April 20, 2007
The world in 2020
Being asked to discuss "the world in 2020" without hesitation, deviation or massive banality is a difficult task at the best of times. It is an even more daunting when you are expected to perform at 7.45 in the morning. But that was the fate that befell me this morning, when I took part in a seminar organised by the Centre for European Reform, a think tank and Accenture, a consultancy.
Fortunately, the hard work had been done by Mark Leonard, who has just been appointed as the head of a new think tank - the astutely-titled European Council on Foreign Relations, which is being funded by George Soros. Leonard - whose stock-in-trade is to think BIG - has just produced a new pamphlet called "Divided World: The struggle for primacy in 2020". You can find a summary of its argument here; and if you feel inspired to buy it, try here.
The pamphlet attempts to describe the new multipolar world that will exist in 2020. It notes that in that year "the Chinese economy could overtake the US to become the largest in the world, measured by PPP" - and it takes the obligatory pot-shot at Fukuyama’s "end of history thesis".
Leonard argues that - pace Fukuyama - the world has not seen the end of ideological competition. He sees four emerging poles of ideological competition - "the US which will seek a balance of power that favours democracy; China and Russia, which will use international law to protect autocracies from external influence; the EU, which will favour a world of democratic states bound by the laws of multilateral institutions; and the Middle East, which will become a faith zone, governed neither by democracy nor the rule of law."
Any argument of this nature is inevitably over-schematised. But Leonard’s is still one of the more interesting and ambitious efforts to describe what a "multipolar world" will look like.
In my own rather rambling commentary (it was early), I argued that Leonard was too optimistic about Europe and too credulous about Chinese "soft power". I also tried to relate what Leonard had to say to the every-day news events that fill the papers in 2007. It seems to me that - even by 2020 - the aftermath of the Iraq catastrophe is still likely to shape the world. America’s global standing and its attitude to key questions like the use of force and the spread of democracy are going to depend a great deal on how badly the Iraq venture ends.
Things aren’t looking good at the moment. But Peter David - the foreign editor of The Economist, who was also there - made a plea to consider the resilience of American society and government. He reckoned America will still be top dog - by a distance - in 2020.
A lot of the business people in the room were more sceptical. Mark Spelman of Accenture argued that American, Japanese and European assumptions that they will continue to monopolise innovation and R&D are likely to be proven false fairly swiftly, as the emerging Asian economies move rapidly to develop their own poles of innovation and expertise. Spelman argued that a shortage of scientific talent in the west means that big companies are going to "source talent globally". This will benefit a global elite, but hit the unskilled.
Combine an American defeat in Iraq, with rising economic inequality associated with globalisation - and what do you get. I would say a resurgence of isolationism and protectionism - which will kick in well before 2020.
This is a very interesting post. As you say, Leonard’s argument is overly schematized. He may underestimate how the four ideological poles could overlap and interpenetrate, e.g., the ‘zone of faith’ will not be confined to the Middle East, but will also manifest itself elsewhere, for instance in the US and sub-Saharan Africa (evangelical Christianity).
And the Sino-Russian axis idea is rather stale - its earliest manifestation (the Soviet-Communist China axis) quickly fell apart during the Cold War, and yet since the end of the Cold War people have been suggesting its re-emergence in one form or another, something which has yet to come to pass.
I think also that Leonard underestimates how quickly America could be knocked off its perch. America’s power and prosperity depends on the continuing availability of supplies of very cheap oil. Disrupt that, whether through Peak Oil, jihadist terrorist attack on the oil supply chain, heightened Middle East instability (the fallout of Iraq), growing competition with China for oil supplies, or a combination of these, and American power is quite vulnerable.
Posted by: strategist | April 20th, 2007 at 9:18 pm | Report this commentI agree with Peter David that America will be the top dog. Though the World is likely to be multipolar, I think America will maintain leadership in economic and scientific terms. In terms of PPP China is likely to overtake US by 2020, but by nominal GDP (we buy oil and other things at nominal prices) America will still be at the top. These days and in the future, America is not going to be the country of white christians, but the country of multiculturism.
Posted by: John | April 20th, 2007 at 11:07 pm | Report this commentTo remind. US has a large reserves of shale oil. In the wors case, it can develop shale oil reserves(technology can allow in the future), jihadist attack can happen anywhere in the World (including Russia).
Though America has the strongest military now, it is not what makes US the superpower and leader. Its scientific advantage, multiculturism, ideas. Current administration made mistakes, but it is not all of America. If current admistration was in charge for the last 45 years, America wouldn’t have won the Cold War.
China is going to be strong because it also has many bright ideas and its culture becoming more and more popular (chinese food for example).
India can be strong, but whilst they have divide in casts with untouchable, they are unlikely to lead the world with their ideas. In the USA there is black secretary of state, in India untouchable won’t get anywhere close to that position anytime soon.
Soviet Union was feared but not respected. Despite what anti americans around the World say, more than 50% Nobel Prize winners are from America (though many of them were not born there). The strenght of American economy is not cheap oil but knowledge. Russia, Iran has lots of it, but it’s people are not rich and prosperious.
Dear Strategist,
Posted by: Chen | April 20th, 2007 at 11:41 pm | Report this commentIn the last 30 years the US and the World lived through 3 major increases in energy prices(in 70s, 80s, and recent one), major terrorist attack(9/11), the Middle Tensions (it has always been unstable), and US still remains the leader.
The USA has lost some influence in recent years, but it is due to the ‘made in the USA’ Iraq war.
I think if USA goes down, it is unlikely to be due to human activity.
America will remain the leading power, because
a) It has the most creative and open society and economy - it’s the gravitation center of globalisation.
b) Governments in many countries prefer to have a pax americana - hegemony - instead of an ever fragile balance of power.
Globalisation needs an enforcer of rules, the US is the only likely candidate, much better than any likely alternative - better than a struggle for mastery, better than chaos. Therefore, governments quietly support US hard power, as a guarantee for order. The more as it permits them to concentrate on their economic interests, instead of being forced into a ruinous arms race.
No government will admit that openly, cause it contradicts strongly the cherished idea of sovereignty. But there is a strong demand for a hegemonic ordering power, and the US will continue to respond to this demand, as global order is also in Washingtons interest - and as the US is payed for its role by a favorable position in the shaping of the world order.
Posted by: Ulrich Speck | April 20th, 2007 at 11:48 pm | Report this commentthis is in respones to mr. john
for your information india has already had a woman prime minister and few presidents from the so called ‘untouchable’ caste.
Posted by: mysore | April 21st, 2007 at 5:00 pm | Report this commentDear Mysore, please give us a name of those untouchables who have been presidents, please be more specific. Because I can’t find any.
Posted by: John | April 21st, 2007 at 7:28 pm | Report this commentThank you.
I hate to get picky, but at its current growth rate, China will surpass the United States on a PPP basis during 2010. By 2020, it will be more than 50 percent larger than the U.S.
Posted by: Dean Baker | April 22nd, 2007 at 4:13 am | Report this comment@ Dean Baker
Granted. But:
- Its very unclear whether the current Chinese growth rates are sustainable
- Unrest in China is likely (rural areas)
- The more the country opens up to the world, the more instable the political system will become.
The future is uncertain, but some countries futures are more uncertain than others countries futures.
Posted by: Ulrich Speck | April 22nd, 2007 at 8:59 am | Report this commentNo global power, however(militarily) strong, has ever prevailed throughout history without an appealing ideology, shared by many well beyond the boundary of a single nation. What will keep America strong in 2020 is not its capability to police the world, but the global adoption of the wonderful concept of the American Dream, a continuation of the pursuit of happyness by human kind routed way back in the French Revolution.
Posted by: simon | April 22nd, 2007 at 5:28 pm | Report this commentCommand, Religions, and Traditions, those key tenets that have kept human kind from total extinction, will always unite us, even if exploited by some in order to polirize the world for self interest. To that end, 2020 won’t be different from 1920. It will be one more historical date measuring human progress.
OK, so the China being bigger than the US on a PPP basis assumes a crash in China or? Because if China doesn’t suddenly crash, it will pass the US around 2010. And with the yuan strengthening, it will probably be very close to the US at nominal dollar values in 2020.
Posted by: Thomas | April 22nd, 2007 at 10:19 pm | Report this commentSo Gideon, did anyone mention droughts, floods, changing soil fertility and agricultural yield or any other major effects of climate change?
No futurist worth his salt is going to ignore a problem of that scale unless its the 800 pound gorilla.
Posted by: Felix Drost | April 23rd, 2007 at 1:10 am | Report this commentThere is a good probability that the US still will be the leader in 2020 because of the hold on global finance. The ghost of Gordon Gecko is what at the heat of what drives the country. Capitalism, the marriage of greed and relative freedom will still propel the US ahead of others, but the inequalities within the country will be much more pronounced.
As to Dear John all I can say is ,
Please try and take off those Colonial era blinders . India is eons from being a perfect society but it is still one of the better democracies given its size and short history.
Given the state of the “hanging chads” in the US, India has at least made better progress as far as the electoral process is concerned.
Posted by: Globetrotter | April 23rd, 2007 at 5:03 am | Report this commentI am not saying India is bad country, it is a great country and with China and the USA it will be the leader in 2020. But what I say is that America is likely to have more advantages than both China and India, America is not the country of ‘white christians’, it is the country of black, white, indians, chinese, russians, latinos. What can stop America’s growth is closing doors to immigrants, both skilled and unskilled. If Senate and Congress treats hard working immigrants as criminals, then it won’t be the top dog.
Posted by: John | April 23rd, 2007 at 1:38 pm | Report this commentWhoever will be the strongest country in 2020(America, China, or India), this trio of countries is likely to be responsible countries, whose leaders won’t exploit their own people and will pursue development and growth.
Posted by: Chen | April 23rd, 2007 at 7:23 pm | Report this commentI see some other key structural changes within :
Posted by: Stephane MOT | April 26th, 2007 at 8:48 am | Report this comment- America enjoying good demography dynamics but becoming more monolithic, more focused on itself, welcoming fewer influences from abroad. Growing old a different way.
- At the opposite of this Mainland Amerika, China is embracing its own diversity. Chinese imperialism is no more about spreading a unique monolithic model but about a much smarter pervasiveness, leveraging on all minorities instead of crushing cultural diversity (ie China intends to build the core of Koreanhood on its very soil, claims the Koguryo cultural heritage, and position the Korean peninsula as a motherland’s satellite).
- What I call “Asianitude” keeps growing. Asian countries developping intra-asian relationships beyond the traditional bilateral relationships with Western countries, students and executives moving from places to places, a common ground and cultural identity, a sense of belonging to the same community at the individuals level…
- The Korean moment. Surrounded by ambitious giants (and a Japan dangerously returning to ultra nationalism and Showa-style fascism), seen as the herald of cultural diversity for other Asian nations, Korea has to cope with the collapse of North Korea. In what I call the Albania scenario, the people who used to live in a quasi sect are totally unprepared for a market economy : con men and gurus get the bulk of the values they received as a kick start in a new world.
- The turn of the millenium rise of fundamentalism (Christian in the US and Eastern Europe, Jewish in Eretz Israel and Islamist everywhere) may last if democracies keep electing leaders who put religion at the top of their not so hidden agendas (the collapse of Iraq, the rise of Iran as the regional threat, and the boost to fundamentalists across the globe were not collateral damage but the very aim of Bush’s game). And while terrorists trained in Iraq blossom on new urban and suburban playgrounds, al Qaeda survivors and wannabes focus on rural Asia, Africa and South America.
http://www.economist.com/world/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9071007
http://books.guardian.co.uk/departments/scienceandnature/story/0,,2063401,00.html
800 pound gorilla going twice…
Posted by: Felix Drost, Amsterdam NL | April 27th, 2007 at 8:15 pm | Report this commenthttp://www.ft.com/cms/s/cd8ffb5a-f14b-11db-838b-000b5df10621.html
And the 800 pound gorilla is sold to the eminent Sir James Lovelock of Gaia fame; his book ‘the revenge of Gaia’ is an extrapolation in depth of climate change trends currently in evidence not unlike in the Guardian article linked above. It does take a scientist of a more generic Newtonian tradition such as Dr. Lovelock to reach a wider superdisciplinary view of how we will develop over the coming decades; specialists feel ill equipped to sketch a future in which the numerous trends are extrapolated to a united view. But it really isn’t all too hard. And it is sorely disappointing to see this discussion being held without climate change being a key factor.
China is on a collission course with devastation. Carelessness, corruption, migration and economic growth but above all climate change are causing humanity to develop, pollute and overexploit an ever decreasing amount of arable land. The city of Beijing itself is facing desertification and increasingly severe sandstorms and by 2020, could be covered in sand; The spread of deserts in just the north of China threatens 400 million people (some 30% of the entire population). Somehow China needs to continue to feed, educate and employ not just climate change refugees but also economic migrants who seek to better their prospects in the industrializing zones. Industrial growth is achieved by ever greater emissions of CO2 and SO2 which contribute to the devastation itself. China isn’t the only area with problems, but given its population they will play out on a much grander scale. Expanding deserts and rising sea levels will cause mass migrations globally; we’ll revert back to worse than just isolationism and protectionism to where autarkist and xenophobic views become the justification for people living in the remaining arable areas to keep the refugees out.
Predictions such as that China can somehow magically become a global power on a par with the US over the next years expose the blinders of those espousing the view. Somehow in 13 years we will still live in the same world; the wide variety of very possible global hazards (there are a couple more besides climate change such as a nuclear war between Iran and the Arabs) is conveniently forgotten. I certainly hope that globalism and internationalism will be stronger forces in 2020 but it seems ever less likely.
Posted by: Felix Drost, Amsterdam NL | April 28th, 2007 at 10:11 pm | Report this commenthttp://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/26/world/asia/26china.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
“Environmental degradation is now so severe, with such stark domestic and international repercussions, that pollution poses not only a major long-term burden on the Chinese public but also an acute political challenge to the ruling Communist Party.”
“project, known as “Green G.D.P.,” was an effort to create an environmental yardstick for evaluating the performance of every official in China… in some provinces the pollution-adjusted growth rates were reduced almost to zero”
Posted by: NYT on China's poisonous growth | August 26th, 2007 at 8:48 am | Report this commentNo, India will surely be the strongest country in the world.
Posted by: bob | December 14th, 2007 at 2:03 am | Report this comment1)Has the fastest growing economy in the world
2)worlds 2nd largest population and it has more people than any other country today in its army and the other branches of the military.
3)very high tech. country
4)and the soldiers are very trained and are the best