Future Conflicts

[rattmuff]

I can imaging a major conflict concerning the Nile and who has the right to it's water. Egypt, Tanzania, Kenya, Sudan, Ethiopia, Uganda and many more. All countries needs the Nile to survive.
This region is a very hot spot for a major military show down within the next 10-30 years. IMO Egypt will be the one making the "wrong" step or turn in this matter.

I'm just guessing.

 

[swerve]

I can imaging a major conflict concerning the Nile and who has the right to it's water. Egypt, Tanzania, Kenya, Sudan, Ethiopia, Uganda and many more. All countries needs the Nile to survive.
This region is a very hot spot for a major military show down within the next 10-30 years. ...

Egypt & N. Sudan need the Nile. The others provide the rainfall which feeds it. But yes, there is potential for conflict.

 

[Scorpius]

heck if that is there could be Indian aggression against Bangladesh.we got lots of disputes,over waters,borders,etc.

 

[metro]

I think drinking water is the next "oil." There are already a bunch of disputes over who "x" water belongs to and threats or agreements of what a country will do with a "river that runs through it."

One damn can start a war. I'm pretty sure the UAE has built (a) desalination(s) as well as Israel. I'm not sure who else in the region has done that, but several countries are dependent upon not much fresh water.

China is building desalination plants (though they have access to water). I'm not sure about India/Pakistan.

Water is definitely a potential source for international conflict. Wait until countries use supertankers to pick up snow/ice at the N. or S. Pole.

Domestically, in the US, bottled water just became a problem when it was just announced that Pepsi, Coke, Nestle (whatever label)... are using regular "tap water," putting it in a bottle, and selling the "free water" as "spring water" for a crazy profit--"we bottled it in the spring." It won't cause a military conflict but I'm guessing defense lawyers are already in place and others are getting their plan put together. If the water was exported, look out now! Thanks FDA, maybe you guys could figure our food/water problem out before hand, you take forever with meds.

 

[Snayke]

Water can be conflict for nations who are landlocked. But those connected to the sea would just have to build lots desalination plants (making it cheaper per plant) to combat drought.

 

[CodE]

-I really don't see a China/Taiwan military conflict. IMO, there's a lot of theatre and not much reality going on in that situation.
It just doesn't make cents economically for China. Taiwan (I guess one could say, "as a broker") brings far too much money into China, especially by way of the US, for China to act against its own interest. Taking the chance of a military conflict with the US is one large gamble (e.g. perhaps, in the end we don't defend Taiwan for "some" reason). Losing trade with the US-- probably Canada, and much of the West as well-- isn't a gamble, it's economic suicide.

There are plenty of other nations more than willing to take up as much of that action as possible (i.e. business China has lost). The world would move on, leaving China behind. In terms of oil, it might even lower the price as the distribution would go to other countries, while a single, major consumer/bidder would no longer be manufacturing for the world. China would thus have to factor in, buying oil for Her population without "an economy," and no more influence over the oil market.

Creating the appearance of a "conflict," makes it easier to justify to a population (anywhere in the world) why or where a gov't is spending its money. The perception of a problem creates a market for a solution to be capitalized upon. The better a "problem" is marketed, the greater the potential is to earn returns.

This being said, IMO, there are other conflicts in the future that are awaiting in S.E.A.

As for China and India becoming very close, Russia won't be happy nor will the US (I'm guessing several other countries would hold similar sentiments).

-As for a "techno-thriller/military-political/conflict, which ranks anywhere on a scale of 1-10, depending on who's being asked (but this has been seriously proposed as a solution).
Many around the world and within the US want "Gitmo" closed. The problem, other than High Valued "Detainees" being there, is that popular support around the world for releasing the "Detainees" to their home country, doesn't translate to any of those Govt's actually wanting the people "coming home."
Even though there's a lot of pressure from abroad and maybe as much within the US to close "gitmo" and to put those being held there, on trial in the US and/or in Prison in the US, nobody living here seems to want any of the "detainees" in a Prison near
them.

A proposal going around is to close "gitmo" (Bush has said he's now looking to do this) in Cuba and move everything (court/prison) to somewhere around the western boarder Alaska. I hope the rest of the world doesn't have the same reaction as the initial response to the suggestion that the ACLU provided... at least the ACLU is unarmed (I think...).

Start the book there...

That's for your suggestion and imput. I think that might be a great idea.

 

[CodE]

Will anyone ever fight a war over drinking water!?!? It seems silly now...may actually be plausable!

 

[CodE]

I can imaging a major conflict concerning the Nile and who has the right to it's water. Egypt, Tanzania, Kenya, Sudan, Ethiopia, Uganda and many more. All countries needs the Nile to survive.
This region is a very hot spot for a major military show down within the next 10-30 years. IMO Egypt will be the one making the "wrong" step or turn in this matter.

I'm just guessing.

That could definatly be interesting. There would be a lot of UN and NATO and other involvement too. Awesome scenario! I had never considered a conflict in that region.

 

[Izzy1]

Quote:
Originally Posted by rattmuff
I can imaging a major conflict concerning the Nile and who has the right to it's water. Egypt, Tanzania, Kenya, Sudan, Ethiopia, Uganda and many more. All countries needs the Nile to survive.
This region is a very hot spot for a major military show down within the next 10-30 years. IMO Egypt will be the one making the "wrong" step or turn in this matter.

I'm just guessing.

That could definatly be interesting. There would be a lot of UN and NATO and other involvement too. Awesome scenario! I had never considered a conflict in that region.

I must admit, this thread rekindled memories of a lecture when I was back in Uni that discussed a very similar scenario. If memory serves, it centred upon Sudan potentially building its own dam on the Nile and thus affecting the river's flow into Egypt. The situation if I remember correctly, quickly escalated into a larger regional conflict.

In a region already with its fair share of flashpoints, the potential for "water-wars" also exist between Israel, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon. The latter three nations rely heavily on the River Jordan for their water needs; yet Israel's possession of the Golan means that it could manipulate the river's source waters - even divert the flow with obvious repercussions.

Likewise, similar fears exist in regards to Turkey's Ataturk Dam project, which allegedly already has effected the flow of the Tigris River through Syria and Iraq.

Given the vital need for such resources, the potential for conflict over water in the near future must not be underestimated.

 

[CodE]

I think we should start more discussion on the 'water-wars' as they are being called. Who would have something to gain in Africa by taking advantage of the Nile, who would fight who? Who would win, and who would pick a side, and who would watch from the sidelines?

No doubt water is vital for everyone, and can be manipulated like anything else, this blue gold could see conflicts fought for it, as real gold was fought over years ago.

 

[StingrayOZ]

Im formulating a story based on Australia verse Indonesia conflict in particular fighting over west Irian Jaya.

Given the tensions between the two country, the huge wealth Australia is generating from its resources boom, the fact that Irain Jaya has always been a little uneasy.

 

[Izzy1]

Im formulating a story based on Australia verse Indonesia conflict in particular fighting over west Irian Jaya.

Given the tensions between the two country, the huge wealth Australia is generating from its resources boom, the fact that Irain Jaya has always been a little uneasy.

Thats another good one.

I wonder if in such a scenario, Indonesia would resort to forms of asymetric warfare to counter certain areas where she may lack in conventional warfare capabilities?

 

[eaf-f16]

China, Taiwan and the U.S. For Sure. Taiwan will declare formal independace and China will attack. The U.S. will interfere to protect Taiwan.

I'm not sure that Taiwan would even survive the first round of attacks. There are 1,000 SRBM's pointed at it. Why doesn't Taiwan peacefully become part of China and just govern it self like Hong Kong?

 

[Waylander]

There are several interesting threads here which deal with a possible Taiwan conflict, so before starting a discussion you should try the search capability of the forum.

I can understand why Taiwan doesn't want a model like Hongkong.
Hongkong itself would have not voted for getting part of China and there are several problems concerning the eroding of the democratic institutions or the problems with the free press.

In the end I hope that the PRC is not going to try to take Taiwan anytime soon because I am of for Taiwan for some time in three weeks.

 

[swerve]

I'm not sure that Taiwan would even survive the first round of attacks. There are 1,000 SRBM's pointed at it. ...

The explosive load of 1000 SRBMs was equalled or surpassed by some single air raids on Germany in WW2. Some cities hit by such raids survived well enough that it was felt necessary to bomb them again.

London was hit by 2400 V-1 & several hundred V-2 in 1944-45. SE England as a whole was hit by 4900 V-1 & 1100 V-2. It survived.

Taiwan would survive.

 

[kato]

There are 1,000 SRBM's pointed at it.

The three Iranian population centers Tehran, Qom and Isfahan were hit by 200-220 SRBMs (Al-Husseins mostly) in Spring 1988 alone. Tehran alone counted over 160 impacts within this 7-week "War of the Cities". Iran as a whole was hit by about 550 SRBMs during the entire Iran-Iraq war.

This triple attack in Spring 1988 only caused about 2,000 casualties, 6,000 injured and maybe 10,000 temporarily displaced people, although a quarter of the population (maybe 2 million ppl) fled from the cities afterwards - and the Tehran urban area is quite more populous than say Taipeh.

And i doubt China would use nukes on Taiwan really - even though a portion of those 1,000 SRBMs are nuclear-tipped just in case of course.

The end result of the "War of the Cities" btw was the negotiation for peace in the Iran-Iraq war. However, what should not be forgotten is that this SRBM barrage was a desperate "last measure" for Iraq - they were on the verge of losing to Iran after 8 years of war, and with Iran having recovered pretty much everything Iraq seized by then. Iran got concessions in the Shatt-el-Arab and otherwise still - a defined border, and on Iran's terms. That SRBM barrage's final purpose was to stop the war, not to beat the enemy into submission.

 

[eaf-f16]

And i doubt China would use nukes on Taiwan really - even though a portion of those 1,000 SRBMs are nuclear-tipped just in case of course.

Are you kidding?! Wouldn't that defeat the whole purpose of invading? I thought they wanted the land afterwards. Anyways I really hope they find a diplomatic solution for this (especially now that you mention the nukes) and that Taiwan co-operates more with China.

 

[eaf-f16]

I can imaging a major conflict concerning the Nile and who has the right to it's water. Egypt, Tanzania, Kenya, Sudan, Ethiopia, Uganda and many more. All countries needs the Nile to survive.
This region is a very hot spot for a major military show down within the next 10-30 years. IMO Egypt will be the one making the "wrong" step or turn in this matter.

I'm just guessing.

That's a pretty nice scenario to imagine. But what do you mean Egypt would be the one that will be making the wrong step?

 

[kato]

That's a pretty nice scenario to imagine. But what do you mean Egypt would be the one that will be making the wrong step?

They already did. When they built the Aswan Dam, they got into some problems with Sudan (because the dam would flooden Sudanese territory). Was finally solved by an agreement to pump a set amount of water for irrigation into Sudan. Nasser also threatened other nations with war "if they took Egypt's water". And when in 1990, Egypt thought that Israeli engineers were building a dam in Ethiopia, they threatened "dire consequences" to Ethiopia (Boutros Ghali, who was foreign minister of Egypt at the time, included war among these possible consequences).
Among recent consideration in Egypt is also that it's not particularly wise to pretty much store the water supply (i.e. the Nile) in other nations, especially since the Aswan Dam causes some problems with the regular flow of the Nile within Egypt itself.

Uganda, Tanzania and Kenya won't fight between themselves over it. They're on some good tracks to unite to a single confed country (East African Federation).
Of course this EAF could get into quite some hotbed with both Ethiopia and Sudan. Not only from the Nile waters, but also because there's some disputed territory in the area. Though, since the EAF is also planned to include Rwanda and Burundi, it will be more focused on the western border most likely in the first decade or so.

 

[SaudiArabian]

the most dangerous conflict is China invading Taiwan and the US military gets involved. but the possibility of this to happen is very low



the conflict which has higher possibility to occur in the near future are new Gulf war involving the US launching strikes against Iran military bases and nuclear sites and then the GCC countries get invloved if a member of the GCC is attacked by Iran

and then after that , some sort of spark (similar to the Lebanese war 2006 but this time Iran has no hand in it) initiating a new Arab-Israeli war which will end with cease-fire


that is what i expect (Not what i wish) in the future