Commentary: Reports of Our Global Disorder Have Been Greatly Exaggerated. Do you agree/disagree? Why?

GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad — Mon, 27 Jul 2015 12:25:39 -0400

The world is more dangerous than it was a few years ago, and the mounting chaos in the Middle East has fed wider, more exaggerated anxieties. Many observers feel that the pace of technological change is quickening, that the international order is disintegrating, that power is shifting from national governments to individuals and nonstate actors, and that America's capacity to lead is waning.

Oftentimes, however, these portents of disaster and decline are overstated.

Certainly, computers and the Internet are driving rapid change, but the pace is not more rapid or revolutionary than that following the introduction of the steam engine, electricity, radio, telephones, internal combustion engines, airplanes, and the atomic bomb. The Chinese economy has grown compared to the United States, but the United States has, for many years, been growing faster than most of Europe, Russia, and much of East Asia. Russia is misbehaving, but nothing on the scale of the former Soviet Union. The Middle East is in turmoil, but even taking into account the chaos in that region, inter- and intrastate conflicts continue to decline (as revealed in Steven Pinker's The Better Angels of Our Nature), as do the casualties and destruction they produce. States are being challenged by terrorists and insurgent groups in the Middle East, as they once were in Southeast Asia, Latin America, and the Balkans. Twenty years ago this month, Christian insurgents executed in cold blood more than 7,000 Muslim prisoners in Srebrenica, matching in scale and ferocity the horrors perpetrated by the Islamic State today.

Prior eras have seen much greater shifts in the global power balance than those underway today.

It's also true that prior eras have seen much greater shifts in the global power balance than those underway today. World War I brought the collapse of the Ottoman and Austrian empires and the creation of more than a dozen new countries, including nearly all those in the modern Middle East. During the two decades after World War II, control over more than half the world's surface shifted radically, as dozens of “nonstate actors” — then known as liberation movements — seized power and set up new regimes. Change occurred at an even greater speed during the first few years of the George H.W. Bush administration, with the unification of Germany, the disintegration of the Warsaw Pact, and the collapse of the Soviet Union. Most of these earlier geopolitical shifts were favorable to the United States in contrast to current developments in the Arab world. Not surprisingly, people are more likely to notice the pace of change for the worse, as opposed to that for the better. Nevertheless, it would be hard to maintain that the distribution of power among states is changing more quickly today than after 1918, 1945, or 1989.

But are states as a whole losing their grip? Is power devolving to individuals and groups outside officialdom? The continued expansion of international trade, finance, travel, and communications has increased vulnerabilities even as it has widened horizons, increased opportunity, and lifted people around the world out of poverty. Terrorists and criminals can mix with the millions of tourists and business people who cross national boarders every day, but security agencies also have new and more powerful tools to track and impede their movements. Contagious diseases can spread more rapidly, but resources to contain them can also be mobilized more quickly. The communications revolution empowers individuals and states alike. Violent extremists can more easily spread their ideology, recruit followers, and orchestrate attacks, but security authorities can more easily collaborate to foil these attempts. As physical infrastructure becomes more dependent on digital controls, the possibility for catastrophic interference grows, requiring ever higher levels of digital safeguards. There is admittedly a race between the forces of order and disorder in all these domains, but it is not one that effective states are predestined to lose.

Another charge is that the interstate system first formalized by a series of European treaties in 1648, known as the Peace of Westphalia, is unraveling, and power is devolving to corporate, criminal, and sectarian enterprises that operate across national boundaries. But most governments in Europe, East Asia, and the Western Hemisphere have not experienced diminished capacity. Africa has long been home to a number of failed and failing states, but the problems there are no more acute today than at any time since the decolonization of that continent some 60 years ago. What is new and disturbing is the fragility of the Arab states. Several have descended into civil war. The rest are deathly afraid of so doing, leading their governments to take extreme and often ill-considered measures to counter what they regard as the forces of dissolution. Regionwide upheavals of this sort are by no means a new phenomenon. In the 1950s, anti-colonial revolts, usually employing terrorism, created dozens of new countries throughout Africa and Asia. In the 1960s and 1970s, all of Southeast Asia was engulfed in conflict. In the 1980s, Latin America and sub-Saharan Africa experienced multiple civil wars. At the end of the Cold War, the Balkans exploded.

Today, turbulence is a reminder that global peace, order, and prosperity are not products of an invisible hand. They require endless application, particularly by those with the greatest power. The problems the United States faces today are not greater in scale than those it mastered in the past, but doing so in the future will require efforts comparable to those made in the past. Deterring Russia, channeling growing Chinese power, and working with others to dismantle the Islamic State are daunting challenges — but not greater than rebuilding post-World War II Europe, containing the Soviet Union, ending the Cold War, and promoting democratic governance throughout much of the modern world.

http://www.rand.org/blog/2015/07/reports-of-our-global-disorder-have-been-greatly-exaggerated.html

Reports of Our Global Disorder Have Been Greatly Exaggerated | RAND

Deterring Russia, channeling growing Chinese power, and working with others to dismantle the Islamic State are daunting challenges, but not greater than rebuilding post-World War II Europe, containing the Soviet Union, ending the Cold War, and promoting democratic governance throughout much of the modern world.

Response by SCPO David Lockwood made Jul 27 at 2015 12:28 PM

SCPO David Lockwood — Mon, 27 Jul 2015 12:28:37 -0400

I would agree that the world is more dangerous than previous. I also believe that global disorder is on the rise thanks to groups like ISIS and Al Quaida.

Response by Capt Seid Waddell made Jul 27 at 2015 12:48 PM

Capt Seid Waddell — Mon, 27 Jul 2015 12:48:54 -0400

I think we are on the edge of another world war.

Response by LTC Stephen F. made Jul 27 at 2015 12:58 PM

LTC Stephen F. — Mon, 27 Jul 2015 12:58:38 -0400

GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad. Global disorder reminds me of the 2nd law of thermodynamics known as entropy which applies to large scale systems. While it somewhat of a stretch to apply entropy to the "order" or stability of nations I think it make sense in the case under discussion. Generally entropy always increases unless there is sufficient force to constrain it.
The disorder is occurring in what was once known as the 1st world of Europe and North America and Australia. The disorder in the 3rd world has been generally constant for at least a century; however, the causes of instability have changed in the 3rd world.
In Europe, the Eurozone has been strained for some time on many levels most prominently has been financial with instability in Greece gaining headlines over the past year or so.
However I would submit the root causes of instability in Europe are rooted in apathy, abandoning the Christian faith and embracing agnosticism particularly at governmental levels. Euthanasia took hold in the low countries over a decade ago, cynicism in France led to Charlie Hebdo's success and dramatic destruction thanks to radical Muslims, home-schoolers are imprisoned in Germany with children becoming wards of the state etc. There has been a push of a four-day work-week in Europe, most people rely on the state to provide many of their services - particularly in Western Europe where taxes are high.
In this country we are beginning to follow Europe's lead with many believing the Government is the best one to provide services to them. There is a push to increase the minimum wage from roughly $11 to $15 which will cause many small businesses to close because they operate at close margins. Obamacare is tottering with many millions still uninsured, costs increasing, services decreasing in many regions, etc.
Until people and nations learn to count the cost to use the Biblical expression, people and nations will continue to go in foolhardy directions.

Response by COL Mikel J. Burroughs made Jul 27 at 2015 1:04 PM

COL Mikel J. Burroughs — Mon, 27 Jul 2015 13:04:21 -0400

GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad I believe there is a lot of turmoil, but I think the media and the ability to report these types of events much faster than we could during WWI and WWII or events leading up to those wars is much faster and more dramatized. All of the world, except those third world countries that don't have access to TVs and IPhones, etc. are seeing it firsthand within in moments after it happens or within 24 hours. I think that makes our world so much more dangerous. I believe we are headed for an error of “Information Overload!” This could cause panic and the “war to end all wars!” taking place sooner than later. Just an opinion!

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Jul 27 at 2015 4:24 PM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Mon, 27 Jul 2015 16:24:41 -0400

Greater overall stability, more "brush-fires."

I think it's a teeter-totter. As we have more stability, brushfires look like bigger issues. As we have less stability, brushfires get bigger (becoming widespread conflicts). We have significantly less full blown conflicts at any one time than we did 20, 40, 60 years ago. We just have lots more "little" wars.

Response by SGT Jeremiah B. made Aug 3 at 2015 2:23 PM

SGT Jeremiah B. — Mon, 03 Aug 2015 14:23:04 -0400

I was thinking about this the other day. Global reach and information flow makes everything seem crazy. Couple that with agendas within our own media outlets and things can look pretty hopeless fast. Are we really anywhere near the brink we teetered on before WWI/II or even the Cold War? There are definitely flashpoints, but crazy crap has always been going on. We just didn't know about it.

I do wonder if the next one will start because leaders will feel pressured to act certain ways to appease their constituents. WWI started as a giant game of chicken where no one blinked.

Nowadays it seems like blinking gets you raked over the coals by every pundit and called a "weak leader." In American politics, at least, diplomacy and de-escalation appear to be four letter words. It's hard to believe that not that long ago, FDR had to bust his ass to convince our grandparents' generation that getting involved in the war in Europe was necessary.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 22 at 2015 10:04 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 22 Oct 2015 22:04:31 -0400

Political Propaganda by the Propaganda machine, the American Democratic Community. Minimize the loss of four lives in Benghazi, deflect from the criticism and Hillary's assertion she cared more than everyone in the room. Bullspit, that lying sociopath and her delusional base can never admit any wrong.

President Obama will leave deep chasms in our country that will have to be fixed. Germany, Poland, USA, France and others are steaming mad and rightly so. When you are out of touch and sick with power you disregard reality for votes. Ambassador Stevens was an unfortunate cost of war, collateral damage that needed to be justified. That justification is a nuanced lie and Democratic women canonizing a real bitch because they too are sociopaths of their own.

Response by SPC George Rudenko made Oct 27 at 2015 5:41 PM

SPC George Rudenko — Tue, 27 Oct 2015 17:41:48 -0400

Chicken little. Boring news doesn't make money. Blood and chaos make news money.

Response by LTC Stephen F. made Oct 28 at 2015 8:18 PM

LTC Stephen F. — Wed, 28 Oct 2015 20:18:09 -0400

GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad there is certainly pockets of unrest and disorder/disaster in various parts of the world especially in the Middle east, north Africa and central Africa to name a few hot spots. Since bad news is covered to a far greater degree than good news in the international news similar to way it is covered in the USA.
In most areas of the world most people are going about their daily routines without much turmoil. That will never make news.

Response by CW3 Cherif L. made Jan 12 at 2017 8:46 PM

CW3 Cherif L. — Thu, 12 Jan 2017 20:46:03 -0500

A recent National Intelligence Council estimate portends that within the next five years the world has the potential to fragment into contested spheres of influence as nations states compete for resources, blame others for their domestic problems and struggle to find common ground. Is similar to the path followed that projected the world into conflict (WWI). The old adage remains true to this day: "To ignore history is to ignore the wolf at the door."