The acceleration of time in war 4.0 (USA-NATO vs. Russia)

By Roberto Moraes

It is important to observe the acceleration of the present timeline in the US-NATO vs. Russia conflict, in relation to previous wars. This process may help explain the conflict and the loss of rationality that may be outlining a tense scenario leading up to a Third World War.

Ukraine was the trigger. Everything unfolds at a dizzying speed—quite different from the times of World War II—characteristics of the digital world that fuels physical, financial, and sanctions warfare, as elements of War 4.0. (See previous article:) Three main elements of the Russia-NATO dispute).

I'm not just referring to the speed of information and counter-information—that already existed before with radio communication—but the "team"that the nations that become involved in the conflict and the time they have to digest and make decisions, which in a spiral can continue to involve other nations."

If the US-NATO conflict with Russia continues for some time, its repercussions will extend to the economic issues of nations, impacting national elections in several important countries. All of this tends to reinforce and expand the conflict spatially.

The 4.0 war and the elections in Brazil.

These hypotheses shake things up and create instability, creating possibilities for international relations and the US-NATO-Russia crisis to affect the Brazilian elections scheduled for less than seven months from now. I haven't yet seen or read any comments on these hypotheses, but I believe they need to be considered and evaluated.

In the event of a prolonged conflict and spatial expansion to other parts of Europe, it is evident that candidates in elections in France and Brazil (among other countries) will have to deal more intensely with the issue of foreign relations and, very likely, always with strongly confrontational positions.

In Bolsonaro's case, the current president has already begun producing conflicting and disingenuous statements about the war, as he has done frequently with other issues. It is not difficult to assume that Bolsonaro wants to use the topic to hide his serious administrative problems and the few results he has to show in his bid for re-election, even though he lacks recognized leadership on a global level.  

Bolsonaro would use this new dissimulation not only as an excuse for the difficulties of his term, which also includes the pandemic. Thus, one can also imagine that the president could try to present "his military government" as the most appropriate for the present time, permeated by conflict between nations, although what is perceived globally is an anxious demand for leaders who can mediate conflicts, an attribute that Bolsonaro has never had, unlike what is globally recognized in his main opponent, Lula.

 

Between the fear and horror of war and the demand for strong, moderate leadership.

It is also necessary to consider the percentage of Brazilians who fear (or are averse to) the idea of ​​war. These people may fear Bolsonaro and his military government even more. As one can infer, the issue is likely to bring about yet another political clash between the main candidates in the October elections.

For someone who is comfortably leading in various polls, in a stable situation, as is the case with Lula, none of this matters. However, for a president running for reelection, in the worst conditions due to poor approval ratings in Brazilian electoral history, the issue may appear as an almost desperate effort to turn the situation around with unexpected initiatives and decisions.

It is evident that the percentage of people who might fall for this new and contradictory deception is not so large, but we must remember that contemporary elections in the West tend to be decided by small margins of votes.

Finally, the threats of a US-NATO war against Russia to other regions of the world are beginning to appear on the horizon as a major conflict. In Brazil, we are less than seven months away from the October elections. The first decisions that would have repercussions for the presidential elections were expected in April (and then June).

However, this new scenario brings astonishment and horror due to the clashes and victims, but also instability and the possibility that the theme of war, if prolonged in time and space, could push the main decisions of the elections in Brazil even further into the final stretch of the election and into the context of global geopolitics.