The Puppet Masters of World War III: How Corrupt Leaders Could Drag the U.S. and Its Allies into Global Conflict

By Stephen Zogopoulos, USNN World News

With the world teetering on the brink of World War III, the role of global leadership cannot be underestimated. Corrupt leaders in China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea are testing the resolve of the West, while a compromised United States under President Joe Biden risks further instability. In this scenario, Biden’s cognitive decline and allegations of corruption have weakened America’s ability to effectively lead. But how would the geopolitical landscape change if former President Donald Trump were to win the 2024 presidential election?

In this article, we’ll explore the role of corrupt global leaders in dragging the United States and its allies—NATO, the UK, Japan, Australia, Israel, South Korea, and others—into World War III. We’ll also assess how Trump’s return to power could alter the dynamics of this conflict, either averting global war or hastening its arrival.

The Catalyst for Global Conflict: China and Russia Strike

In the lead-up to a potential World War III, two key players—China and Russia—would likely act as the primary catalysts. China’s aggressive pursuit of Taiwan and Russia’s relentless invasion of Ukraine would set the stage for a global conflict involving U.S. allies. The corrupt ambitions of these regimes make them feel emboldened to take decisive action when U.S. leadership appears weak.

Under a Biden Administration (2025-2028):
Biden’s cognitive decline would worsen by the middle of his second term, with significant speculation that former President Barack Obama is steering U.S. foreign policy from behind the scenes. This perception of weak U.S. leadership would embolden China to invade Taiwan by 2026, calculating that the United States and its allies would be slow to respond.

Russia, seizing the opportunity created by a distracted and compromised U.S., would escalate its campaign in Ukraine and push further into Europe, threatening NATO’s eastern borders. The Biden administration’s response would be delayed and diplomatically cautious, allowing China and Russia to expand their spheres of influence without significant military pushback.

Simultaneously, Iran would increase its proxy attacks on Israel and the Gulf states, knowing that U.S. retaliation would be slow and ineffective due to Biden’s reliance on Obama’s cautious approach.

The Role of Allies

While the U.S. might struggle under compromised leadership, its global allies would still be drawn into conflict due to mutual defense treaties and commitments:

• NATO would be forced to respond to Russian aggression, particularly in the Baltic states and Poland.
• Japan and South Korea would demand U.S. military assistance in the face of Chinese and North Korean provocations.
• Israel would likely find itself fending off attacks from Iran-backed proxies like Hezbollah and Hamas, expecting the U.S. to step in.

Timeline of Escalation

• 2025-2027: China invades Taiwan, Russia pushes deeper into Ukraine, and North Korea threatens Japan and South Korea. U.S. leadership under Biden is indecisive, leading to a fractured and delayed response.
• 2027-2029: Iran escalates its regional conflicts, targeting Israel and the Gulf states. U.S. is dragged into the conflict alongside NATO and other allies, but the global response is slow, leading to further deterioration.

The Trump Factor: How Would the World Respond to Trump’s Return?

Should former President Donald Trump win the 2024 presidential election, the dynamics of global conflict could shift dramatically. Trump, known for his unconventional and aggressive foreign policy, would likely take a far different approach from Biden.

Trump’s Foreign Policy: Strength or Chaos?

Trump’s tenure in office was marked by a “peace through strength” doctrine, where his unpredictable nature and willingness to engage in economic warfare made adversaries think twice about direct confrontation. His administration brokered historic peace agreements in the Middle East, as seen with the Abraham Accords, and avoided large-scale military conflicts. However, Trump’s willingness to engage in sharp rhetoric and his adversarial approach to NATO and traditional allies also raised concerns about the stability of U.S. alliances.

Under a Trump Administration (2025-2028):
If Trump were to win the 2024 election, his administration would likely adopt a more confrontational stance towards China and Russia. Trump’s foreign policy would be driven by two key strategies: aggressive economic sanctions and an unpredictable military posture.

1. China and Taiwan: Trump would likely take a hard-line stance on China’s ambitions in Taiwan, signaling a strong U.S. military presence in the region. By 2026, if China were to invade Taiwan, Trump’s administration would immediately deploy U.S. naval forces and impose crushing economic sanctions on Beijing. China’s leadership, recognizing Trump’s unpredictability and the potential for rapid escalation, may reconsider a full-scale invasion.
2. Russia and Ukraine: Trump’s relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin has long been a topic of debate. While his administration would likely continue to impose sanctions on Russia, Trump might pursue a more diplomatic solution to the conflict in Ukraine, possibly pushing for a negotiated peace. Unlike Biden’s administration, which could be seen as indecisive, Trump’s directness and tough rhetoric might serve as a deterrent to further Russian expansion.
3. Iran and the Middle East: Trump’s previous administration pulled the U.S. out of the Iran nuclear deal, and a second Trump term would likely see an aggressive stance against Iran. Iran’s proxies in the Middle East, including Hezbollah and Hamas, would face direct military retaliation if they attacked U.S. allies like Israel. Trump’s firm support for Israel could prevent a wider Middle Eastern conflict from escalating.
4. North Korea: Trump’s unconventional diplomacy with North Korea could once again come into play. Although North Korea would likely increase provocations under a Biden administration, Trump’s direct engagement with Kim Jong-un could maintain a fragile peace. Trump’s willingness to meet face-to-face with the North Korean leader might deter North Korea from pursuing aggressive military actions against South Korea or Japan.

The Role of Allies Under Trump

Under a Trump administration, U.S. allies might face a more assertive America, one that demands greater contributions to mutual defense. Trump’s previous criticism of NATO countries for not paying their fair share could resurface, leading to increased tensions within the alliance. However, Trump’s aggressive posture towards adversaries might also embolden allies who have felt abandoned under Biden’s cautious diplomacy.

NATO, Japan, Israel, and other allies would still be drawn into the conflict, but Trump’s approach would be faster and more aggressive. His reliance on economic sanctions, military threats, and unpredictable diplomacy could lead to a shorter timeline of escalation but potentially avoid the worst-case scenario of a prolonged global war.

Timeline of Escalation Under Trump

• 2025-2026: Trump issues strong military and economic responses to China’s provocations in Taiwan and North Korea’s aggression. U.S. military presence in Asia is ramped up, deterring China from a full-scale invasion. Russia continues its efforts in Ukraine, but Trump pushes for a diplomatic resolution.
• 2027: Iran’s proxies in the Middle East test Trump’s resolve, but swift U.S. military retaliation prevents further escalation. Israel remains secure with U.S. support.
• 2028: Global tensions remain high, but Trump’s aggressive posture prevents a full-scale World War III. Adversaries are more cautious, recognizing the unpredictable nature of U.S. foreign policy.

Conclusion: Two Diverging Paths

The world stands at a crossroads as the 2024 U.S. presidential election approaches. Under a Biden-Obama puppeteer administration, the United States risks being seen as weak and divided, with adversaries like China, Russia, and Iran taking advantage of the situation to push their aggressive agendas. This scenario could see the U.S. and its allies dragged into World War III, as corrupt leaders exploit global instability for their gain.

Under a Trump administration, the dynamics could shift. Trump’s aggressive foreign policy, backed by unpredictable diplomacy, could deter adversaries from making bold moves. While tensions would still run high, Trump’s approach might avoid the worst-case scenario of a global conflict, or at least delay its onset.

In either case, the actions of corrupt leaders around the world will continue to push the world toward the brink. The question remains: Will the U.S. lead decisively or be led astray by compromised leadership? The future of global peace hangs in the balance.

Disclaimer: This is an opinion piece by Stephen Zogopoulos. The views expressed in this article are his own and do not necessarily reflect those of USNN World News. The article presents a hypothesis on global escalation toward World War III and the potential role of U.S. leadership.