Deja vu all over again?

The future is getting repetitive…

At least, that seems a fair reaction to the 2025 report issued last week by the US National Intelligence Committee. Nothwithstanding the fuss made in much of the serious press, this prospect of a multipolar, interdependent world seemed pretty familiar.

The feeling is reinforced by the security futures report just out from a posh lot of foreign policy and military wise persons convened by Britain’s IPPR.

It is well put in a comment on the Global dashboard blog, where the writer asks:

“How many times do we need to be told that:

* Since the end of the Cold War, the international landscape has been transformed.
* During the next 30 years, every aspect of human life will change at an unprecedented rate, throwing up new features, challenges and opportunities.
* The unprecedented transfer of wealth roughly from West to East now under way will continue for the foreseeable future.
* The formidable acceleration of information exchanges, the increased trade in goods and as well as the rapid circulation of individuals, have transformed our economic, social and political environment
* New players—Brazil, Russia, India and China will bring new stakes and rules of the game to the international high table.
* Increase in global population will put pressure on resources—particularly land, energy, food, and water—raising the spectre of scarcities emerging as demand outstrips supply.
* There are a set of interconnected set of threats and risks, including international terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, conflicts and failed states, pandemics, and trans-national crime.”

Point taken. But it does pose a nice dilemma for a writer on such things. If this is all now taken for granted by folks who are paying attention to world events, it all still needs to be said, in brief. Straightforward enough. And many of these topics bear looking at in detail, to assess if they are as serious (or more serious) than all these reports suggest. I’m trying to make up my mind about biowar just now, which I tend to think is a less serious threat than has often been made out – and some agree.

That’s all fine. But if the basic list is becomong a litany, that implies a challenge to go further. To action, says Global Dashboard. At least to some more unexpected aspects of the future to writer about, say I. So I’m wondering what the key omissions might be?
(Why this blog?
– first post explains)

Explore posts in the same categories: futures studies, military

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: