A military historian has warned that the world could be heading towards a third world war, identifying a particular country and potential military confrontation that she believes could trigger a much wider conflict.
Dr Sarah Paine, a historian and professor specialising in military strategy, shared her concerns during an appearance on Steven Bartlett's popular podcast, The Diary of a CEO.
With ongoing international tensions and conflicts raising questions about global security, Paine discussed how a confrontation involving major military powers could escalate beyond its original borders.
She also warned about the consequences of political leaders making decisions that could draw multiple countries into war.
During the interview, Bartlett presented a specific scenario involving a European country, asking whether it could lead to World War III.
Paine's response was direct.
Which country does Dr Sarah Paine believe could start World War III?
Dr Sarah Paine identified Russia as a potential trigger for World War III, agreeing that a Russian invasion of Poland could spark a wider international conflict.
During the podcast, Steven Bartlett asked whether a Russian invasion of Poland could mark the beginning of a third world war.
Paine agreed with the scenario, highlighting the danger of a confrontation involving Russia and a NATO member state.
She argued that Russia's leadership and its wider territorial ambitions were significant concerns for European security.
In particular, Paine expressed the view that Russian President Vladimir Putin wanted to restore elements of the former Soviet empire.
Her comments reflected her assessment of Russia's strategic objectives rather than confirmation that an invasion of Poland was being planned.
What did the historian say about World War III?
Paine warned that current international tensions could develop into a much larger conflict if governments continued along the same course.
She expressed particular concern about the possibility of nuclear weapons being used during a major confrontation.
When Bartlett asked what a third world war might look like, Paine acknowledged that she could not predict the precise outcome.
However, she described the potentially enormous human cost of nuclear warfare and the devastation that such weapons could cause in densely populated cities.
She also criticised Putin's leadership, arguing that his decisions demonstrated a willingness to accept significant human casualties.
Elsewhere in the conversation, Paine warned that the world could be moving towards a wider war because of decisions made by leaders of powerful countries.
Her comments were a warning about a possible future scenario, not a claim that World War III had already begun or was inevitable.
Why would a Russian invasion of Poland be so dangerous?
Poland is a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, commonly known as NATO.
Unlike Ukraine, Poland is covered by the alliance's collective defence commitments.
Under Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, an armed attack against one member is considered an attack against all members.
This means that a Russian military attack on Poland could require other NATO countries, including the United States, United Kingdom, France and Germany, to provide assistance.
Such a confrontation would create a serious risk of direct military conflict between Russia and NATO countries.
Because several of those countries possess nuclear weapons, the potential consequences of further escalation would be especially significant.
However, Article 5 does not automatically require every NATO member to declare war or deploy combat troops.
Each country determines what assistance it considers necessary, which may include military support or other measures.
What is NATO's Article 5?
Article 5 is the collective defence provision at the centre of NATO's founding treaty.
It establishes that an armed attack against one member state is treated as an attack against the alliance as a whole.
Members are then obliged to assist the country that has been attacked, taking action they consider necessary to restore security.
That assistance can include the use of armed force, but the treaty does not prescribe an identical military response from every member.
The provision was designed to deter aggression by making clear that an attack on one NATO country could provoke a coordinated response from multiple allies.
Article 5 has been invoked only once in NATO's history, following the September 11 terrorist attacks against the United States in 2001.
The principle remains central to European security and explains why a potential attack on Poland would carry consequences far beyond the country's borders.
Why is Dr Sarah Paine concerned about Russia's leadership?
During her discussion with Bartlett, Paine argued that Russia's strategic ambitions extended beyond the conflict in Ukraine.
She expressed the view that Putin wanted to restore the influence and territorial reach associated with the former Soviet Union.
Her concerns centred on the possibility that Russia could pursue objectives that bring it into direct confrontation with NATO countries.
She also discussed the dangers of escalation, particularly when leaders believe they cannot retreat from a conflict without suffering political or strategic consequences.
These are Paine's interpretations of Russia's intentions, rather than independently established plans for a specific future invasion.
Could a conflict between Russia and NATO become nuclear?
A direct confrontation between Russia and NATO would raise serious concerns because several countries involved possess nuclear weapons.
Russia, the United States, United Kingdom and France all maintain nuclear arsenals.
However, a conventional military confrontation would not automatically result in nuclear weapons being used.
Decisions about escalation would depend on the circumstances, military developments, diplomatic efforts and the choices made by governments.
Paine's warning focused on the potentially catastrophic consequences if a major confrontation escalated to that level.
Her remarks were intended to illustrate the risks involved rather than provide a specific prediction of how a future conflict would unfold.
Is World War III inevitable?
No. Paine's comments represent a historical and strategic assessment of possible future events, not evidence that another world war is certain.
International security experts examine potential conflict scenarios to understand risks and identify ways to prevent escalation.
NATO's collective defence arrangements are themselves intended to deter attacks by demonstrating that member countries would support one another.
Diplomacy, military deterrence and international cooperation can all influence whether tensions escalate or are contained.
For now, Paine's comments have drawn attention to the consequences of a hypothetical Russian attack on Poland and the importance of avoiding direct confrontation between nuclear-armed powers.
Her central concern is that decisions made during an existing conflict could have consequences extending far beyond the countries initially involved.
Sources: UNILAD, Callum Jones, October 30, 2026; Dr Sarah Paine's appearance on The Diary of a CEO, October 29, 2026; NATO's official explanation of Article 5 and collective defence.
