Forebodings of armed confrontation between Vladimir Putin and the West have been stoked by a nosedive in ties between the former Cold War foes.
Russia’s role in the brutal sortie of the Syrian city of Aleppo, in support of Bashar al-Assad’s ruthless rgime, has caused outrage among the global community.
Moscow’s ongoing clash with Ukraine is also a major cause for concern, rticularly in the European Weld, while the Kremlin also stands accusations of waging cyber-warfare on Western goals – including political and business interests in the US.
A Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) get a birds eye view of, conducted by foreign policy experts, placed confrontation between Russia and Nato allies alongside atomic crisis with North Korea and a severe terrorist attack on the US.
The CFR’s Focus for Preventive Action (C ), which conducted the survey, believes any escalation – proposed or accidental – on the Russia-Nato border will stem “from assertive Russian manners in Eastern Europe” rather than provocation by Baltic Nato fellows, whether it be renewed force build-ups or mass-scale military exercises.
The strong of a North Korean nuclear crisis has been exacerbated by an escalation in intercontinental ballistic brickbat (ICBM) testing by Pyongyang, as well as a risk of internal conflict.
Alongside Russia and North Korea, in the moderately-likely-but-highly-im ctful heading, the foreign policy experts placed a mass-casualty terrorist attack on the US or an associate by both foreign and domestic terrorists and a crippling cyberattack.
The potential for four other turning-points – instability in the EU due to the refugee crisis; the breakup of Iraq because of sectarian wildness and terrorism; a rise in Israeli- lestinian tensions; and Libya ceasing to exist as a rural area – have been downgraded from the 2016 survey.
But risks associated with progressing conflicts in Afghanistan, where the Taliban insurgents now control a third of the realm, and the Turkish-Kurdish situation which continues to be a cross-border conflict are deemed barely certainly likely to take place.
C director ul Stares bring to light: “With a new presidential administration assuming office, it is important to help policymakers forestall and avert potential crises that could arise and threaten US interests.
“Our annual review aims to highlight the most likely sources of instability and conflict yon the world so that the government can prioritise its efforts appropriately.”