2034: A novel by Stavridis and Ackerman visualizes how the United States and China can go to war

Long-range cyber attacks cast a shadow on the United States’ ability to act strategically. Conventional wars and naval battles lead to heavy losses for both sides. A host of other countries are drawn into a conflict in which strategists see resorting to the most dangerous measures. In the end, no one really wins. The scenario may be speculative, but it is very real, says Admiral James Stavridis, the former NATO supreme commander who visualizes these events as co-author of the book “2034: A Narrative From The Next World War,” published on Tuesday. The book, written with novelist and veteran warrior Elliot Ackerman, is what Stavridis describes as a “cautionary tale”, exploiting a rich tradition of telling Cold War stories – think John Hackett’s book “World War III” or Stanley Kubrick’s “Dr. Strangelove” – That illustrated the horrific catastrophe that the war between the Soviet Union and the United States would represent. “Part of the reason we never ended up dumping nuclear weapons at each other during the Cold War is because we imagined just how terrible it was, Stavridis told Today’s WorldView. Audience perception of the dire consequences of the Sino-US escalation. Its turnkey – “clearly written and well-paced,” as the Washington Post review describes it – includes a film crew of characters: a Chinese Sphinx-like defense attachment who loves to chew on M & Ms; a blond three-toed brigade Of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards; a dissident American fighter pilot teased with nostalgia for World War II; a weary US Deputy National Security Adviser in the White House whose family ties to the motherland affect the course of the war, but beyond imagination There is a roadmap for war that can be easily translated into the real world. “The novel lays out a plausible ladder of escalation that goes from a conventional attack to a second conventional attack to a third conventional attack on America’s decision to withdraw and use a tactical nuclear weapon,” Stavridis said. “This is more real [a prospect] Than I wish it was. “The event happened in 2034, 15 years after Stavridis and Ackerman began writing the book, a framework for the future that allowed them to“ create a world in which technology is roughly the same, but Stavridis said that fundamental tensions will reach a climax, ”acknowledging“ the timeline for progress. ” China, its military, its artificial intelligence capabilities, and its cyber capabilities. “A network of infrastructure and economic deals in an important geopolitical project that includes enhanced security ties with countries like Iran. Meanwhile, in the United States there is an unnamed president who does not interestingly belong to either of the traditional political parties. The administration remains post-partisan. Its leadership cannot avoid the miscalculations and blind spots that see the maritime conflict exploding into a devastating global war, and at the National Security Institution in Washington, a growing set of policy papers and think tank reports are mapping similar terrains. To a more tense confrontation.Both sides will draw – or are already seen as – “red lines” on a range of interests, from freedom of navigation in the South China Sea to Chinese claims over Taiwan. The United States may feel compelled to redeploy more of its assets. The strategy is in China’s neighborhood, while China may become more insecure as Washington strengthens its security cooperation with Asian allies. Risks of escalation. Gen. Charles Q Brown said Junior, Chief of Staff of the Air Force, told reporters last year that a conflict with an adversary like China would now see “combat attrition and risk levels … closer to the World War II era.” From the undisputed environment that we have become accustomed to “in recent decades.” While planning to win a war with China remains necessary, it is no longer enough, “a 2016 report from Rand Corp. warned. The United States must also bear in mind that American and Chinese officials insist that they have no interest in fomenting conflict or pitting one another in a new Cold War. But the arrogance of the great powers has often been the cause of disaster. “Nations are like people, and they can become overconfident in ways that lead them to make bad choices,” said Stavridis. “Certainly this has been the case for the United States on many occasions.” He added that the disastrous Sino-American war was not “destined,” referring to moments in the novel “when either side could pull the keys out of the car.” “Big doors can swing on small hinges,” said Stavridis.