SecDef vs Gens, Part 2; Geo-Political and Economic Realities

I think it is safe to say that no one anticipated the multitude of Geo-Political changes that have occurred over the last twenty years. The Soviet Bloc collapsed nearly overnight, “revolutionary” governments throughout Central and South America have been flipped and are as stable as can be expected, democracy in Iraq and Afghanistan, resurgence of democratic efforts in Lebanon, and the recent uneasiness of the population in Iran, all underpin the movement of the world towards democracy, stability, and peace.

Al-Queda still lurks as a destabilizing force. Syria, North Korea, and the government in Iran, remain as the few serious agitators in the world. Cuba, while still a thorn in the western hemisphere is no longer exporting revolution. China, while “communist” remains engaged with us in our attempts to corral North Korea’s nuclear weapons programs. India and Pakistan have maintained a strained, but workable “peace.” A serious look about, reveals that terrorism, and muscle flexing amongst the North Koreas of the world are about the extent of what we can be expected to handle over the next decade or so.

This is not a call for the US to unilaterally disarm, but it may be an opportunity to re-organize to meet the realities of the world map as it exists today, not as we remember it 16 years ago. Without a doubt the biggest strategic discussions since the disintegration of the former USSR, have center around how our forces should be molded, and what “threats” should we be ready to respond to. A simple look at today’s map, and geo-political realities, begs for revised thinking.

Clearly the biggest worry is a two theater war(s). An endless discussion takes place here on what “could” happen. I think the shift should be it to what will likely happen. We often work the arguments around being engaged in one area, then having to go to war with a major power in another. Well, China is the only major power left, and the likelihood of us going to war with China is small.

A quick look at a global map highlights the difficulty for China in going to war…with anyone. They could of course, and recently have, threatened Taiwan, but military action would be impossible without our early detection of their forces massing…giving plenty of time for diplomatic activity to diffuse and time for our military to prepare. While there is a nationalistic incentive for China to want to take back Taiwan, the true drive would be for the economic engine of Taiwan. Again, the counter to this would be economic, not military, for an isolation of China economically would be the quickest way to achieve a policy change. Without significant importation of resources, China could not sustain a war and its bloated population…a population that requires vast resources on its own just to feed, house, and keep the lights on. If the government fails to do those things, stand by for People’s Revolution Part II.

Also, aside from Taiwan, where can the Chinese go without withering on the vine…ten time zones across Russia? Through SE Asia, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, India, etc. on their way to Europe? All of which would destroy their economy and have them fighting insurgent actions as they drive to Europe. The reality is, there is really nowhere for them to go militarily. Possible? Yes. Likely? No.

With every factory that a US company opens in China, war with China becomes less likely. The economic undercurrents in the global political picture are as large a driver as the geo-political picture was two decades ago. While China maintains a happy face about the “People’s Revolution,” they are in reality, becoming increasingly dependent on capitalistic activity to sustain their central control over the population. This is a double-edged sword for them…as more Chinese participate in an increased standard of living, the expectations of the population will also increase…making it more difficult to maintain that central control without that sustained economic activity…economic activity that doesn’t occur in a communistic system or when the world boycotts you for your aggression. So China, at least for the foreseeable future, is stuck on it current path of tolerated capitalism, but with no hope of changing course back to a truer form of communism. As a billion plus Chinese become consumers of western goods, the base of the “People’s Revolution” erodes from around the central government. China will have a political change, but it will be driven by economics, not by war.

I may not be 100% correct here, but certainly these issues influence what the “threat” really is, and how we should adapt to meet it. And while we wring our hands about the possibility that I might not be 100% correct, taking action to restructure will be a success if it is the 95% solution. The other 5% we can make up with innovation, drive and shear will. No force structure will be perfect in terms of meeting the threat, being economically sustainable, or being sufficiently modern, but a re-examination is certainly called for, and changes likely, based on the significant shift of the geo-political and economic realities of today.

It is incumbent on the military leaders in the Pentagon to open up their minds, and develop courses of action that were unthinkable 20 years ago. While many will call them sellouts as pet projects or other specialties are disposed of, now is a time for bold thinking and innovation…otherwise known as leadership.

More still to come on the military realities in today’s world.