The National Intelligence Council analysis Global Trends 2025: A Transformed World will serve as a sobering reminder to President-Elect Barack Obama of the challenges he faces leading a country that might no longer be able to "call the shots alone".
The use of nuclear weapons will grow increasingly likely by 2025, the report found, forecasting a tense, unstable world shadowed by war.
"The world of the near future will be subject to an increased likelihood of conflict over scarce resources, including food and water, and will be haunted by the persistence of rogue states and terrorist groups with greater access to nuclear weapons."
Mr Obama will assume power in January with wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, a resurgent Russia, an Iran determined to build a nuclear bomb and instability over the Palestinian territories.
The report also predicted that some African and South Asian states may wither away altogether, and organised crime could take over at least one state in central Europe.
Struggling to find a bright spot, researchers concluded that terrorism could decline if "economic growth continues in the Middle East and youth unemployment is reduced".
However, it concluded that "opportunities for mass-casualty terrorist attacks using chemical, biological, or less likely, nuclear weapons will increase as technology diffuses and nuclear power programmes expand".
Based on a survey of trends by analysts from all US intelligence agencies around the world, it was more pessimistic about status of the world's superpower than the four previous outlooks that have been made public.
"The international system, as constructed following the Second World War, will be almost unrecognizable by 2025, owing to the rise of emerging powers, a globalising economy, an historic transfer of wealth from West to East, and the growing influence of non-state actors," the report said.
"Although the United States is likely to remain the single most powerful actor, the United States' relative strength even in the military realm, will decline and US leverage will become more strained."
The report's authors said "we do not believe that we are headed toward a complete breakdown of the international system", but gave warning that "the next 20 years of transition to a new system are fraught with risks".
Researchers predicted China and India were likely to join the United States atop a multi-polar world and compete for influence. Russia's potential was less certain, but Iran, Turkey and Indonesia were also seen gaining power.
The current financial crisis on Wall Street is the beginning of a global economic rebalancing, the report found, predicting that the dollar's role as the major world currency will weaken to the point where it becomes a "first among equals".
The growing relative power of "businesses, tribes, religious organisations and criminal networks" was likely to continue, it concluded.
The analysts predicted that better renewable technologies such as solar and wind power would provide opportunities for a quick and low-cost transition from dependence on oil.
Officials said the report was timed to be ready for Barack Obama when he takes office on Jan 20.
#2
The IGC is not unbiased of course. Brussels - EuroPeon view contained within.
Not smart taking advice from one of the bloodiest regions on the planet.
Ahyhoo.... IGC is king of like a cliffnotes to Intel Briefs with of course, the opposite than needed solution.
I do enjoy their monthly Crises Watch magizine and read it when it comes out. A good general overview.
There are many places to help determine foreign policy. Eggs in one basket are broken easily.
Piracy and maritime terrorism are forms of asymmetrical warfare that non-state actors use as instruments in disrupting the peace and security of states. It is therefore necessary for navies to revamp and find new definitions for their role in the modern security context.
#1
Why is this even considered a naval question? This is purely a political question and the navy as currently constituted is fully able to put a stop to this crap, or at least knock it back to negligible levels.
If we wanted this done we could do it. My issue is that these are not US ships that are being attacked so why the heck should I care? If the Saudis, SKors, Brits, French, etc. don't like it then let them deal with it.
Let's give sailing under the stars & stripes mean something....if you're sailing under US registry, the navy will be there. AND GIVE THE NAVY THE ROE necessary.
#2
I believe it is a mechanism to funnel cash into terrorist groups now that we have disrupted their traditional financial channels.
Notice that Iran says they are going to continue using those shipping routes. It gives them an opportunity to transfer large sums of cash to terrorist groups without the world community coming down on them. They can say "we were just paying ransom to get our ship back".
In my opinion any country paying a ransom should be listed as a terrorist facilitator.
#3
Somalia is on the brink of slipping back under the control of the Islamic Courts Union (or some such name), essentially a radical islamic group akin to the Taliban. And strategically located in the Horn of Africa, a redux of the A-Q homebase scenario would cause even more problems worldwide. Little known in the US, there are several significant concentrations of Somali "refugees", legally admitted under a foolish 80's statute that provides asylum. In San Diego there are over 70,000 concentrated in a very small area, creating the beginnings of tribal/clan criminal enterprises, and social no-go zones. Look for car-be-ques and Sharia behavior next, and connections to Somalia from a supportive ethnic enclave on the U.S. Mexico border. Sounds like a Clancy novel, only it's all true and exists right now, right here.
IF General Motors, Ford and Chrysler get the bailout that their chief executives asked for yesterday, you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye. It won't go overnight, but its demise will be virtually guaranteed.
Without that bailout, Detroit will need to drastically restructure itself. With it, the automakers will stay the course -- the suicidal course of declining market shares, insurmountable labor and retiree burdens, technology atrophy, product inferiority and never-ending job losses. Detroit needs a turnaround, not a check.
I love cars, American cars. I was born in Detroit, the son of an auto chief executive. In 1954, my dad, George Romney, was tapped to run American Motors when its president suddenly died. The company itself was on life support -- banks were threatening to deal it a death blow. The stock collapsed. I watched Dad work to turn the company around -- and years later at business school, they were still talking about it. From the lessons of that turnaround, and from my own experiences, I have several prescriptions for Detroit's automakers.
First, their huge disadvantage in costs relative to foreign brands must be eliminated. That means new labor agreements to align pay and benefits to match those of workers at competitors like BMW, Honda, Nissan and Toyota. Furthermore, retiree benefits must be reduced so that the total burden per auto for domestic makers is not higher than that of foreign producers.
That extra burden is estimated to be more than $2,000 per car. Think what that means: Ford, for example, needs to cut $2,000 worth of features and quality out of its Taurus to compete with Toyota's Avalon. Of course the Avalon feels like a better product -- it has $2,000 more put into it. Considering this disadvantage, Detroit has done a remarkable job of designing and engineering its cars. But if this cost penalty persists, any bailout will only delay the inevitable.
Second, management as is must go. New faces should be recruited from unrelated industries -- from companies widely respected for excellence in marketing, innovation, creativity and labor relations.
The new management must work with labor leaders to see that the enmity between labor and management comes to an end. This division is a holdover from the early years of the last century, when unions brought workers job security and better wages and benefits. But as Walter Reuther, the former head of the United Automobile Workers, said to my father, "Getting more and more pay for less and less work is a dead-end street."
You don't have to look far for industries with unions that went down that road. Companies in the 21st century cannot perpetuate the destructive labor relations of the 20th. This will mean a new direction for the U.A.W., profit sharing or stock grants to all employees and a change in Big Three management culture.
The need for collaboration will mean accepting sanity in salaries and perks. At American Motors, my dad cut his pay and that of his executive team, he bought stock in the company, and he went out to factories to talk to workers directly. Get rid of the planes, the executive dining rooms -- all the symbols that breed resentment among the hundreds of thousands who will also be sacrificing to keep the companies afloat.
Investments must be made for the future. No more focus on quarterly earnings or the kind of short-term stock appreciation that means quick riches for executives with options. Manage with an eye on cash flow, balance sheets and long-term appreciation. Invest in truly competitive products and innovative technologies -- especially fuel-saving designs -- that may not arrive for years. Starving research and development is like eating the seed corn.
Just as important to the future of American carmakers is the sales force. When sales are down, you don't want to lose the only people who can get them to grow. So don't fire the best dealers, and don't crush them with new financial or performance demands they can't meet.
It is not wrong to ask for government help, but the automakers should come up with a win-win proposition. I believe the federal government should invest substantially more in basic research -- on new energy sources, fuel-economy technology, materials science and the like -- that will ultimately benefit the automotive industry, along with many others. I believe Washington should raise energy research spending to $20 billion a year, from the $4 billion that is spent today. The research could be done at universities, at research labs and even through public-private collaboration. The federal government should also rectify the imbedded tax penalties that favor foreign carmakers.
But don't ask Washington to give shareholders and bondholders a free pass -- they bet on management and they lost.
The American auto industry is vital to our national interest as an employer and as a hub for manufacturing. A managed bankruptcy may be the only path to the fundamental restructuring the industry needs. It would permit the companies to shed excess labor, pension and real estate costs. The federal government should provide guarantees for post-bankruptcy financing and assure car buyers that their warranties are not at risk.
In a managed bankruptcy, the federal government would propel newly competitive and viable automakers, rather than seal their fate with a bailout check.
Mitt Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts, was a candidate for this year's Republican presidential nomination.
Posted by: john frum ||
11/20/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11137 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Who makes military vehicles, tanks and such now? We could be double screwed by bad management, bad unions, bad government. This situation affects our national defense.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
11/20/2008 1:15 Comments ||
Top||
#2
He was my choice for the Republican candidate. Wish we had him in there now.
Posted by: Richard of Oregon ||
11/20/2008 4:21 Comments ||
Top||
#3
A restructuring of the auto industry to make it excellent could be a new Manhattan-type project, if done correctly. Good for the defense industry, and good for domestic issues.
Posted by: no mo uro ||
11/20/2008 6:10 Comments ||
Top||
#4
If I am not mistaken, General Dynamics is the primary manufacturer of the M1. Pretty sure the Big Three have little or no involvement in military assets these days.
And I concur 100% with Mitt. The only way to save them is to force them to restructure. New management and kill the UAW. Our only hope is that GM goes under before NObama takes office, cause in January they'll get their money.
#5
As a shareholder of GM, I say.....let 'em declare bankruptcy. Yes, I know what little I have in them will be declared worthless, but that's better than saddling my kid and other future generations with debt that cannot possibly be repaid under their current business model.
#6
GM stock is fast approaching $1 billion. It would be interesting if the UAW purchased majority ownership and then implemented needed reforms.
Posted by: ed ||
11/20/2008 12:02 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Not today. CNBC: Key senators reached a compromise on a $25 billion bailout of the three big US auto makers, a Senate Democratic aide said. A draft of the compromise being worked on by Michigan Sen. Carl Levin and Sen. Christopher Bond, R-Mo., would use the $25 billion set aside by Congress in September for retooling auto plants over the next several years and lend it to auto makers immediately, the Detroit Free Press said.
Automakers would face strict conditions on using the money, similar to what financial firms faced under their bailout, and as they repaid the loans, the money would go back into the retooling fund, the paper said.
Posted by: ed ||
11/20/2008 13:11 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Oh my God!!!
"Automakers would face strict conditions on using the money, similar to what financial firms faced under their bailout,..."
ROFLMAO how stupid can these Bozos be??? They don't know that the financial firms used the money for executive bonuses??? I think that the entire Senate & House should be replaced by gold fish. They would make less noise, better decisions and be better looking.
#9
I've been trying to send that asshole Levin packing every election and the sonofabitch keeps getting re-elected - the people in my homestate who vote for this clown are morons. He's been in the senate way too long.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
IF General Motors, Ford and Chrysler get the bailout that their chief executives asked for yesterday, you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye. It won't go overnight, but its demise will be virtually guaranteed.
