September 11th 2006.
I'm writing an abstract of a fascinating article I found in today's
Independent, named: 'The
World in 2031: How September 11 Could Shape Our
Future'.
The article gives 3 leading historians' predictions of what the world
will be like in 30 years time; if September 11 had a lasting impact or
not. The 3 predictions are all very different, but each is chilling in
its own way.
The first
prediction is given by Paul Kennedy, a professor of history
at Yale. He
predicts that following the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq,
the US will also go into Iran, with disastrous consequences: between
2008-12, there will be a barrage of terrorist attacks throughout
Europe, North America and Japan. In that period, the Middle East will
be in
crisis - the regimes in Egypt, Syria and Saudi Arabia will
fall, Iraq will enter a civil war, and Iran will destroy Tel Aviv in a
nuclear attack. Israel will retaliate with a nuclear attack on Iran,
killing 10 million people. The world stands by, shocked: the US doesn't
know what to do apart from lick Israel's wounds, Russia does nothing,
Europe can't do anything and Asia doesn't want to get involved. Kennedy
predicts that China and India become major actors on the world scene,
as does Russia. Africa will finally come out of its cycle of civil wars
and revolutions and become stronger. He predicts that Al-Qaida will
become a thing of the past: after bombing Shanghai and Beijing in the
years 2010-12, China will join in the fight against them, as will
Russia and Europe. The banks will work together to stop anyone funding
the organisation and
eventually it disappears.
Prediction number two comes from Michael Clarke, a professor of defence
at Kings College, London. He talks of 'technological
medievalism'. A good term, what does it mean? Basically that the world
will rely less on nation states and
countries will regionalise:
national economies will break up into 'regional hot spots' and
individualism and freedom will rule. In this new eden, Al Qaida and
other Islamic groups become irrelevent: there is no longer the concept
of the collective against anything. The events leading to this change
are the growing tensions in the Middle East, which the West eventually
decides to leave to their own devices. This leads to an energy crisis,
a political crisis of course, between US, China and Russia. Meanwhile,
human issues are ignored: the climate changes bring more natural
disasters, poverty and crime increase, and eventually cities and
organisations begin making their own decisions, instead of the State.
With increasing technology, this is made easier, and voila, bye bye
State.
The third prediction is given by Lisa Jardine, the director of the AHRC
Centre for Editing Lives and Letters at Queen Mary, University of
London. She talks of a new world map, where nation states will cease to
exist. Countries continue to be administered locally but only for
convenience: anyone who wishes to become part of any global
organisation does so. Due to the low prices of international travel,
the internet and other advanced communications, people become global
citizens, spending time 'abroad', spekaing many languages and buying
even everyday things such as food from other countries. America becomes
a diversified place: it has 2 Hispanic, Spanish speaking presidents.
The president of the US becomes a leader who runs an efficient
bureaucracy providing social services, healthcare and general
administration to its inhabitants. In short, the future is a return to
Thomas Hobbe's views that the state exists to protect the individual
from harm and war exists only for the interests of those in power.
More reviews about the undefined