So I recently came across a report written last year by the U.S. National Intelligence Council on what the world may look like in seventeen years. Here is a summary of its view on world politics and true-religion believers:
- The whole international system—as constructed following WWII—will be revolutionized. Not only will new players—Brazil, Russia, India and China— have a seat at the international high table, they will bring new stakes and rules of the game.
- The unprecedented transfer of wealth roughly from West to East now under way will continue for the foreseeable future.
- Unprecedented economic growth, coupled with 1.5 billion more people, will put pressure on resources—particularly energy, food, and water—raising the specter of scarcities emerging as demand outstrips supply.
- The potential for conflict will increase owing partly to political turbulence in parts of the greater Middle East.
The full report is here. (The NIC is also predicted trends for 2020.)
Firstly, one interesting observation is how different newspapers interpret the findings. The Times of England’s headline mentions “superpower strife” and the increasing problems that will face the United States and European Union. The Guardian of England’s headline flatly proclaims “the end of U.S. dominance.”
Amir Mizroch, the news editor of the Jerusalem Post, summarizes the findings this way:
Fifteen years from now America is still globally preeminent, yet its relative power is in decline. The US faces multiple threats from state and non-state actors, some of which have superseded their nation states and could be in possession of weapons of mass destruction.
Mega-cities forge their own policies and partnerships.
Complex threats transcend geographic borders and organizational boundaries, and small local skirmishes quickly escalate into worldwide shooting wars. Asia and the Middle East are awash with WMD; space, the Arctic and cyberspace become increasingly militarized. Governments around the world take a zero-sum attitude to international affairs and retreat from free trade agreements, while simmering competition between nations results in a growing wave of nationalism, reviving historic tensions.
All of these interpretations are accurate, but they are different. This just goes to show that it is impossible for journalists to be objective — and, as a former one myself, I should know. What journalists should be is fair.
Secondly, the predictions themselves. As Mizroch notes:
…the report looks at how identity-based groups supplant the authority of nation-states, competing with one another for influence in a chaotic political environment. By 2025 a subtle but unmistakable power shift has enabled identity-centric groups to gradually supplant the authority of traditional nation-states. National leaders frequently find their authority challenged in a variety of indirect ways: mega-cities forge their own policies and partnerships, a multitude of social and political movements lobby for change, and ideologically motivated groups cause violent disruptions.
In an earlier post, I observed that increasing cultural nihilism is a symptom of the Western world’s subconscious despair at their countries’ seeming declines. (For the long-term effects, see Japan.) The report is correct in noting that the international system of nation-states in place since the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 will become increasingly vulnerable. As people throughout the world increasingly embrace their ethnic and religious identities — partly as a defense mechanism to combat their fears of globalization and what the future may hold — they will demand political rights as well. Countries that have historically been a heterogeneous collection of nationalities and religions — like, for example, the United States, Russia, and United Kingdom — will might come close to breaking apart because they are in the latter stages of the often-cited Tytler Cycle. When young people see what the world might look like in 2025, it is no wonder that they are extremely upset to the point of possibly committing intergenerational warfare in the future.
As the NIC notes, “the unprecedented transfer of wealth roughly from West to East now under way will continue for the foreseeable future” — until the Western world can kick its addition to oil and then stop funding autocratic regimes that in turn fund Islamic extremism under a Devil’s bargain to stop the terrorists from attacking them.
Countries like China, India, and Brazil will become increasingly powerful — perhaps to the point of dominance by bringing “new stakes and rules of the game” — because they are taking advantage of the opportunities provided by globalization while the United States is not. (I do not mention Russia, because that country is declining as well as a result of below-replacement-rate demographics, tensions inside between ethnic groups, and those outside with China. Russia’s current aggressiveness is like the last, violent rattle of a body five seconds before it dies.)
Of course, past trends to do not guarantee future results. But these changes are evident enough to those who have been paying attention. Interesting times, and all.
Tags: true religion, jewish religion, religion clothing, conservative politics, religion t shirts, religion brand, world politics, gcse religion
Now Available: E-Book download: “Letters from Israel: An American journalist’s adventures in the Holy Land.“
Every little bit helps! Any donations to help us keep writing are much appreciated:
Related posts:
1) You seem awful sure of yourself. Where’s your crystal ball?
2) I hardly think any youth are reading the NIC report or recognize most of the trends that it or you discuss. Jeff(Quote)
First, people truly have no idea what is going to happen in the near future, much less the more distant future. Remember the essay, “The End of History,” written in 1992? It foresaw universal adoption of Western-style liberal democracies worldwide. Um, not really. Thanks for guessing.
Second, you state, “As the NIC notes, “the unprecedented transfer of wealth roughly from West to East now under way will continue for the foreseeable future” — until the Western world can kick its addition to oil and then stop funding autocratic regimes that in turn fund Islamic extremism under a Devil’s bargain to stop the terrorists from attacking them.” The transfer of wealth from West to East goes, in large part, to the economies of China and India, not to mention Japan, rather than the Middle East. The primary commodity imported by the US from the Middle East, for example, is oil. Only 8% of US imports is crude oil; only 30% of US crude oil imports are from the Middle East. That means that 2.4% or so of transferred US wealth goes to the Middle East (roughly). That’s not a primary concern. The primary concern should be capital goods (30% of imports) and consumer goods (32% of imports) rather than just oil. I think your obsession with the specter of Islamofascism is a byproduct of choosing to live in a state constantly threatened by those around it, and ends up by vastly overstating the threat to the larger world at the hands of the Islamic Republics in the Middle East. Believe me, I’m much more concerned about China than Iran. Dan(Quote)