Sleepwalkers and the blind are driving the world to the brink of war...

On January 20, 2025, U.S. President Joe Biden will hand over the presidency to Donald Trump. However, as his term nears its end, Biden has made a decision that could potentially spark “World War III.” Previously, Biden had prohibited Ukraine from using U.S.-supplied long-range missiles (ATACMS) within Russian borders. Now, he has reversed that stance, raising concerns that this sudden policy shift could escalate the war, even leading to discussions of nuclear weapon usage. Analysts fear the conflict could extend beyond Ukraine, potentially engulfing Europe and even escalating into a global war.

As recently as September, Biden opposed Ukraine's use of British-supplied Storm Shadow missiles to strike targets inside Russia, citing the risk of triggering a “NATO-Russia war.” This abrupt change in position during the U.S. transition period has left many questioning his motives. Observers speculate that Biden may have deliberately delayed lifting these restrictions until after the elections, ensuring his successor inherits the consequences. Meanwhile, Donald Trump had pledged during his campaign to end the “Russia-Ukraine War” as a priority upon taking office.

Following reports of Biden’s policy reversal, Donald Trump Jr. criticized the administration on X (formerly Twitter), accusing the military-industrial complex of attempting to ignite World War III before his father’s inauguration. Several Trump-aligned lawmakers echoed these concerns, alleging that Biden’s actions were a deliberate attempt to provoke further conflict. They pointed out that American voters, by electing Trump, signaled their desire to end foreign interventions and prioritize domestic issues.

Reactions to Biden’s decision have varied. Some, like retired General Keith Kellogg, who served as National Security Advisor to Vice President Mike Pence, viewed it as a strategic move. Kellogg argued that lifting restrictions on long-range weapons would provide Trump with greater flexibility to counter Russia. However, others warn of the dire consequences of underestimating Russia’s potential response, especially given Putin’s lowered threshold for nuclear weapon use.

The parallels to history are stark. In 1914, no one expected the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand to trigger a domino effect, leading to World War I. Yet, as Cambridge historian Christopher Clark described in his book The Sleepwalkers: How Europe Went to War in 1914, world leaders, blinded by mistrust and poor judgment, stumbled into catastrophe. Clark likened their behavior to “sleepwalkers—alert but unseeing, fixated on dreams, yet blind to the horrors they were about to unleash.”

Today, similar warnings resonate. From Türkiye to other global leaders, many have cautioned that failing to stop the Russia-Ukraine conflict risks spiraling into a world war. Escalatory moves, such as Israel’s provocative actions in its own conflicts, only underscore the precariousness of the current geopolitical landscape. As history has shown, no war is inevitable—it simply requires decisive, responsible leadership to prevent disaster.