THE NEW THREATS

As the debate over the value of the Iraq study group's report rumbles on, it's important to reflect on larger frame within which this debate is taking place. This frame, little discussed as a cohesive phenomenon, is the emergence of a new class of threat.

We can catch a glimpse of this new class (and given that even a glimpse is enough to stump the establishment, it should be a dire warning) in Iraq. What is different about the war in Iraq is that the threat developing there shows a pattern of bottoms up growth -- percolating upwards through catalyzed organic processes -- rather than the familiar competition between nation-states and the historical patterns of guerrilla/proxy warfare. It's also fundamentally different in that there isn't any human agency than controls more than a minor fraction of its process of development. Here's a quick list of threats that fall into this new class (not exhaustive):

• Global guerrillas. As seen in Iraq, Nigeria and other locales. Open source warfare and systems disruption. Fragmentation and chaos that can swallow states and regions. In the mid-term: super-empowered actors that can wield bio-weapons.
• Peak oil and resource depletion. The acceleration of resource consumption due to the mainlining of China and India at the very point these resources are reaching capacity limits.
• Global warming. Not the slow change discussed, but rather a cascading change in weather patterns and ocean flows that drastically change continental climates. Ditto the mainlining of China and India as a driver here too.
• Pandemics. Bird flu and other forms of infectious disease that can sweep the world in the matter of days. Have infection, will travel.

Speed and Scale

In each case, the threat we see appears distant and remote until just before it becomes intractable, global, and (faintly) apocalyptic. One reason for this is that globalization and new technologies radically accelerate the speed at which these threat can grow/escalate. These threats don't just emerge in a form that can be dealt with through careful deliberation, they explode once they reach an ignition point.

The response we can generate to combat these threats is overwhelmed not only by the speed at which they can appear, it is also trumped by their scale. All of these threats intertwine the actions of billions of actors that span the globe and they can break individual nation-states like kindling wood. It defies logic to think that a nation-state or even a group of nation-states can even remotely approach the response necessary for mitigating this class of problem once its effects are felt.

Systemic Resilience

The only solution for these problems isn't something that gains much currency from the current decision makers. There isn't any built-in audience ready with money and support to make them happen (at least, not yet). The reason is that systemic resilience is hard. It reverses power relationships and pushes control to the edges. It simplifies processes and builds-in dampening forces to limit the impact of any shocks that ripple through our global network. It forces changes in individual behavior to broaden skill sets and limit dependencies. In short, it isn't anything you will read in any report generated by current or past power brokers.

How do we make it easier to get from here to there before it is forced upon us? I'll write more on this in future briefs.

Comments

[enigma_foundry]

Three of the four threats are directly related to the sustainability imperative, whereas the first is tied in that all of the things that we do now to solve the sustainability issues also make our defense against the global guerilla that much more resilient.

Unlike the mentality of defending a perimeter (always a losing proposition) the adapt-to-the sustainability-imperative approach will result in defense in depth, throughout all levels and locations of society.

I have explored these linkages in a series of posts (which was inspired, I must admit by several exchanges with John Robb here)

First: There is this post: "Rita, educating us all" at
http://enigmafoundry.wordpress.com/2006/11/29/rita-educating/

And then there is an issue that we have to face, and that is AQ tendency to absolutely maximize the damage done by any of their attacks, so that we may not have a chance to learn from our mistakes (in other words, our OODA loop is too stretched out) I explore this as it relates to some possibilities in biological warfare in this post: Conceptualizing Biological Warfare at:

http://enigmafoundry.wordpress.com/2006/12/05/conceptualizing-biological-warfare-defense/

I understand that there are those who think that such a post might be useful to our enemies, but IMHO, starting the public debate about the inadequacy of current preparations for bio-defense is a necessary part of getting the problem fixed. To this end, I would refer you to Amartya Sens observation, in his excellent book Development as Freedom that there has never been a famine in a country with a functioning multiparty democracy. However disease outbreaks, being much more difficult to control than a famine, need much more robust, focused and sustained public debate if the necessary resources are to be committed for bio-defense.

I am extremely pessimistic about our chances of overcoming this issue, before a great deal of pain, suffering and needless deaths occur, and see a non-trivial chance of a disease outbreak claiming millions of American lives, unless more is done, soon.

Another post may be of interest:"The new Front line: Climate Change"
http://enigmafoundry.wordpress.com/2006/11/05/the-new-front-line-climate-change/

[Duncan Kinder]

Some time ago, commenting on this blog, I recommended Thomas Cahill's _How the Irish Saved Civilization_.
http://www.amazon.com/Irish-Saved-Civilization-Hinges-History/dp/0385418493/sr=8-1/qid=1165616903/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/105-1492388-2926814?ie=UTF8&s=books

It discusses how Ireland's monasteries, on the remote fringes of the West, served as a refuge to preserve civilization while barbarism overwhelmed Rome.

[Duncan Kinder]

Annother obeservion re: John's post.

John essentially is stating that the United States would be a lot better off it it looked more like rural Vermont.

Unfortunately, it seems as if the punch line from the joke about the guy who was asking directions from a Vermont farmer applies: "You can't get to thar from here."

How each of us, reading this blog, could nevertheless get to thar, is the trick.

[Azr@el]

We have exceeded our limit of elasticity; we lack the ability to undertake fundamental reforms; we have reached a plateau and we are to scared to jump any higher for fear of losing what we have achieved. It began with the nonsense of 'american exceptionalism'; whenever a people start to attribute their success to a attribute that is unique to them and inaccessible to their competitors then the immediate future becomes one of a series of missteps soaked in hubris. We need the humility that empires but can so readily be found in any true republic. We need to learn from our mistakes and stop hiding behind the need to constantly create a national myth. We have done great things as a nation and we have done horrible things as a nation, the sooner we can come to grips with that reality then the sooner we can stop sking questions such as, "why does the world hate us so much?"

We need to present the world with a vision of a better tommorow, not this idiotic notion of "democracy thru force of arms". Find nations in the islamic world ( non-islamic sa well) who are willing to make the undertake the major internal reforms ( anti-corruption, tax reduction, infrastructure, etc) that will see them transformed into viable economies. Offer these nations free trade accords and whatever targetted aid will aid their economies grow and make their people wealthy thru trade and industry. Connect them to the global economy , make them give a damn about what is happening to their customers on the otherside of the planet. And the basket case nations, such as iraq? ignore them. Let them have a good look at the progress being made by other muslim states and leave the door open for them to join , but other than that , ignore them. This has to be a sustained multi-generational commitment on the part of the u.s. , if done properely it can boost the u.s. economy and can be paid for completely out of the current military aid we give to egypt and israel.

This brings me to another point, the two largest distortions in u.s. foreign policy are oil and israel. If we start a massive program of enegy self dependence maybe in 2 genrations we can wean ourselves off foreign oil, but every year we can increase our ethanol production or increase our fuel efficiency we can decrease the grip on our nut-sacks that chavez,abdollah et al have become so comfortable with over the years. Israel is a much simpler problem, just say no. Israel does not serve either our short term interests in the region nor our long term global interests. The holocaust was a horrible atrocity just as bad as the armenian or rwandan genocides, but we were not responsible for any of them. The only genocide we ever participated in was the one against the native population of theis continent and we are trying to make up for with casino licenses. Te israels have been unable to transform any of their military victories into a political victory and now the pendulam is shifting and they can't seem to generate any more military victories, this bodes ill for them. But why should american prestige and global standing be tied to this sinking anchor called israel? Can someone explain why the last superpower must have this albatross afixed to our neck in this death grip? We should offer the same deal to israel we offer those muslim states , shape up and we'll help you become an example , continue doing what you're doing and we'll ignore you.

If the president of the united states was not so completely disconnected from reality, he next steps would be easy. A) weather whatever political backlash their is in washington from aipac and the pro-israel lobby and inform the israels that u.s. recognizes a palestinian state with east jerusalem as it's capital on the complete territory of 1967. This will knock the wind out of the iranians, their influence in the levant will be shatterd. Follow this up with demanding the immediate vacation of the shebba farms , thus removing hizb'e'allahs last remaining reason to bear arms. Then inform both syria and israel that the u.s. will sponsor a meeting between the two to finalize the complete transfer of the golan heights to syria in exchange for arab recognition of israel and full normalization.

Will the world be all sunshine and roses the next day ? hell no , not even close , expect a few people going ape-shit and blowing themselves to protest. But it will have seriously set back iranian influence in the region and defused much of the anti-american tension in the region. And then after haveing knocked the iranians down a few pegs do we then contain and ignore them? No! exactly the opposite , from a postion of strength to their position of weakness( momnetary weakness) we begin having those long set of discussions that we've been putting off for a generation. Eventually we're going to have to talk to them , somethings you just can't keep putting off, but when we do , let's try to make sure we are not doing it on bended knee begging them to yank our chestnuts out from that place that makes vietnam seem warm and inviting.

[zenpundit]

Hi John,

"How do we make it easier to get from here to there before it is forced upon us? I'll write more on this in future briefs."

Building systemic resilience is going to require culture-building - educating the class of creators and the more entrepreneur-like CEOs in its value. In turn, they will put pressure on/model for the political class they way previous trends ( "re-engineering") seeped into the USG. This will take time.

Which we probably have less of than we think.

[scalefree]

"Building systemic resilience is going to require culture-building - educating the class of creators and the more entrepreneur-like CEOs in its value."

We need to accelerate the rate at which we find each other. We need better tools, widely deployed, for managing social networks. Reputation systems, reputation-based voting systems, large-scale project management systems. Parallel with that we need resilience training, either focused ala the Iron Angel exercizes or ad-hoc through events like Burning Man (you think it's all about sex, drugs & art? How many cities have you built? I've built two (so far) that sustained 30-40,000 people for a week in the middle of a desert. Just about all of them are people you'd want at your back in a crisis - see point one.).

[tim302]

John,
I've been reading your blog for a long time now, and I think it's great to see the conversation moving in the direction from identifying the problem, to what to do about the problem.

If there's any place on the internet to get a good discusion about resiliency going, it's here.

And now, I better get back to studying for finals.

[Andy]

I'd add a few more potential threats in the future.

1. Overpopulation - creates all kinds of political instability due to resource harvesting, employment/unemployment, and the loss of the legitimacy of the state when basic services aren't provided. I agree that China and India are the two major nation states to kepe an eye on when (not if) the global economy takes a crap.
2. Clean Water - already an issue in the Israel/Palestine stalemate, the lack of potable water will become a greater issue over time. I expect Canada and Russia to leverage this with massive fresh water exports. How this will affect their environments is unknown.

[enigma_foundry]

I have taken a stab at establishing some principles to guide the needed transformation in my ppost below:

The Ghost Map and 5GW: The answer is blowing in the wind

John Robb has an interesting post in which two astute points are made, and flowing from these, an important question is raised. The answer to his question depends on our thinking across disciplines, to see a very similar structure in a problem that was solved in Victorian London. The differences and similarities of John's question to the problem in Victorian London provide for a clear a straight-forward development of the path forward. First, his post starts:

see more at:
http://enigmafoundry.wordpress.com/2006/12/09/the-ghost-map-5gw-the-answer-is-blowing-in-the-wind/

[stevelaudig]

"Pandemics. Bird flu and other forms of infectious disease that can sweep the world in the matter of days. Have infection, will travel."

Out of the disruptions of WWI [the second to next to last European Civil War followed by WWII and the Cold War] came the great flu pandemic. Out of disruptions of the civil war of the people of "the books" [Christian and Jewish versus Muslim] will come the great something pandemic all that's needed is sufficient disruption of public health [how many could die in Iraq now of avian flu without anyone knowing due to health system disruption], sufficient population [ Iraq, and Afghanistan are large enough] the illnesses are always evolving, they are meta-opportunistic waiting for a meta-weakness in prevention.

[Jack Boot]

Mr. Robb,

Your site is great.

I like your view of our near future. Could you, or any of the other readers, please comment on what I can (legally) do to help this future come quickly.

m-Xmas everyone!

[adam]

John,

I'd suggest that any solution that relies on current American politicians having either the courage or character needed to stand up is a total non-starter until the situation becomes so bad that there isn't a choice.

We're not there yet, but in 10 or so years we will be. Problem is that in the real world its quite possible to get so deep into a hole that you cannot get out of it. Just ask the people of Easter Island.

Azrael,

All good points. Some minor side notes: a) tax reductions aren't really related to having a viable economy and reflect an oddly American position. One of the major US "achievements" in Iraq was making the income tax only 15% - but no one in Iraq paid income tax (under Iraqi law) except civil servants. The Americans simply assumed that Iraqi tax law and US tax law were interchangable.

"Can someone explain why the last superpower must have this albatross afixed to our neck in this death grip?"

OK I'm going to ignore the clingy US military relationship with the Israelis post-Vietnam when the US military were desperate for something to grow towards. Its not my area and others can handle it better (Marcello? Any thoughts?).

The short answer is that the Israelis have a lot invested in US politicians.

The long answer is to say that the short answer actually mis-states the situation.

The current dogma in the US is that America must support Israel to achieve US objectives in the Middle East as Israel, like America, battles and fights the same "terrorists". Like most things said by US politicians on the Middle East this isn't true, but would take some time to examine and reality is so over-rated, so it goes unquestioned.

The reason that this has become dogma is that the Israelis have a massive, interlinked, and powerful set of organisations dedicated to maintaining a strong hand on the US political system using a combination of money and influence. This has been true since at least 1947 when Truman received $2 million dollars (equal to $15-16 million today. Source: Gore Vidal) for his then-impoverished 1948 presidential bid. Truman gave these kind supporters Israel, which in terms of return on investment is a pretty good deal.

It should be noted that about 80% of American Jews vote Democrat and the vast majority of them opposed the Iraq war (far more so than the general population) and this is not reflected in the political organisations that claim to represent their interests. Its hardly a shock that this happens, that's life.

Both Bush and Kerry were backed by Israel in 2004. Lacking actual Jewish votes for the Republicans, AIPAC and some of Bush's crazier Christians have formed a new theology of Christian Zionism based on the idea that the sooner Palestinians are eliminated from Jerusalem (or Earth) the sooner Christ will return. I'd imagine that the AIPAC officer that came up with that one dropped a testicle from stopping himself laughing. Still they do have lots of votes. On the other side Kerry (or AIPAC, which kindly provides pre-written speeches and essays for politicians to use) wrote an article entitled: "The Cause of Israel is the Cause of America".

But, I hear you cry, as AIPAC works for a foreign power (Israel) its political financing activities in the US should fall under US laws. True, but AIPAC has an exception to the Foreign Agents' Registration Act. How convenient is that?

In 2002 Haim Saban (also AIPAC) gave $12.3 million to the Democrats and he's only one person. In 2001, Mother Jones listed the 400 leading contributors to the 2000 US elections. Seven of the top 10 and half of the top 250 were Jewish, and Jewish money is assumed - by US politicians - to be pro-Israel. To be fair quite a lot of this cash comes from Israel and is sent through American-based middle-men.

The Israelis give this much money to US politicians as, once elected, the politicians are usually very open handed with the taxpayers money (which in turn gets recycled back to US politicians). US support for Israel comes at a significant monetary cost to the US taxpayer. Israel (as wealthy as Spain) is the only US aid recipient that does not have to report what it spends the money on. Its little noted, but since 1973 Israel has cost the United States about $1.6 trillion, around $30,000 per Israeli, and about twice the cost of the Vietnam War. To put it another way - for each starving African the US gave a dollar, they gave each Israeli $250.

None of this is particularly controversial, it just doesn't get discussed much in the US. There are any number of accounts of this starting, IIRC, in 1978 with Lilienthal's The Zionist Connection (possibly out of print - I lost my copy in a move about 2 years ago), via Findley's 1985 They Dare To Speak Out (Findley was a thwarted US politician who got taken out by AIPAC - he's very bitter).

http://www.amazon.co.uk/They-Dare-Speak-Out-Institutions/dp/155652482X/sr=8-1/qid=1165750933/ref=sr_1_1/026-1119153-6791653?ie=UTF8&s=books

Theres also a neat collection of essays I picked up at Politicos a while back called "The Politics of Anti-Semitism" which deals extensively with the Israel lobby.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Politics-Anti-Semitism-Alexander-Cockburn/dp/1902593774/ref=pd_bxgy_b_text_b/026-1119153-6791653

One of the most interesting is on the idea of Dual Loyalties where neo-cons like Feith (and his convicted AIPAC / Israeli spy associate Larry Franklin) can work for both America and Israel in key strategic positions with no-one questioning the security issue (despite the fact that Israel spies extensively on the US).

This year Mearsheimer and Walt wrote "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy" first at Harvard (which publically disowned it) then for the Atlantic Monthly (which had originally commissioned it and then rejected it). It finally appeared in the London Review of Books.

http://ksgnotes1.harvard.edu/Research/wpaper.nsf/rwp/RWP06-011/$File/rwp_06_011_walt.pdf

Its significant that today no US publisher / university will allow criticism of Israel. In fact the paper contains nothing that a half-decent second or final year politics student shouldn't know. The fact that it caused massive shock in the US is a sign of how twisted and knotty the US-Israel relationship is.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-op-fairbanks14may14,0,3078249.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions

So what does the US as a nation get out of this? Nothing. What do US politicians get out of it? Quite a lot. To change this would require current US politicians to change and for the new ones to no longer need money. I wouldn't hold my breath.

[enigma_foundry]

The other observation I would add is that high-tech engineering of a highly lethal organism may not be necessary to create and maintain a network-disrupting level of disease. For example, if AQ got hold of SARS virus, it could be quite an effective weapon, and could destroy economy of certain areas that depend on travel.

So pandemics can be seen a GG WMD-enablers.

[ramsis]

adam a few good points about israels political contribututions to the united states, but we must also aknowledge that there are many countries that openly (and some not so openly)support american politicions in our country (chinese contributions to clinton wich also extensively spy on us or saudi contributions to bush are just a couple of examples).Azrael. we must remember that america provides large amounts of finacial aid to israel but the world provides far greater aid to the palestinians. america also provides aid to many countries that don't get politically involved here or like us much for that matter . one only has to see the beautiful french villa that mrs. arafat enjoys to see where some of your tax dollars went.for all the weapons we sell to israel we have never interviened militarly on israels behalf, we never needed too. the solviet union and a wide variety of nations have all tried at one time or another to openly act against israel but for some reason it is our sales of equipment to israel that is critisized the most. I find it particularly funny that of the major issues expressed by john that we face in our future the best chance at dealing with them wether its bird flu, global warming or global gurillas will most likly come from israeli scientists or military experience

[Azr@el]

Contrary to some , i feel that most of the threats posited in the article are second order effects. They are symptoms of the world system breaking down under the strain of globalization knitting us tighter together and the general mismangement of this process exhibited by the world's sole remaining super power. We are confronted by a strange epoch in american foreign affairs where the principle mandate is to deny the rise of a near peer competitor to american might, yet at the same time american leadership of the free world is at all time low.

To manage the world's problems we need to have more than just confidence in ourselves, we need to have a vision of a fair future where the people of this planet can raise their children without having the dice loaded against them and we need to have a concrete plan for how to achieve this endgame.

We can't scream dictates to the poor of the world expecting them to obey becuase of our 'moral authority'. We need to convince them that it'll work and we need to put our money where our mouth is. Dealing with global guerillas can become a police matter once we have in place in functioning global system able not just to resolve inter-state disputes but also disputes between the peoples of vrious states. This might take the form of a gloabl court , where criminals such as osama bin laden can be brought to court and where people regardless of the flag the wear upon their lapel can have their day in court to prove their innocence or to pay for their crimes.

I hate to sound utopian, but i believe the system of social conflict resolution developed in the united states has a lot to offer the world as a model for how to cope with a new more interconnected world. And other nations such as swiss, and yes god-forbid the english might have something to contribute to the dialog regarding the implementation of institutions to channel the non-state conflicts of the future. The first step however is for the u.s. to put it's house back in order and once again be a light unto the world sans this pesky little albatross that has made a nest upon our necks.

[ramsis]

Azrael I do share your hope for the world but unfortunatly the reality is that the world is petty. Wrapped up in religious,racial,and cultural differences that it just cant seem to get over.we stress the need for "multiculturalism" in this country and for the most part it seems to be the right approach.The most concerning thing in this approach is our tolerating of intolerant cultures,and not tolerating but our insane need to embrace and protect them. Hamas has expressed on numerous occasions that at no time will they reconize Israels right to exist and have even went as far as stating the destruction of israel as a goal in its state charter. I don't think our cutting diplomatic ties with israel or the return to the 1967 pre existing borders will change anything. After all in pre war 1967 the Gaza strip and jeruselem belonged to Egypt and Jordan and not once did they seek to establish a palistinian homeland. So in conclusion i would state that unless the culture of religious oppression, sexism,and homophobic bigotry find room to reform they will always clash and be at odds with the only liberal democracy in the entire region, and the west will always be there to save them wich makes me wonder whom the real albatross in all this really is.