(Analysis) Russian strategist DmitryTrenin when made a profession convincing Western audiences that Moscow could be a partner in a rulesbased order.His latest essay for the Russian International Affairs Counciltitled The Era of Wars: World WarIII Has Already Begun, But Not Everyone Realises Itdeclares that rapprochement is completed and that a multifront international dispute is currently under way.At nearly the exact same minute, NATO leaders in TheHague pledged to raise defence spending to 5percent of GDP by2035, commemorating the move as a bulwark against Russian aggressiveness.
The balance stands out: each side takes the very same factsdrone strikes, proxy wars, sanctionsand weaves them into incompatible stories about who is escalating and who is simply defending.DmitryTreninFrom bridgebuilder to doomsayerTrenins essay traces the minute prewar normality ended: Crimea 2014 for Russia, the U.S.China trade war in2017 for Beijing, and Irans rolling clashes with Israel and the West in2023.From there, he argues, the world slipped into an undeclared however active world war hammered out 2 hot frontsEasternEurope and the Middle Eastand a 3rd looming in East Asia.He mentions the 1 June 2025 drone raid on Russias Engels bomber base and Israels July strikes on Quds officers as evidence that guidelines of engagement are gone.The West, in Trenins informing, is not stabilizing power however seeking to destroy competitors outright.
Economic blockades, innovation bans, the targeting of scientists and generals: all are framed as proof of dehumanisation that eliminates moral restraints.Compromise, he writes, is illusory; just fearchiefly Russias nuclear deterrentcan keep an existential opponent at bay.TheHague NATO SummitNATOs answer: deterrence with a rate tagIf Trenin paints a world moving into overall war, NATO frames 2025 as a test of resolve that can still be managed by traditional means.The TheHague Summit Declaration requires the alliance to invest 3.5 percent of GDP on core military capabilities and another 1.5 percent on cyber durability and facilities, all by 2035.
U.S.
President Donald Trump called the promise a big win for Western civilisation, coupling it with Patriot missile batteries for Kyiv and a hazard of 100percent tariffs on Russian oil purchasers unless peace talks advance within 50 days.Yet the numbers are staggering.
According to Reuters Breakingviews, matching the promise would cost EU and UK taxpayers 660billion in new yearly outlaysmoney that scores firm S&P states lots of states can not raise without either higher taxes or cuts to social programmes.Germany would have to more than double its present defence spending plan; Spain has actually currently negotiated an optout, identifying the target unreasonable and counterproductive.Even defence hawks are uneasy.
Five percent would be simply insane for Europeans, says LianaFix of the Council on Foreign Relations, keeping in mind that the pledge bundles hardtoaudit categories such as facilities and energy security to make the maths look gentler.Former NATO assistant secretarygeneral CamilleGrand cautions that without evaluation clauses targets danger being satisfied on paper while genuine abilities still lag.The ThirdWorld War Narrative: Why a Russian Thinker and NATO Are Talking Past One Another Image Friedrich Ebert StiftungEscalation danger: 2 readings of the exact same eventsWhere Trenin sees Westernbacked drone strikes on Russian airfields as an unambiguous step toward nuclear brinkmanship, NATO officials argue they are legitimate extensions of Ukraines right to selfdefence.The problem, says Julianne Smith, the U.S.
ambassador to the alliance, is signal clarity: When every theatre is linked digitally, the opportunity of a tactical raid being misread as strategic intent goes through the roof.Economic deterrence is equally contested.
The new 5percent goal, integrated with Trumps tariff dangers, enhances Moscows conviction that the West is set on strangling its economy, a view that feeds Kremlin hardliners and makes deescalatory gestures politically toxic.Meanwhile, European treasuries groan under the cost of double objectivesarming Ukraine and rebuilding their own forces.Breakingviews calculates that every euro of additional military spending now provides less than a euro of GDP development, providing populists fresh ammunition versus wars of choice.Hybrid war or world warIs Trenin right that a world war has already begun? Trade, crossborder financial investment and flight have not collapsed as they did in 1914 or 1939; at $68 per barrel, oil remains both economical and easily available.The greatpower hotlines that endured the Cold War still function.
The psychological frame has moved.
By describing todays mle as a world war, Moscow prepares its public for sacrifices and validates non-traditional retaliation.By describing the exact same chaos as deterrence, NATO assures citizens that amazing spending is preventive, not provocative.Those stories are solidifying simply as technological ambiguityAIenabled drones, autonomous cyberweaponsreduces alerting time to minutes.The Engels raid that alarms Moscow was performed with Ukrainianadapted drones costing under $200,000, aimed at aircraft worth billions.
Such asymmetries tempt weaker stars to strike first and dare the more powerful side to escalate.Ways off the ladderA handful of steps might suppress the spiral without satisfying aggression.Firewall the signalling channels.
A NATORussia deconfliction online forum covering area, cyber and tactical bomber patrols would separate nuclear tripwires from battlefield aid.Stresstest the 5percent guarantee in daylight.
Publishing countrybycountry roadmaps and independent audits would require politicians to justify each euro and secure social budgets.Use thirdparty mediation early.
Turkey, Brazil or SouthAfrica might host talks on dronerange limitations or maritime deescalation, building on the Black Sea grain precedent.Police the rhetoric.
Kremlin talk of subhumans and Western recommendations to crushing Russia nurture mirrorimage paranoias; leaders ought to keep adjectives to realities they can document.The upshotTrenin is right that the world is already combating on several fronts at onceand that those fronts are intellectually, digitally and financially linked.Where he overreads is in stating that the line into total war has actually already been crossed.
In the meantime, the conflict remains a messy hybrid of proxy combat, sanctions and information warfare.Whether it stays there depends less on military balance sheets than on narrative discipline: when each side frames escalation as the others default mode, the room for error narrows to zero.World WarIII is not inevitable; however explaining todays crisis as if it has actually currently begun is one reputable method to make it so.SourcesTrenin,, RIAC, 14Jul2025.
([ russiancouncil.ru] [1] NATO Summit Declaration, TheHague, 25Jun2025.
([ NATO] [2] Trump weapons pledge and tariff threat, Reuters, 14Jul2025.
([ Reuters] [3] Breakingviews on fiscal multipliers, 15Jul2025.
([ Reuters] [4] Spain optout details, Reuters, 22Jun2025.
([ Reuters] [5] Fortune interview with LianaFix, 25Jun2025.
([ Fortune] [6] ECFR podcast with CamilleGrand, 25Jun2025.
([ ECFR] [7] CNAS summit preview featuring JulianneSmith, 24Jun2025.
([ cnas.org] [8]