Doubts on Global Conflict Predictions

The National Intelligence Councils Global Trends 2030: Alternative Worlds (2012) publication highlights several current and ongoing global trends which are then extrapolated out over the next 20 years to predict the major shifts in geopolitical relations.  The megatrends predictions in this publication seem tautological and most of them are already undergoing.  Doubtful are the more acute predictions the publication makes especially regarding armed conflict around the world.  Although the publication cites measurable decreases in the number of civilian and military casualties over the past two decades, other metrics which the publication disregards suggest the opposite trend may be at play. (59) For example, the proliferation of interstate cyber-warfare has the potential to inflict low cost to human life, but great cost to economies, infrastructure, or security.   The potential for nuclear conflict, especially on the Korean peninsular, the Middle East, or on the Indian sub-continent are larger than they have ever been before. 

The decline in interstate conflict, which the publication acknowledges, was widely cited among academics and members of the policy community during the 1990s as proof that the international system had become so benign that the United States no longer faced serious security threats of any kind.[i]  Chief among these academics was Dr. Francis Fukuyama who, in his famous book The End of History and the Last Man (1992) asserted that there existed an international consensus favoring democracy and free markets and the prediction that major conflict and war would be essentially a thing of the past.  The peace witnessed directly after the fall of the Soviet Union proved to be ephemeral.  The rise and rapid globalization of the phenomenon of international jihadism was not predicted in the years following the collapse of the USSR.   There is no evidence to suggest that our power of prediction in international relations and global conflict has improved over the last 15 years.  The point being, extrapolations into the future, even the seemingly near future of 10-15 years, tend to miss the mark.  Considering the National Intelligence Councils publication in 2012, it is worthwhile to note that there is no mention of the Islamic State, a non-state actor, with nation-state ambitions that has upended geopolitical dynamics in the Middle East. 

Increased demand for critical resources such as food, water, and energy, which the report discusses at length, may lead to increases in international conflict.   Countries such as Pakistan or India, which both have nuclear arsenals and large population that demand resource consumption, may be pushed to adopt more aggressive postures for these reasons.   

While fertility rates in most of the developed world are declining, this is not true for much of Sub-Saharan Africa. (60) Resource competition as well as large populations of young people goes against the publication’s prediction of a more peaceful world in the coming decades.

Finally, according to the United Nations, there are almost 60 million displaced refugees in the world today, most due to war and conflict.[ii]  The ongoing European immigration crisis is noticeably absent from the national Intelligence Council’s predictions.  Such diaspora is sure to cause intrastate tension and possibly violence.

Ultimately, this article seems more confident in the forces favoring peaceful global interaction.  However, the international system is inherently unpredictable and any extrapolations for future trends in geopolitics should be taken with a heavy dosage of salt and skepticism.

---

[i] Gaddis, John Lewis.  Surprise, Security, and the American Experience. 2004. Page 76.

[ii] According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) Global Trends: Forced Displacement in 2014 Report. http://unhcr.org/556725e69.html