Will the competition for these strategic resources ignite a Third World War?

SadaNews - The world is living in this era on a hotplate; wars are igniting at an accelerating pace, international law is being undermined, competition among major powers for various means of influence is intensifying, relations among allies in the western hemisphere of the globe are becoming turbulent, and experts and analysts are warning of the signs of a potential direct clash between major powers. Amid the escalating tensions, multiple forms and types of strategic competitions become apparent, one of which could lead to the outbreak of a great war, which Einstein predicted would bring humanity back to fighting with sticks and stones.

The global conflict map today appears more complicated and interconnected. It combines recurring historical patterns with innovative and pivotal transformations, yet this complex global scene is not devoid of signals that contribute to understanding the dynamics of significant risks at the present moment.

The emerging conflict between the "heart" and the "peripheries"

The "heart" versus "peripheries" map reflects a deep-rooted struggle for dominance in Europe and Asia, represented historically in the Soviet Union's efforts to expand towards the peripheries of the supercontinent. In response, the alliance termed the "free world" emerged, comprising the margins of Western Europe and East Asia, supported by the United States, which has a powerful naval presence across the seas.

The most dangerous focal points of tension at that time were located along the front line between the "heart" and the "peripheries", such as the divided Germany and Korea, which were then governed by the two competing camps.

In the current era, this map continues to reflect global competition for influence and provokes tensions that narrow the gap from a major war, with notable transformations.

The threat of the "heart" today lies in an alliance comprising countries located in the heart of Europe and Asia or its peripheries, including Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea, united by their hostility towards the "peripheries" alliances that obstruct their interests.

This alliance is manifested in Beijing, Tehran, and Pyongyang's support for Moscow in its war against Ukraine, backed by NATO. In the contribution of Russian military technology to enhance the capabilities of North Korea and China, as Beijing attempts to break the containment in the Pacific.

Economically, new contours of an economy for the "heart" camp are taking shape, as Russian energy exports are intensively directed toward China, while Moscow relies on financing, technology, and trade coming from Beijing.

Despite economic cohesion, the "peripheries" camp still enjoys advanced wealth and innovation, in addition to the strength of American alliances that face little competition.

With the underinvestment of the "peripheries" countries in defense over recent decades, the door has opened for China to become the world's leading industrial power.

Now, Trump seeks to reverse these trends and flip the balance of benefits across the Atlantic and Pacific; pushing frontline allies to finance re-manufacturing in the United States and bolster their defense capabilities.

Although the goal is to strengthen the "peripheries" position in the global power map, Trump's volatile leadership, his expansionist tendencies, and repeated threats to close allies threaten to fragment this camp.

Once again, the most dangerous possibilities for the outbreak of a Third World War emerge in the contact areas between the two competing camps, such as Ukraine or Taiwan, rendering the most dangerous divisions of the current era visible on the "heart-peripheries" map, just as they were in the past.

Renewed efforts to control old spheres of influence

Spheres of influence are not a product of the moment; major powers have always sought to impose their hegemony on weaker states, whether as buffer zones, platforms for expansion, or sources of resources and prestige. However, today's spheres of influence take forms that combine the old with the new.

The "Donroe Doctrine" adopted by Trump marks a return to the past, as the United States aims to regain its supremacy from the Arctic to Argentina, by isolating hostile countries, intervening in Latin American politics, rewarding allies, and punishing adversaries.

Trump seeks to expand his country's influence in the global economy by establishing an oil empire extending from Alaska to Venezuela.

This adventure places Trump in a familiar historical context, as American presidents have historically fortified the western hemisphere during times of global turmoil.

Additionally, Russia has spent two decades trying to reclaim its hegemony over parts of Eastern Europe and the former Soviet space.

This coincides with questions arising in India about why New Delhi has not asserted its influence over South Asia and the Indian Ocean.

Parallel to the above, Turkey envisions a "new Ottoman" sphere of influence extending across three continents, making this era potentially one of multi-dimensional competition for influence, ending the calm period that followed the Cold War.

As for China, it seems fully prepared for this phase, with artificial islands in the South China Sea, military pressure on Taiwan, and attempts to intimidate Japan and the Philippines reflecting a pursuit to establish a geographically defined traditional sphere of influence over the edges of East Asia.

Border clashes with India in the Himalayas, semi-secret movements against Bhutan, and incursions into Central Asia represent the land extension of a parallel maritime campaign.

Xi Jinping's map does not stop at the geographical borders of influence; it also includes a vast sphere of influence in the digital space.

The Chinese "digital silk road" extends through vast areas of the Global South, relying on communication networks built by Chinese companies, open AI models, digital payment platforms, and surveillance technologies.

Chinese digital equipment forms the infrastructure for over 200 smart cities in 40 countries.

Dependency on Chinese technology opens the door to economic and political influence, explaining the United States' targeting of Huawei, the Chinese telecommunications giant, in an attempt to rein in China.

In June 2025, Panama announced that it will remove Huawei equipment from its networks and replace it, as part of Trump's efforts to reduce Chinese influence within the framework of "Donroe."

However, this mission appears daunting given Beijing's widespread economic and technological penetration in the region, but it serves as a reminder of a steadfast reality: wherever competing spheres of influence intersect, friction occurs between the great powers, and the risks of clashes from which there is no return increase.

Struggle for influence over strategic maritime corridors

The focus on strategic waterways also represents a new area of global competition; after decades of American dominance, China’s naval enhancement is beginning to challenge American superiority in the oceans, while Beijing's push in the South China Sea threatens to turn this corridor into a closed, exclusively controlled space.

Maps of influence contention today show an increase in conflicts around vital maritime corridors in general, often in regions surrounded by wider spans of tension and conflict.

A prominent example is the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait, which forms a juncture between the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden, linking the Mediterranean Sea with the Indian Ocean and connecting Europe with Asia.

The Red Sea was a passage for about 30% of global container traffic, and after the war on October 7, with the Houthis restricting maritime navigation in it, global transport movements were redirected, reducing traffic through the Suez Canal, revealing how integrated the Red Sea is within a conflict range extending from Africa to the Arabian Gulf.

The strategic struggle for influence in this region reveals a competition among significant regional powers, including Saudi Arabia, Iran, and the UAE, over dominance in Yemen, with this competition extending to Sudan and the Horn of Africa, where bloody internal conflicts have transformed into multi-party proxy wars.

Djibouti, located at the crossroads of the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden, has become a military hosting power greater than its geographical size, hosting bases for both the United States and China, alongside facilities used by several other countries.

Russia seeks to consolidate its naval presence on Sudan's coast overlooking the Red Sea, while Israel has granted diplomatic recognition to "Somaliland" for its strategic locations.

Countries such as India, Turkey, and Egypt also enhance their presence along this contested corridor, transforming maritime navigation intersections into conflict hotspots amid escalating competition.

The north is not devoid of these tensions, as the Arctic region represents the shortest route between North America and "Eurasia" (a geographical term referring to the landmass that includes Europe and Asia), with melting ice potentially opening new maritime routes that could cut days, if not weeks, off shipping times between Western Europe and East Asia.

The Greenland – Iceland – Britain corridor serves as a gateway to the North Atlantic, making this frozen region a front of increasing competitive importance.

Russia strengthens its territorial claims and expands its military capabilities around the "Northern Sea Route", fostering hopes that one day it will become a Eurasian highway, while China is also advancing economically and militarily within the Arctic region.

In the opposing camp, the United States seeks to fortify its northern entrances, including early warning networks in Greenland and Canada. This underscores that a map centered on the polar regions will increasingly populate strategic thinking, and that the struggle around corridors controlling the fate of the maritime world is intensifying significantly.

Reading the chaos of the scene

The strategic map of our current era is no less chaotic than the world it embodies, revealing how old hostilities, like the conflict between the "heart" and the "peripheries", persist despite evolving contemporary alliances.

It also shows how modern spheres of influence sometimes follow geographical dictates and at other times rebel against them, and how revolutionary innovations shape patterns of engagement and vulnerabilities.

Understanding the global scene sheds light on critical risks, such as the fact that the greatest threat of a World War lies along the contact line between the "heart" and the "peripheries", or how conflicts over vital maritime corridors lead to changing trade flows, inflaming entire regions.