FC 502: FUTURE EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENT

LESSON OBJECTIVES

The main focus is that the old actors (states, etc) are under assault from new organizations (MNC's, IGO's etc.) that are exerting power. This is causing states to have to be on the defensive. The cold war is over and the resulting system has not stabilized. Whether the world will be UNIPOLAR, BIPOLAR or MULTI-POLAR. There are three scenario's possible: Growing interdependence which causes everyone to work together. Interdependence that causes states to get paranoid and perceive others as a threat and third is that the world will be more dangerous because of new and powerful weapons that more people will have. "Actors will participate in resource wars" There are also challenges across the spectrum that will impact the future: Population growth, food production, nuclear and conventional arms races, the environment, drugs, health, income, trade, energy security and several others. (Papp, reading #1)

The international system has changed, and it is still unsettled. No one really knows what the emerging international system will look like, but we think it will be different than the one that preceded it. The world went from a bipolar structure, where our security challenges were clearly defined in terms of deterrence, to what is now a more diffuse and often confusing place. This, of course, makes defense planning particularly problematic.

The nature of the post Cold War is complicated by an explosion of what can be called global issues or trends. In large part, our focus on global issues is a result of the end of the Cold War. That is, we are no longer pre-occupied by the "balance of terror" that characterized Cold War international politics.

Some believe global issues make the national pursuit of security an anachronism because global issues are, in fact, GLOBAL. As Papp implies, "The interrelationships among population, food, economic development, resources, the environment, drugs and health are exceedingly complex, and few of the problems associated with any of these issues can be contained completely within national boundaries." In other words, because the effects of global issues transcend national boundaries, their importance transcends narrow definitions of security based on so called national interests.

Others believe global issues, while important, are not important enough to significantly transform the basic nature of international politics which, has been defined in terms of states pursuing their own interests. As Mearshimer argues, "there have been no fundamental changes in the nature of international politics. The state system is alive and well, and although regrettable, military competition between sovereign states will remain the distinguishable feature of international politics for the foreseeable future."

In either case, the point is: Understanding the importance of global issues can help us think about, and therefore evaluate the reasonableness of, alternative futures.

Some believe the transboundary nature of global issues will force states to be more cooperative in the future. Others think global issues, like the environment, might be causes of acute international conflict, and even war. The argument for a more cooperative world hinges on understanding the transboundary nature of global issues. For example, because the negative effects of environmental degradation freely crosses international boundaries, solutions to environmental problems requires collective action. Collective action demands a relatively high degree of international cooperation. In other words, in a world of pressing global issues, states can't go it alone. Petersen alludes to this point when he refers to 'integrationist' trends noting, "An 'evening out' is taking place in the relative positions of major political players; and, as a result of that growing interdependency, leaders are far more reluctant to go it alone in responding to major problems." Pushing this harder, we might even imagine a time when war is considered a truly collective action, thus shoring up the classical liberal notion of collective security.

Argument for a more conflict ridden or fragmentationist world: The argument for a more conflict ridden world hinges on what Petersen describes as "fragmentationist trends." Essentially, in many parts of the world, sets of opposing pressures are at work. Leaders in places like Bosnia, and parts of Africa are working hard to "extricate their nations and groups from the larger global community." In part, this is a reaction to an inability of these groups to relate and/or participate in some of the beneficial changes taking place in the world. In part, this is due to the inability of poor countries to deal with the negative effects of global issues (think environment). Pushing this harder, because there are so many poor countries in the world, we might expect to see an increase in ethnic isolation, and even ethnic war. As a minimum, "fragmentationist trends" seem to contradict the "evening out" mentioned above.

Many scholars believe we are seeing a combination of both integrationist and fragmentationist trends. That is, while an "evening out" seems to be taking place between major powers, minor powers are, in large part, being disenfranchised from the emerging international system. This is commonly known as the North-South conflict. Generally, the North-South conflict derives its name from the simple fact that, almost without exception, the wealthy nations of the world are in the northern hemisphere, and the poorer nations lie to the south.

States acting in a truly cooperative world do not face the same kind of threats that states acting in a fragmentationist world face. Therefore, collective security arrangements might be a real possibility. States acting in a fragmentationist world, however, have to be able to protect themselves because there is no higher authority preventing others from using force or threats of force to destroy or enslave them. Ultimately then, the size and composition of military forces are a function of the nature of the world we are living in (or the nature of the world we think we are living in).

Economics will prove to be an important driver in defense planning in the 21st Century. Decisions made today will effect our resources tomorrow as we begin to develop and plan a force structure for 2025.

Robert Gilpin makes this argument in Emergent International Economic Order. The collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the East-West conflict has relegated military power to a less important place in international life, and elevated economic strength to the highest importance. This view is bolstered by the emergence of the European Community as an increasingly unified economic actor in Europe; by the movement toward a North American Free Trade Area consisting of Canada, the U.S., and Mexico in the Western hemisphere; and, by the growth and interdependence of the economies of Japan and other states in East Asia. Proponents of this perspective argue that economics is the dominant force in international affairs, and that the world will soon be divided into 3 major trading blocs centered in Europe, Asia, and Americas.

Proponents of the multipolar perspective believe the next international system will be extremely diffuse with U.S., European Community, Japan and China playing major roles, but other states and other internat-ional actors also, on occasion, rising to prominence on a case-by-case or global issue to global issue basis.

More often than not, scholars who believe in this model see economic strength growing in importance in the next few years. However, they also believe military strength will continue to play an important role in international affairs

Continuing Economic Influences on Post-Cold War Defense Spending- Since the mid 1980s, a variety of economic factors squeeze the amount of money the government spends on national defense. Revenues, the amount of money the federal government collects, obviously places a ceiling on the amount of government spending. Since 1947, this ceiling has rarely crept above 20 percent of GDP. Since 1960, revenues have hovered between 18 and 20 percent. While enabling budgeteers to forecast revenues accurately, it has also established political and economic barriers to further budget growth. Raising the tax burden above 20 percent to spur deficit reductions is considered politically unfeasible. Additionally, policymakers are reluctant to push beyond the twenty percent ceiling because of the pressure it might exert on economic growth and international competitiveness.

• The national debt exerts downward pressure on defense spending. Servicing the national debt is considered a mandatory expenditure in the federal budget and the more the federal government spends on servicing the debt the less money is available for use in discretionary domestic programs and defense. In 1994, interest payments on the national debt alone accounted for 15 percent of the budget, being outpaced by only social security and national defense outlays. Along with the increasing downward pressure of the national debt is the influence of entitlements. Entitlements, also considered mandatory outlays, are legally binding obligations of the federal government to pay benefits to all who meet specific critieria. Entitlement programs comprise 49 percent of federal spending annually. The two largest entitlements, Social Security and Medicare, accounted for 33 percent of the federal budget in 1995. Under the present structure, the financial burden of these programs will increase as the American population ages.
  These budgetary issues have extra-budgetary impacts that in turn influence defense spending. Deficit spending reverberates through all sectors of government and the private sector creating indirect pressures on the level of real defense spending and the cost of defense. Deficit spending forces the federal government to borrow money from the capital markets. That government borrowing competes with the private sector for capital and in turn pushes interest rates higher. These interest rates drive both future private and government sector costs higher by making borrowing more expensive and limiting further capital investment. Additionally, the financial markets react negatively to the expansion of the national debt and deficit spending.
  As a result, investments in the private sector are suppressed, resulting in less earnings and in turn slower growth in federal revenues.
• As a result of the above factors, national security must compete with domestic discretionary spending for the remaining 34 percent of the federal budget. Domestic spending includes a wide variety of programs such as space, science, natural resource and environmental protection, disaster assistance, veterans' programs, highway and housing construction, law enforcement, education,and maintenance of the federal prison system to name but a few.
• Finally, the general state of the economy will influence as well as be influenced by revenues, the deficit, and defense spending. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the economy will grow approximately 2.3 percent a year through the end of the century.

Because future generations will act and react to the environment and the military differently, leaders in all areas, including the military, must appreciate the changes going on in our society today. These trends will not only impact the way we do business, they represent the most likely causes of strife in the future as different cultures and values collide. The future sociological environment has two dimensions, the changes taking place in the American culture, and the influences in the global arena.

Demographics will have a significant impact of the composition of US armed forces as well the uses of those forces. Greater cultural diversity, Greater class diversity, Greater age diversity, The changing American family, Changing values will come into conflict. All these trends, both domestic and international, will impact the shape of US armed forces and the kinds of contingencies we will respond to, as well as the threats we are likely to face. As is evident in all these trends, future threats can come from any direction. Perhaps what is most important for us to understand is that the technology drawing the world closer and serving to heighten the awareness of these differences may lead to conflict. Some key societal issues are:

• The welfare state: How much are we willing to spend. Will it take away from defense.
• Taxes: Are they too high or low. The consensus is that they are high. Less money for defense.
• Crime: A burden on the society which causes expense. Less money for defense.
• Public Opinion: Low level of knowledge, Volatility on issues, internationalism, tolerance to war deaths. All lead to smaller forces and more high tech (expensive) means.
• Education: Is expected to lag behind world, could impact innovation.

These things are just a sampling of what's happening. They provide stresses on the future development because they drain resources away from the productive and defense related items we may need. Everything is impacted from people (rifle toaters) to new airplanes (buy F-22 or new prison). (Reading #7, 9)

China is a wild card because it is big and is moving so fast. Its economy is booming, and the present rate of growth and development could be multiplied with a shift in governmental priorities. It is expected that China will be the worlds biggest economy by early in the next century. They want to be a world power and they may have the means soon to get there from here. ( reading #2 pg6)

502.22 Explain why Russia is considered a wild card in the international arena.
Russia is considered a wild card because it is in political and economic trouble. The breakup of the Soviet Union has been very traumatic and is not quite run its full course. They still have the second largest nuclear arsenal and a big army. They are also fighting among themselves over the course of their foreign policy. Ther is a real nationalist trend in some areas. There are two scenarios presented: 1. The CIS evolve into peaceful, free enterprise democracies, and 2. They disintegrate into chaos and war. Great choices. ( ing #2, pgs 4/5)

These two countries influence future force structure because they are the major threats, or areas of interest, out there. We must be prepared to deal with them in both best and worst case scenarios.

The primary idea of future technology is going to be the use of long range precision strike weapons, coupled to very effective sensors and command and control systems. They can kill at the touch of a button. The other main idea is the evolution of information warfare. Getting there with the most, the best and being able to deny the other guy his information is considered a key to the future of warfare. ( reading 315 pg1)

502.32 Explain the major technological developments that will influence our world in the early 21^st Century.

1. Artificial intelligence: The study of relatively simple computer algorithms that, when turned loose in the memory of a computer, exhibit all of the characteristics of a regular life.
2. Advanced microprocessors: (1) Optical integrated circuits that will be 1000 times faster than silicon chips. (2) Tamarack storage would replace the hard disk drive and may be able to store more than 10 gigabytes of data in a crystal small than a sugar cube.
3. Global communications networks to all parts of the world: Would involve satellite access everywhere, including the developing world.
4. Advanced virtual reality: Illusion of being immersed in an artificial world.
5. Molecular nanotechnology: Process of building things from the bottom up. Nanotech starts with individual atoms and uses molecular sized machines to put them together in predetermined configurations.
6. Cold fusion: Release of more energy than was originally put into the process.
7. Holography: Three dimensional projections.
8. Advanced robotics
9. Bioelectronic devices: Artificial replacements for major organs.
10. Zero-point energy: Ambient energy left in space after all heat has been removed at absolute zero.
11. Advanced high speed rail.

The main idea is that things will get smaller, faster, smarter, more complex, and effective. (Reading #11,12,13) Below is a chart from ppt presentation showing military uses.

502.41 Summarize the impact of technology in the evolution of combat operations.

Throughout history, there are numerous examples where technological breakthroughs have had a significant impact on combat operations. Addington indicated that the revolutionary changes in warfare after 1815 were primarily changes in technology and mirrored the Industrial Revolution...steam power, mass production, and discoveries in metallurgy, chemistry, and physics

Example: Steam Engine ----------> Naval vessels that were not at the mercy of the wind

Farm Tractor -----------> Tank

Revolutionary Changes in Warfare

• Land
• Steam locomotive, electric telegraph, and mass produced muskets
• Armored fighting vehicle
• Navy
• Steam engine replaced the sail
• Metal hulled ships
• Mobile torpedo
• Air
• Airplane

These technological changes affect warfare:

(Land) The railroad could move troops and supplies fifteen times as fast as their marching speed. The electric telegraph permitted instantaneous transmission of messages hundreds of miles between headquarters. Obviously, mass production put more weapons in the hands of the army. The armored fighting vehicle could negotiate broken ground, smash through barbed wire, and roll over trenches.

(Navy) Steam engines provided "on demand" propulsion systems at increased speeds.

(Air) The airplane was a leap forward in technology by initially serving as an observation and scouting platform and rapidly transitioning to a weapons platform.

More recently, technological advancements have changed the face of combat operations: Mobile communications, accurate multiple launch rocket systems, satellites, jet engines, aircraft carriers, precision guided munitions systems, and information technology.

Areas which could have a major impact on combat operations: •Art Intel: Smart Cockpits in planes, UAV's, smart bombs, unmanned cargo missions •Virt Real: 3 dimensional sit awareness, C2 of unmanned space missions, flight control •Bio-Tech: Food sources in space, O2 Production •Computational Chemistry: Better materials •Energy sources: Less fueling req, less waste, directed energy weapons, more range. The main idea is that things will get smaller, faster, smarter, more complex, and effective. ( Reading #11,12,13)

Some technological areas could hold promise for military application.

502.42 Given the increasing speed of technological developments, discuss the probable implications of how changes and innovation in technology will impact the world in the 21^st Century. With appropriate financing, anyone, anywhere in the world will have immediate access to multiple information and communication nets. Some of these areas could have military application.

There are a few things that are really being impacted with the coming 21st century:

•Speed; Everything is moving faster •Trend toward light: Fiber-optics, faster, more reliable •Information: Info in the form of knowledge is speed •Going digital: Information is digital, fast and getting faster •Global Connectivity: information anywhere in the world at any time •Global Accessibility: you can get information anywhere. •Information instead of people: Moving info is better, faster, safer •Power to the individual: access to information will make individuals more powerful •Systems thinking: Everything as a system instead of individual parts •Increasing Complexity; faster, more of it, systems, its all more complex •Vulnerability: because its digital and electronic, it is vulnerable to individuals •New structure/Organizations: to shape and transmit info •Unpredictability: it's moving too fast to predict what's next beyond the short term (reading #11, pg 10/11)

1. Apply tools to develop credible forecasts of the global and military environments in 2025.

2. Comprehend force structures that define rather than react to uncertain & technologically accelerating future.

3. Comprehend the future force structure capabilities and limitations of US military forces across the range of military operations, to include force development, organization, equipment, and personnel.

• Papp, Contemporary International Relations, Toward 2000 and Beyond
• Petersen, The Road to 2015, Political Relationships: Not the Same Old Politics
• FC502-1 Slides and Notes, The International-Political Environment most is in notes.
• INSS, Strategic Assessment 1995, Russia and Neighbors
• Bullet Background Paper on The Russian View of Future War
• Bullet Background Paper on The Chinese View of Future War
• Bullet Background Paper on The National Political Environment
• INSS, Strategic Assessment 1995, Economics
• Bullet Background Paper on The Future Economic Environment
• A Citizen's Guide to the Federal Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 1996
• Petersen, The Road to 2015, Extraordinary Technology
• Bullet Background Paper on The Future Technological Environment
• Bullet Background Paper on The Future Sociological Environment
• FC502-3 Slides and Notes, Technology, the Military and 2025
• 1996 Annual Defense Report, Chapter 11, Technology for the 21^st Century

READINGS RATIONALE The Papp ing, Toward 2000 and Beyond discusses six critical areas of international change. Petersen argues that during the next decade the major political concern of the country will be to deal with the domestic situation-economic and otherwise-and get it under control. He lists nine general trends that will produce some dramatic new political realities in the coming 20 years. Petersen also examines Russia and China as wild cards in the international community, and discusses the profound influence they may have on the rest of the world. Finally, Petersen provides and excellent discussion on the emerging technologies of the future. The INSS ing on Russia and Her Neighbors is a refresher ing on Russia and the problems and challenges occurring in the country today. An additional INSS ing on Economics identifies key trends and associated security concerns as we move to toward the future. A citizen's Guide to the Federal Budget of the United States, Fiscal Year 1996 is included to highlight the budget process and provide some insight into how this will effect the future of the United States. Powerpoint presentations and short bullet background papers are provided to emphasize key aspects of the future political, economic, technological, and social environments of the future.

Thesis: The political (both international and domestic), economic, technological, and social environments of the future will drive and significantly influence the military force structure of tomorrow. Understanding the potential directions of the future in each of these areas will significantly enhance the development of alternative futures for the focal issue of "What is an appropriate force structure for the year 2025?"

Main Point I: Understanding the future political, economic, technological, and social drivers of the future is critical to the development of alternative futures.

Main Point II: Russia and China as wild cards in the international arena may significantly influence the development of alternative futures.

Main Point III: The implications of technology trends (alone) are profound.

Main Point IV: Throughout history, there are numerous examples where technological breakthroughs have had a significant impact on combat operations.

LESSON INTEGRATION AND RATIONALE This lesson builds on the information provided in the preceding lesson and prepares the students to use their own insights concerning the future direction of the many facets of the external environment. This lesson provides the critical base for understanding what the world of 2025 may look like, and how students can prepare military alternative futures that will best exist within the possible military worlds of the future. While the focus of this lesson is on the future external environment, students must combine their understanding of materials covered in the entire ACSC curriculum.

LESSON OPR: Lt Col Lawton G. Duncan, ACSC/DEB, DSN 493-2611.