India, Turkey, Brazil, and Saudi Arabia could drastically alter alliances. India, with its significant economy, population, and nuclear arsenal, practices strategic ambiguity, maintaining ties with both Eastern and Western powers while navigating territorial disputes. Turkey, a NATO member, consistently demonstrates its willingness to shift allegiances based on immediate interests, becoming a potential 'chaos agent.' Brazil's control over critical natural resources, like the Amazon and fresh water, gives it significant leverage, as does Saudi Arabia's ability to influence global oil markets and its intense rivalry with Iran.

Future Alliance Landscape

• 00:15:17 World War III is expected to render traditional alliance paradigms, such as democracy versus authoritarianism, obsolete. Instead, new partnerships would form around vital resources like cobalt (Democratic Republic of Congo) and lithium (Bolivia), or strategic control over shipping lanes (Southeast Asia). The resulting international system would be truly multipolar, characterized by a constantly shifting kaleidoscope of overlapping alliances where power dynamically moves based on resources, technology, and regional influence, challenging the post-1945 American-led order with unprecedented fluidity and unpredictability.