WPR's The New Rules: U.S. Resilience Can Rise to Future Threats

Last month I spent a couple of hours on the phone being interviewed for the next iteration of the National Intelligence Council's global futures project. This one imagines the world in 2030, and the interview was part of the organization's early polling process of experts around the world. I've participated similarly in previous iterations, and I've always found the NIC's questions fascinating for how they reveal the group's primary fears about the future.

Read the entire column at World Politics Review.

Comments

[Ted O'Connor]

Interesting that you identify "Coastal Cities" as important players. Made me think. New York had 911, New Orleans the great disaster and government failure and San Francisco became the first gay haven. Now New York has a problem with an initially small protest by a ragged group of young people against "Wall Street." The protesters seemed to lack focus and the whole thing was about to fizzle and die. Then a series of dumb moves by a couple of NYPD commanders on the street put the affair on the evening news, the internet and bingo...new life. Now some unions are joining the protest. Remember unions?

[Maduka]

A few points.

2030 is barely twenty years from now. I for one, will be in my fifties and a generation of Americans who came of age during the Iraq and Afghan campaigns will be in power.

2030 is also a scant fourteen years away from when American troops are scheduled to withdraw from Afghanistan and I can assure you the American appetite for intervention in "the Gap" will be very much reduced.

You mentioned that America will define the rules for engagement for the new sexy era of robotic warfare. Please what rules were applied in the assassination of Al Awlaki and how different from the Israeli assassination of Sheikh Yassin was it? You guys really need to come up with rules like yesterday, because the Chinese are going to start bumping off a lot of perceived enemies in ways you won't like.

You are also vastly over estimating America's capacity for adaptation (with respect to the rest of the World). You watched an economic basket case transform itself over a thirty year period to become the World's second largest economy (China) and you are still confident that Americans are the most adaptable creatures the World has seen.

Consider these questions:
1. Who has been the most adaptable in "shrinking the Gap"? Note it has been neither America nor the West - the West is still flogging the dead aid and humanitarian assistance model.
2. Is the current political gridlock in the US a sign of American adaptability? I doubt it.

Dr. Barnett, in the past, America had it easy. When World War II ended, your major industrial rivals were broke, so you made good use of that advantage. You were the last man standing.

Today and in the future, you will have to really compete. The Chinese are still in their copying phase, please anticipate what they will be up to, when they start innovating (which they will). Do not let the glitter of Apple and Facebook convince you that the American's are the only people who can do that kind of stuff (the British felt the same way during the Victorian era).

The parallels between 21st Century America and Victorian Britain are too neat to be ignored. We had the British Empire dissipating energy, fighting wars in places as diverse as the South African Cape and Malaysia and finally buckling to accommodate challengers to the established order. America has been handed a massive blow to its prestige in the Islamic World and is finally learning, like the British during the Boer War about the limits of hard power.

Consequently, I find your enthusiasm for drones and "whacking off" bad guys disappointing. There is no insurgency in the World that is not fed by a real grievance and neither you (nor the American foreign policy establishment it seems) seems to be either willing or capable of dealing with or discussing the remote causes of insurgencies in a sustainable manner.

Only a very out of touch set of people would look at regions like Africa and the Arab World, where unemployment rates are sometimes as high as 60% and conclude that it is better to spend more money and energy on counter-terrorism there than on trade relations and economic diplomacy (not humanitarian aid).

[Michael]

Dr Barnett: I don't see where the rise of megacities is contrary to the concept of a return to medieval times--some of the great powers of the Middle Ages were city-states or networks thereof.

Ted: Read Richard Florida's work when you get a chance. He makes the point that a welcoming environment for gays is usually a good sign of an environment conducive to creative work. From that point of view, San Francisco is doing just fine.