Wednesday, June 14, 2006
GOTHS AND VANDALS
Lexington Green of Chicago Boyz noticed that the British Ministry of Defense seems to have an admiral who echos John Robb and Robert Kaplan:
"Very Global Guerillas-esque vision -- From the British MOD"
"Quoting Rear Admiral Chris Parry, head of the "development, concepts and doctrine centre at the Ministry of Defence", who is "charged with identifying the greatest challenges that will frame national security policy in the future."
He identified the most dangerous flashpoints by overlaying maps showing the regions most threatened by factors such as agricultural decline, booming youth populations, water shortages, rising sea levels and radical Islam. Parry predicts that as flood or starvation strikes, the most dangerous zones will be Africa, particularly the northern half; most of the Middle East and central Asia as far as northern China; a strip from Nepal to Indonesia; and perhaps eastern China. He pinpoints 2012 to 2018 as the time when the current global power structure is likely to crumble. Rising nations such as China, India, Brazil and Iran will challenge America’s sole superpower status. This will come as "irregular activity" such as terrorism, organised crime and "white companies" of mercenaries burgeon in lawless areas.'
Hmmm. I'd like to see the map. I bet it looks a lot like the Gap.
Meanwhile, the Brits are probably going to be axing one of their planned aircraft carriers. Wise move to ditch a Cold War anachronism -- or foolish move, sacrificing a valuable 4GW power-projection platform? I suppose it depends on what the person with the checkbook wants to hear.
The Brits are speculating about (reconfiguring for?) a new Barbarian Invasion. And it sounds kinda plausible.
That concerns me."
Globalization and immigration are not incompatible with assimilation nor must they result in catastrophic security problems. However when you opt to allow in large numbers of foreigners (U.S., E.U.), lack real border controls (U.S.), discourage assimilation of immigrants by promoting crackpot multiculturalism (U.S., E.U.), encourage the dole instead of employment (E.U.) , make acquiring citizenship nigh impossible (parts of E.U.) then you have to expect to have problems in your immigrant communities, at least on the margin.
Immigration can be reduced, assimilation can be encouraged, Islamist Imams can be prohibited entry or kicked out, inane economic policies that create permanent unemployment can be reversed. Actions can be taken to prevent autocratic kleptocracies from easily exporting their spillover costs from incompetent governance. Captured terrorists can be tried and hanged instead of being given "culturally sensitive" MRE's.
We have choices. We are not doomed.
UPDATE (LINKS):
DDC STRATEGIC TRENDS ( Hat tip to UK Fan )
The DDC link is worth an extended examination along the lines of the National Intelligence Council's 2020 Project.
"Beware: the new goths are coming" at Times Online
The Small Wars Council
"Modern-day Goths and Vandals threaten the West via cheap flights and the net" at The Australian. ¶ 12:06 PM
Lexington Green of Chicago Boyz noticed that the British Ministry of Defense seems to have an admiral who echos John Robb and Robert Kaplan:
"Very Global Guerillas-esque vision -- From the British MOD"
"Quoting Rear Admiral Chris Parry, head of the "development, concepts and doctrine centre at the Ministry of Defence", who is "charged with identifying the greatest challenges that will frame national security policy in the future."
He identified the most dangerous flashpoints by overlaying maps showing the regions most threatened by factors such as agricultural decline, booming youth populations, water shortages, rising sea levels and radical Islam. Parry predicts that as flood or starvation strikes, the most dangerous zones will be Africa, particularly the northern half; most of the Middle East and central Asia as far as northern China; a strip from Nepal to Indonesia; and perhaps eastern China. He pinpoints 2012 to 2018 as the time when the current global power structure is likely to crumble. Rising nations such as China, India, Brazil and Iran will challenge America’s sole superpower status. This will come as "irregular activity" such as terrorism, organised crime and "white companies" of mercenaries burgeon in lawless areas.'
Hmmm. I'd like to see the map. I bet it looks a lot like the Gap.
Meanwhile, the Brits are probably going to be axing one of their planned aircraft carriers. Wise move to ditch a Cold War anachronism -- or foolish move, sacrificing a valuable 4GW power-projection platform? I suppose it depends on what the person with the checkbook wants to hear.
The Brits are speculating about (reconfiguring for?) a new Barbarian Invasion. And it sounds kinda plausible.
That concerns me."
Globalization and immigration are not incompatible with assimilation nor must they result in catastrophic security problems. However when you opt to allow in large numbers of foreigners (U.S., E.U.), lack real border controls (U.S.), discourage assimilation of immigrants by promoting crackpot multiculturalism (U.S., E.U.), encourage the dole instead of employment (E.U.) , make acquiring citizenship nigh impossible (parts of E.U.) then you have to expect to have problems in your immigrant communities, at least on the margin.
Immigration can be reduced, assimilation can be encouraged, Islamist Imams can be prohibited entry or kicked out, inane economic policies that create permanent unemployment can be reversed. Actions can be taken to prevent autocratic kleptocracies from easily exporting their spillover costs from incompetent governance. Captured terrorists can be tried and hanged instead of being given "culturally sensitive" MRE's.
We have choices. We are not doomed.
UPDATE (LINKS):
DDC STRATEGIC TRENDS ( Hat tip to UK Fan )
The DDC link is worth an extended examination along the lines of the National Intelligence Council's 2020 Project.
"Beware: the new goths are coming" at Times Online
The Small Wars Council
"Modern-day Goths and Vandals threaten the West via cheap flights and the net" at The Australian. ¶ 12:06 PM
Comments:
<< Home
Mark
Here's the link to the UK MOD
http://www.jdcc-strategictrends.org/
UK fan
Here's the link to the UK MOD
http://www.jdcc-strategictrends.org/
UK fan
# posted by 
: Wednesday, 14 June, 2006
: Wednesday, 14 June, 2006
Mark,
I posted my thoughts over at Chicago Boys, though I don't understand how this is related to GG. I think Robb agrees that GG is much more than just barbarism. Likewise, Robb believes (I think) that connectedness defines danger, and the places mentioned tend to be less connected.
I had a second of thinking some official actually defend aircraft carriers of 4GW weapons. That would be insane.
Dan tdaxp
I posted my thoughts over at Chicago Boys, though I don't understand how this is related to GG. I think Robb agrees that GG is much more than just barbarism. Likewise, Robb believes (I think) that connectedness defines danger, and the places mentioned tend to be less connected.
I had a second of thinking some official actually defend aircraft carriers of 4GW weapons. That would be insane.
Dan tdaxp
Maybe I need to be more literal. I am not saying an aircraft carrier is a 4GW platform. I don't really even know what 4GW means, and I read Hammes' book, and I read the stuff on Lind's site. (I don't really accept the four generation breakdown of military history that this is all premised on, though it is interesting.)
Anyway, there was supposed to be this mild humor in there, where I said, "depends whose writing the check". So, to explain that, I am saying, these ships can be and have been dismissed as irrelevant, so how do the British Admirals explain what they want these aircraft carriers for, anwyay? If the future is "4GW", or even "5GW", whatever those things may be, then the RN's sales job will be explaining to someone unsmiling person from the Treasury how these ships are, by Jove, just what you need for it.
I agree with Sonny that the USA handles immigrants much better than does the UK, which in turn is much better than continental Europe. His suggestion that (1) this British admiral is saying that "all" immigrants are barbarians, or (2) that I am saying that, is not correct.
I agree with Mark also that there is nothing inevitable about any of these predictions. I just found it interesting that fairly serious sounding British military people are suddenly sounding like Robert Kaplan.
Anyway, there was supposed to be this mild humor in there, where I said, "depends whose writing the check". So, to explain that, I am saying, these ships can be and have been dismissed as irrelevant, so how do the British Admirals explain what they want these aircraft carriers for, anwyay? If the future is "4GW", or even "5GW", whatever those things may be, then the RN's sales job will be explaining to someone unsmiling person from the Treasury how these ships are, by Jove, just what you need for it.
I agree with Sonny that the USA handles immigrants much better than does the UK, which in turn is much better than continental Europe. His suggestion that (1) this British admiral is saying that "all" immigrants are barbarians, or (2) that I am saying that, is not correct.
I agree with Mark also that there is nothing inevitable about any of these predictions. I just found it interesting that fairly serious sounding British military people are suddenly sounding like Robert Kaplan.
# posted by : Wednesday, 14 June, 2006
: Wednesday, 14 June, 2006
For clarification's sake -immigration is generally positive, including Arab and/or Muslim immigration.
We have however a problem on the margins with illegal immigration in general and in terms of Islam, an acute security crisis, that requires a re-thinking of how we handle migrational " flows".
Subjecting Muslim flows to stricter scrutiny is little different than subjecting refugees from Communist countries to screening and debriefings during the Cold War. Most were poor souls but some few were sleepers, spies or common criminals that the Communist regimes wished to expel.
There is no requirement that we be self-destructively blind or, alternatively, hysterical.
We have however a problem on the margins with illegal immigration in general and in terms of Islam, an acute security crisis, that requires a re-thinking of how we handle migrational " flows".
Subjecting Muslim flows to stricter scrutiny is little different than subjecting refugees from Communist countries to screening and debriefings during the Cold War. Most were poor souls but some few were sleepers, spies or common criminals that the Communist regimes wished to expel.
There is no requirement that we be self-destructively blind or, alternatively, hysterical.
"There is no requirement that we be self-destructively blind or, alternatively, hysterical."
Mark, being a voice of reason in the blogosphere is a lonely task, but I am glad to see you doing it.
Sonny, I agree absolutely that the USA needs a range of capabilities, and not just COIN. I think the 4GW framework has some value, but I think that there are other ways of thinking about todays challenges that are probably equally or more valuable, particularly focusing on each country's historical competencies (and weaknesses). But I tend to be an inductive and historically-minded thinker not a system-builder or generalizer. Both approaches can have their utility.
Post a Comment
Mark, being a voice of reason in the blogosphere is a lonely task, but I am glad to see you doing it.
Sonny, I agree absolutely that the USA needs a range of capabilities, and not just COIN. I think the 4GW framework has some value, but I think that there are other ways of thinking about todays challenges that are probably equally or more valuable, particularly focusing on each country's historical competencies (and weaknesses). But I tend to be an inductive and historically-minded thinker not a system-builder or generalizer. Both approaches can have their utility.
# posted by : Thursday, 15 June, 2006
: Thursday, 15 June, 2006<< Home
