Geopolitical Predictions
Overview
The Pax Judaica framework includes specific predictions about near-term and long-term geopolitical developments. This article catalogs these predictions, examines their reasoning, and tracks their status.
Important note: These are predictions made by proponents of the framework, presented here for documentation. They are speculative and should not be taken as fact.
Regional Predictions
Europe
| Prediction | Reasoning | Status |
|---|
| Europe-Russia war | NATO expansion; Ukraine as trigger | Active conflict (Ukraine) |
|---|---|---|
| Civil wars in Europe | Immigration-driven social tension | Rising tensions in multiple countries |
| Economic collapse | Energy dependency; deindustrialization | Partial (energy crisis 2022-23) |
| Rise of far-right | Backlash against immigration, EU | Electoral gains across Europe |
Framework logic: Europe must be weakened so it cannot challenge the emerging order. Immigration creates internal division; Russia conflict drains resources and unity.
Mainstream analysis: The Russia-Ukraine conflict is widely analyzed through the lens of NATO expansion, Russian security concerns, and Putin's imperial ambitions.2 European energy vulnerability resulted from decades of policy choices regarding Russian gas dependence.3
"You have both war with Russia as well as civil war. So Europe is kind of screwed."
— Professor Jiang
United States
| Prediction | Reasoning | Status |
|---|
| Civil conflict/war | Left-right polarization | Increasing political violence |
|---|---|---|
| Venezuela intervention | Monroe Doctrine; resources | Threatened but not executed |
| Economic decline | Debt, de-dollarization | Ongoing concerns |
| Loss of Middle East | Iran war will force withdrawal | Not yet |
Framework logic: America must be exhausted militarily and economically. Internal division prevents unified response. Forced out of Middle East, assets transfer to Israel.
Mainstream analysis: American polarization is studied extensively by political scientists who point to factors including media fragmentation, geographic sorting, and institutional failures.4 Economic concerns about debt sustainability are debated by economists across the political spectrum.5
"Random violence will be more and more common in the United States... eventually they'll go to war... the left and right, they really don't like each other."
— Professor Jiang
Middle East
| Prediction | Reasoning | Status |
|---|
| US-Iran war | Final obstacle to Greater Israel | Tensions persist |
|---|---|---|
| Destruction of Iran | "Bomb the crap out of Iran" | Not yet |
| US loses/withdraws | Forced out of region | Partial (Iraq withdrawal) |
| Israel expands influence | Fills power vacuum | Abraham Accords; regional normalization |
| Greater Israel actualized | Nile to Euphrates | Not evident |
Framework logic: Iran is the last major regional power opposing Israeli hegemony. Its destruction (even if America also suffers) clears the path.
Mainstream analysis: US-Iran tensions stem from the 1979 revolution, nuclear program concerns, and regional proxy conflicts.6 The Abraham Accords (2020) normalized relations between Israel and several Arab states, though analysts debate whether this represents strategic realignment or diplomatic achievement.7
"America at some point will go to war with Iran, and this will destroy both countries... if America loses war, it's forced out of the Middle East. And once it's forced out of the Middle East, all its military assets go to Israel."
— Professor Jiang
Asia
| Prediction | Reasoning | Status |
|---|
| China-Japan conflict | Historical tensions; Taiwan | Tensions elevated |
|---|---|---|
| India-China conflict | Border disputes | Periodic clashes |
| US embargo of China | Sea power blockade | Trade restrictions increasing |
| Chinese economic crisis | Cut off from resources | Partial (property crisis) |
Framework logic: Asian powers must be kept in conflict with each other, preventing unified resistance to the emerging order.
Mainstream analysis: US-China competition is analyzed as great power rivalry, with scholars debating whether conflict is inevitable (the "Thucydides Trap").8 China's economic challenges, including the property sector crisis, are attributed to domestic policy decisions and demographic factors.9
Africa
| Prediction | Reasoning | Status |
|---|
| Israeli influence expansion | Resource control | Growing tech/agriculture partnerships |
|---|---|---|
| Proxy control | Through local governments | Alleged; difficult to verify |
| Resource extraction | Critical minerals, food | Ongoing competition |
Framework logic: Africa's resources are essential for the future order. Control must be established through proxies and economic leverage.
Mainstream analysis: Great power competition in Africa involves China, the US, Russia, and European nations, each pursuing economic and strategic interests.10
Timeline Scenarios
Short-Term (1-5 Years)
According to the framework, expect:
Medium-Term (5-15 Years)
Long-Term (15-30 Years)
Tracking Predictions
Confirmed/Partially Confirmed
| Prediction | Made When | Outcome |
|---|
| Russia-Ukraine conflict escalation | Pre-2022 | Confirmed (2022 invasion) |
|---|---|---|
| European energy crisis | Pre-2022 | Confirmed |
| Rising antisemitism post-Oct 7 | Framework predicted | Confirmed13 |
| US political polarization worsening | Ongoing | Confirmed4 |
| Israeli normalization with Arab states | Pre-Abraham Accords | Confirmed7 |
Unconfirmed/Failed
| Prediction | Made When | Status |
|---|
| Imminent US-Iran war | Repeated since 2000s | Not occurred |
|---|---|---|
| Imminent dollar collapse | Repeated since 2000s | Not occurred |
| Greater Israel expansion | Ongoing | Not evident at scale claimed |
| European civil wars | Predicted | Not occurred (tensions exist) |
Pending
| Prediction | Timeframe Given |
|---|
| US-Iran war | Imminent to 5 years |
|---|---|
| US civil conflict | Next decade |
| Jerusalem as financial center | 10-20 years |
| Global digital currency | 5-15 years |
Critical Analysis
Why Some Predictions Seem Accurate
Why Some Predictions Fail
The Falsifiability Problem
The framework is difficult to falsify because:15
- Failures can be explained as "delays" in the plan
- Unexpected events become "part of the plan we didn't see"
- The timeline is flexible ("it could take decades")
- Counter-evidence is dismissed as "deception"
Alternative Explanations
For each prediction area, mainstream analysts offer different explanations:
| Region | Framework Explanation | Mainstream Explanation |
|---|
| Europe-Russia | Deliberate destabilization | NATO expansion + Russian imperialism2 |
|---|---|---|
| US polarization | Engineered division | Social media + inequality + cultural change4 |
| Middle East chaos | Greater Israel plan | Failed states + sectarianism + resource competition6 |
| China tensions | Keep Asia divided | Great power competition8 |
| Immigration crises | Planned demographic replacement | War, poverty, climate driving migration16 |
How to Evaluate
When assessing these predictions:
Discussion Questions
Further Reading
- The Three Stages Model
- AI Surveillance Thesis
- Critiques: Evidence Gaps
- Interactive Map — Visualize predicted developments
This article catalogs predictions made within the Pax Judaica framework for documentation purposes. These are speculative claims, not established facts.
Contribute to this Article
Help improve this article by suggesting edits, adding sources, or expanding content.