by Michael T. Klare
This was originally published on TomDispatch and is republished here with Tom’s kind permission.
As the second decade of the twenty-first century begins,
we find ourselves at one of those relatively rare moments in history
when major power shifts become visible to all. If the first decade of
the century witnessed profound changes, the world of 2009 nonetheless
looked at least somewhat like the world of 1999 in certain fundamental
respects: the United States remained the world’s paramount military
power, the dollar remained the world’s dominant currency, and NATO
remained its foremost military alliance, to name just three.
By the end of the second decade of this century, however, our world
is likely to have a genuinely different look to it. Momentous shifts
in global power relations and a changing of the imperial guard, just
now becoming apparent, will be far more pronounced by 2020 as new
actors, new trends, new concerns, and new institutions dominate the
global space. Nonetheless, all of this is the norm of history, no
matter how dramatic it may seem to us.
Less normal—and so the wild card of the second decade (and
beyond)—is intervention by the planet itself. Blowback, which we
think of as a political phenomenon, will by 2020 have gained a natural
component. Nature is poised to strike back in unpredictable ways whose
effects could be unnerving and possibly devastating.
What, then, will be the dominant characteristics of the second
decade of the twenty-first century? Prediction of this sort is, of
course, inherently risky, but extrapolating from current trends, four
key aspects of second-decade life can be discerned: the rise of China;
the (relative) decline of the United States; the expanding role of the
global South; and finally, possibly most dramatically, the increasing
impact of a roiling environment and growing resource scarcity.
Let’s start with human history and then make our way into the unknown future history of the planet itself.
The ascendant dragon
That China has become a leading world power is no longer a matter of
dispute. That country’s new-found strength was on full display at the
climate summit in Copenhagen in December where it became clear that no
meaningful progress was possible on the issue of global warming without
Beijing’s assent. Its growing prominence was also evident in the way
it responded to the Great Recession, as it poured multi-billions of dollars into domestic recovery projects, thereby
averting a significant slowdown in its economy. It spent many tens of
billions more on raw materials and fresh investments in Africa, Latin America, and Southeast Asia, helping to ignite recovery in those regions, too.
If China is an economic giant today, it will be a powerhouse in 2020. According to the U.S. Department of Energy (DoE), that country’s gross domestic
product (GDP) will jump from an estimated $3.3 trillion in 2010 to $7.1
trillion in 2020 (in constant 2005 dollars), at which time its economy
will exceed all others save that of the United States. In fact, its
GDP then should exceed those of all the nations in Africa, Latin
America, and the Middle East combined. As the decade proceeds, China
is expected to move steadily up the ladder of technological
enhancement, producing ever more sophisticated products, including advanced green energy and transportation systems that will prove essential to future
post-carbon economies. These gains, in turn, will give it increasing
clout in international affairs.
China will undoubtedly also use its growing wealth and technological
prowess to enhance its military power. According to the Stockholm
International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), China is already the
world’s second largest military spender, although the $85 billion it
invested in its armed forces in 2008 was a pale shadow of the $607
billion allocated by the United States. In addition, its forces remain
technologically unsophisticated and its weapons are no match for the
most modern U.S., Japanese, and European equipment. However, this gap
will narrow significantly in the century’s second decade as China
devotes more resources to military modernization.
The critical question is: How will China use its added power to achieve its objectives?
Until now, China’s leaders have wielded its growing strength
cautiously, avoiding behavior that would arouse fear or suspicion on
the part of neighbors and economic partners. It has instead employed
the power of the purse and “soft power”—vigorous diplomacy, development aid, and cultural ties—to
cultivate friends and allies. But will China continue to follow this
“harmonious,” non-threatening approach as the risks of forcefully
pursuing its national interests diminish? This appears unlikely.
A more assertive China that showed what the Washington Post called “swagger” was already evident in the final months of 2009 at the summit meetings
between presidents Barack Obama and Hu Jintao in Beijing and
Copenhagen. In neither case did the Chinese side seek a “harmonious”
outcome. In Beijing, it restricted Obama’s access to the media and refused to give any ground on Tibet or
tougher sanctions on key energy-trading partner Iran. At a crucial
moment in Copenhagen, it actually sent low-ranking officials to negotiate with Obama—an unmistakable slight—and forced a
compromise that absolved China of binding restraints on carbon
emissions.
If these summits are any indication, Chinese leaders are prepared to
play global hard-ball, insisting on compliance with their core demands
and giving up little—even on matters of secondary importance. China
will find itself ever more capable of acting this way because the
economic fortunes of so many countries are now tied to its consumption
and investment patterns—a pivotal global role once played by the
United States—and because its size and location gives it a
commanding position in the planet’s most dynamic region. In addition,
in the first decade of the twenty-first century Chinese leaders proved
especially adept at nurturing ties with the leaders of large and small
countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin America that will play an ever
more important role in energy and other world affairs.
To
what ends will China wield its growing power? For the top leadership
in Beijing, three goals will undoubtedly be paramount: to ensure the
continued political monopoly of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), to
sustain the fast-paced economic growth which justifies its dominance,
and to restore the country’s historic greatness. All three are, in
fact, related: The CCP will remain in power, senior leaders believe,
only so long as it orchestrates continuing economic expansion and
satisfies the nationalist aspirations of the public as well as the high
command of the People’s Liberation Army. Everything Beijing does,
domestically and internationally, is geared to these objectives. As
the country grows stronger, it will use its enhanced powers to shape
the global environment to its advantage just as the United States has
done for so long. In China’s case, this will mean a world wide-open to
imports of Chinese goods and to investments that allow Chinese firms to
devour global resources, while placing ever less reliance on the U.S.
dollar as the medium of international exchange.
The question that remains unanswered: Will China begin flexing its
growing military muscle? Certainly, Beijing will do so in at least an
indirect manner. By supplying arms and military advisers to its
growing network of allies abroad, it will establish a military presence
in ever more areas. My suspicion is that China will continue to avoid
the use of force in any situation that might lead to a confrontation
with major Western powers, but may not hesitate to bring its military
to bear in any clash of national wills involving neighboring
countries. Such a situation could arise, for example, in a maritime
dispute over control of the energy-rich South China Sea or in Central Asia, if one of the
former Soviet republics became a haven for Uighur militants seeking to
undermine Chinese control over Xinjiang Province.
The eagle comes in for a landing
Just as the rise of China is now taken for granted, so, too, is the
decline of the United States. Much has been written about America’s
inevitable loss of primacy as this country suffers the consequences of
economic mismanagement and imperial overstretch. This perspective was present in Global Trends 2025,
a strategic assessment of the coming decades prepared for the incoming
Obama administration by the National Intelligence Council (NIC), an
affiliate of the Central Intelligence Agency. “Although the United
States is likely to remain the single most powerful actor [in 2025],”
the NIC predicted, “the United States’ relative strength—even in the
military realm—will decline and U.S. leverage will become more
constrained.”
Some unforeseen catastrophe aside, however, the U.S. is not likely
to be poorer in 2020 or more backward technologically. In fact,
according to the most recent Department of Energy projections,
America’s GDP in 2020 will be approximately $17.5 trillion (in 2005
dollars), nearly one-third greater than today. Moreover, some of the
initiatives already launched by President Obama to stimulate the
development of advanced energy systems are likely to begin bearing
fruit, possibly giving the United States an edge in certain green
technologies. And don’t forget, the U.S. will remain the globe’s
preeminent military power, with China lagging well behind, and no other
potential rival able to mobilize even Chinese-level resources to
challenge U.S. military advantages.
What will change is America’s position relative to China and other
nations—and so, of course, its ability to dominate the global
economy and the world political agenda. Again using DoE projections,
we find that in 2005, America’s GDP of $12.4 trillion exceeded that of
all the nations of Asia and South America combined, including Brazil,
China, India, and Japan. By 2020, the combined GDP of Asia and South
America will be about 40 percent greater than that of the U.S., and growing at
a much faster rate. By then, the United States will be deeply
indebted to more solvent foreign nations, especially China, for the
funds needed to pay for continuing budget deficits occasioned by the
wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Pentagon budget, the federal stimulus
package, and the absorption of “toxic assets” from troubled banks and
corporations.
Count on this, though: in an increasingly competitive world economy
in which U.S. firms enjoy ever diminishing advantages, the prospects
for ordinary Americans will be distinctly dimmer. Some sectors of the
economy, and some parts of the country, will certainly continue to
thrive, but others will surely suffer Detroit’s fate, becoming
economically hollowed out and experiencing wholesale impoverishment. For many—perhaps most—Americans, the world of 2020 may still
provide a standard of living far superior to that enjoyed by a majority
of the world; but the perks and advantages that most middle class folks
once took for granted—college education, relatively accessible (and
affordable) medical care, meals out, foreign travel—will prove
significantly harder to come by.
Even America’s military advantage will be much eroded. The colossal
costs of the disastrous Iraq and Afghan wars will set limits on the
nation’s ability to undertake significant military missions abroad. Keep in mind that, in the first decade of the twenty-first century, a
significant proportion of the basic combat equipment of the Army and
Marine Corps has been damaged or destroyed in these wars, while the fighting units themselves have been badly battered by multiple tours of duty. Repairing this damage would require at
least a decade of relative quiescence, which is nowhere in sight.
The growing constraints on American power were recently acknowledged by President Obama in an unusual setting: his West Point address announcing a troop surge in Afghanistan. Far from constituting a
triumphalist expression of American power and preeminence, like
President Bush’s speeches on the Iraq War, his was an implicit
admission of decline. Alluding to the hubris of his predecessor, Obama
noted, “We’ve failed to appreciate the connection between our national
security and our economy. In the wake of the economic crisis, too many
of our neighbors and friends are out of work and struggle to pay the
bills … Meanwhile, competition in the global economy has grown more
fierce. So we simply can’t afford to ignore the price of these
wars.”
Many have chosen to interpret Obama’s Afghan surge decision as a
typical twentieth-century-style expression of America’s readiness to
intervene anywhere on the planet at a moment’s notice. I view it as a
transitional move meant to prevent the utter collapse of an
ill-conceived military venture at a time when the United States is
increasingly being forced to rely on non-military means of persuasion
and the cooperation, however tempered, of allies. President Obama said
as much: “We’ll have to be nimble and precise in our use of military
power … And we can’t count on military might alone.” Increasingly,
this will be the mantra of strategic planning that will govern the
American eagle in decline.
The rising South
The second decade of the century will also witness the growing
importance of the global South: the formerly-colonized,
still-developing areas of Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Once
playing a relatively marginal role in world affairs, they were
considered open territory, there to be invaded, plundered, and
dominated by the major powers of Europe, North America, and (for a
time) Japan. To some degree, the global South, a.k.a. the “Third
World,” still plays a marginal role, but that is changing.
Once a member in good standing of the global South, China is now an
economic superpower and India is well on its way to earning this
status. Second-tier states of the South, including Brazil, Indonesia,
South Africa, and Turkey, are on the rise economically, and even the
smallest and least well-off nations of the South have begun to attract
international attention as providers of crucial raw materials or as
sites of intractable problems including endemic terrorism and crime
syndicates.
To some degree, this is a product of numbers—growing populations and growing wealth. In 2000, the population of the global South stood at an estimated 4.9 billion people; by 2020,
that number is expected to hit 6.4 billion. Many of these new
inhabitants of planet Earth will be poor and disenfranchised, but most
will be workers (in either the formal or informal economy), many will
participate in the political process in some way, and some will be
entrepreneurs, labor leaders, teachers, criminals, or militants. Whatever the case, they will make their presence felt.
The nations of the South will also play a growing economic role as
sources of raw materials in an era of increasing scarcity and founts of
entrepreneurial vitality. By one estimate,
the combined GDP of the global South (excluding China) will jump from
$7.8 trillion in 2005 to $15.8 trillion in 2020, an increase of more
than 100 percent. In particular, many of the prime deposits of oil, natural
gas, and the key minerals needed in the global North to keep the
industrial system going are facing wholesale depletion after decades of
hyper-intensive extraction, leaving only the deposits in the South to
be exploited.
Take oil: In 1990, 43 percent of world daily oil output was supplied by members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting
Countries (the major Persian Gulf producers plus Algeria, Angola,
Ecuador, Libya, Nigeria, and Venezuela), other African and Latin
American producers, and the Caspian Sea countries; by 2020, their share
will rise to 58 percent. A similar shift in the center of gravity of world
mineral production will take place, with unexpected countries like
Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Mongolia, Niger (a major uranium supplier),
and the Democratic Republic of Congo taking on potentially crucial
roles.
Inevitably, the global South will also play a conspicuous role in a
series of potentially devastating developments. Combine persistent
deep poverty, economic desperation, population growth, and intensifying
climate degradation and you have a recipe for political unrest,
insurgency, religious extremism, increased criminality, mass
migrations, and the spread of disease. The global North will seek to
immunize itself from these disorders by building fences of every sort,
but through sheer numbers alone, the inhabitants of the South will make
their presence felt, one way or another.
The planet strikes back
All of this might represent nothing more than the normal changing of
the imperial guard on planet Earth, if that planet itself weren’t
undergoing far more profound changes than any individual power or set
of powers, no matter how strong. The ever more intrusive realities of
global warming, resource scarcity, and food insufficiency will, by the
end of this century’s second decade, be undeniable and, if not by 2020,
then in the decades to come, have the capacity to put normal military
and economic power, no matter how impressive, in the shade.
“There is little doubt about the main trends,” Professor Ole Danbolt Mjøs, Chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, said in awarding the Peace Prize to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC) and Al Gore in December 2007: “More and more scientists
have reached ever closer agreement concerning the increasingly dramatic
consequences that will follow from global warming.” Likewise, a
growing body of energy experts has concluded that the global production of conventional oil will soon reach a peak
(if it hasn’t already) and decline, producing a worldwide energy
shortage. Meanwhile, fears of future food emergencies, prompted in
part by global warming and high energy prices, are becoming more
widespread.
All of this was apparent when world leaders met in Copenhagen and
failed to establish an effective international regime for reducing the
emission of climate-altering greenhouse gases (GHGs). Even though they
did agree to keep talking and comply with a non-binding, aspirational
scheme to cut back on GHGs, observers believe that such efforts are
unlikely to lead to meaningful progress in controlling global warming
in the near future. What few doubt is that the pace of climate change
will accelerate destructively in the second decade of this century,
that conventional (liquid) petroleum and other key resources will
become scarcer and more difficult to extract, and that food supplies
will diminish in many poor, environmentally vulnerable areas.
Scientists do not agree on the precise nature, timing, and
geographical impact of climate-change effects, but they do generally
agree that, as we move deeper into the century, we will be seeing an
exponential increase in the density of the heat-trapping greenhouse-gas
layer in the atmosphere as the consumption of fossil fuels grows and
past smokestack emissions migrate to the outer atmosphere. DoE data
indicates, for example, that between 1990 and 2005, world carbon
dioxide emissions grew by 32 percent, from 21.5 to 31.0 billion metric tons. It can take as much as 50 years for GHGs to reach the greenhouse layer,
which means that their effect will increase even if—as appears
unlikely—the nations of the world soon begin to reduce their future
emissions.
In other words, the early manifestations of global warming in the
first decade of this century—intensifying hurricanes and typhoons,
torrential rains followed by severe flooding in some areas and
prolonged, even record-breaking droughts in others, melting ice-caps
and glaciers, and rising sea levels—will all become more pronounced
in the second. As suggested by the IPCC in its 2007 report,
uninhabitable dust bowls are likely to emerge in large areas of Central
and Northeast Asia, Mexico and the American Southwest, and the
Mediterranean basin. Significant parts of Africa are likely to be
devastated by rising temperatures and diminished rainfall. More cities
are likely to undergo the sort of flooding and destruction experienced
by New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina in 2005. And blistering
summers, as well as infrequent or negligible rainfall, will limit crop
production in key food-producing regions.
Progress will be evident in the development of renewable energy
systems, such as wind, solar, and biofuels. Despite the vast sums now
being devoted to their development, however, they will still provide
only a relatively small share of world energy in 2020. According to DoE projections,
renewables will take care of only 10.5 percent of world energy needs in 2020,
while oil and other petroleum liquids will still make up 32.6 percent of
global supplies; coal, 27.1 percent; and natural gas, 23.8 percent. In other words,
greenhouse gas production will rage on—and, ironically, should it
not, thanks to expected shortfalls in the supply of oil, that in itself
will likely prove another kind of disaster, pushing up the prices of all energy sources and endangering economic stability. Most industry experts, including those at the International Energy Agency (IEA) in Paris, believe that it will be nearly impossible to continue
increasing the output of conventional and unconventional petroleum
(including tough to harvest Arctic oil, Canadian tar sands, and shale
oil) without increasingly implausible fresh investments of trillions of
dollars, much of which would have to go into war-torn, unstable areas
like Iraq or corrupt, unreliable states like Russia.
In the latest hit movie Avatar, the lush, mineral-rich moon
Pandora is under assault by human intruders seeking to extract a
fabulously valuable mineral called “unobtainium.” Opposing them are
not only a humanoid race called the Na’vi, loosely modeled on Native
Americans and Amazonian jungle dwellers, but also the semi-sentient
flora and fauna of Pandora itself. While our own planet may not
possess such extraordinary capabilities, it is clear that the
environmental damage caused by humans since the onset of the Industrial
Revolution is producing a natural blowback effect which will become
increasingly visible in the coming decade.
These, then, are the four trends most likely to dominate the second
decade of this century. Perhaps others will eventually prove more
significant, or some set of catastrophic events will further alter the
global landscape, but for now expect the dragon ascendant, the eagle
descending, the South rising, and the planet possibly trumping all of
these.
Related Links:
Is the Obama administration about to eat the foodies’ lunch?
The melting of America
The earth’s decade
