Tough Times Predicted

The International Monetary Fund's Board of Governors

The National Intelligence Council predicts a significant shift in the US risk profile between now and 2025. According to a report released last week the next two decades will feature intense international competition for markets, energy, and even water. This competition will increase friction between cultures and regions. Managing the competition will be complicated by dwindling US dominance and the weakness of international institutions.

Some key findings:

• A global multipolar system is emerging with the rise of China, India, and others. The relative power of nonstate actors—businesses, tribes, religious organizations, and even criminal networks—also will increase.


• The unprecedented shift in relative wealth and economic power roughly from West to East now under way will continue.


• Continued economic growth—coupled with 1.2 billion more people by 2025—will put pressure on energy, food, and water resources.


• Opportunities for mass-casualty terrorist attacks using chemical, biological, or less likely, nuclear weapons will increase as technology diffuses and nuclear power (and possibly weapons) programs expand.

The NIC report expects the United States to remain the single most powerful nation, but the relative power of the United States will decline as the affluence and influence of others increase.

The report joins many others in noting the current international framework - centered around the United Nations, World Bank, and International Monetary Fund - is incapable of responding effectively to current, much less emerging, challenges. This has been a topic of discussion for many years. The current economic crisis is pushing the process past talk to action.

At its November 15 Washington Summit the Group of Twenty outlined surprisingly detailed actions, including several to be implemented by March 31, 2009. These actions advance a new consensus view of much greater international cooperation in economic and financial regulation:

We call upon our national and regional regulators to formulate their regulations and other measures in a consistent manner. Regulators should enhance their coordination and cooperation across all segments of financial markets, including with respect to cross-border capital flows. Regulators and other relevant authorities as a matter of priority should strengthen cooperation on crisis prevention, management, and resolution.

We are committed to advancing the reform of the Bretton Woods Institutions so that they can more adequately reflect changing economic weights in the world economy in order to increase their legitimacy and effectiveness. In this respect, emerging and developing economies, including the poorest countries, should have greater voice and representation. The Financial Stability Forum (FSF) must expand urgently to a broader membership of emerging economies, and other major standard setting bodies should promptly review their membership. The IMF, in collaboration with the expanded FSF and other bodies, should work to better identify vulnerabilities, anticipate potential stresses, and act swiftly to play a key role in crisis response.

In remarks last April at the John F. Kennedy Library Gordon Brown, the British Prime Minister, anticipated many of these international financial reforms and pressed for similar steps across a much broader agenda:

So a new World Bank; a new International Monetary Fund; a reformed and renewed United Nations mandated and resourced that is greater than the sum of its parts; strong regional organisations from the European Union to the African Union able to bring to a troubled world the humanitarian aid, peacekeeping and the support for stability and reconstruction that has been absent for too long — all built around a new global society founded on revitalised international rules and institutions, and grounded in the great values we share in common.

In his remarks Prime Minister Brown wondered if the will to reform could be generated short of global calamity. In the unraveling of global prosperity since his speech a motivating calamity may have been provided... for better or worse.

The full NIC report is available by selecting Global Trends 2025: A Transformed World. It is a large pdf exceeding 33 megabytes.

NOTE TO READERS: Over the next several weeks new professional obligations may delay or interrupt regular publication of Monday (P)review.

Religious Terrorism Rejected

Pope Benedict XVI and King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia.

Meetings at the Vatican and the United Nations have condemned the religious pretensions of terrorists. During the first week in November religious scholars from several faiths met at the Vatican. Last week secular leaders from many nations met in New York. Both meetings addressed the religious dimensions of terrorism.

"A joint declaration issued at the end of a Vatican sponsored three-day Muslim-Catholic forum has called for recognition by both Muslims and Christians of the rights of women and freedom of conscience, and condemned terrorism in the name of religion," the Times of London reported.

Seventy nations participated in the the UN meeting, the latest in a series of discussions organized around inter-faith issues by Saudi Arabia. In their final declaration the UN delegates offered, "“Participating States affirmed their rejection of the use of religion to justify the killing of innocent people and actions of terrorism, violence and coercion, which directly contradict the commitment of all religions to peace, justice and equality.”

In his remarks to the UN delegates President Bush argued, "We may profess different creeds and worship in different places, but our faith leads us to common values. We believe God calls us to love our neighbors, and to treat one another with compassion and respect. We believe God calls us to honor the dignity of all life, and to speak against cruelty and injustice. We believe God calls us to live in peace -- and to oppose all those who use His name to justify violence and murder."

In their Joint Declaration those meeting November 4-6 at Rome's Gregorian University wrote, "We profess that Catholics and Muslims are called to be instruments of love and harmony among believers, and for humanity as a whole, renouncing any oppression, aggressive violence and terrorism, especially that committed in the name of religion, and upholding the principle of justice for all."

The Vatican meeting was the specific result of an inter-religious controversy arising from remarks by Pope Benedict XVI at Regensburg University in 2006. Islamic scholars responded to the controversy with an open letter which, in turn, led to the organizing of recent discussions in Rome.

The open letter, originally signed by 138 leading Islamic scholars, was entitled A Common Word between Us and You. The letter begins, "Muslims and Christians together make up well over half of the world’s population. Without peace and justice between these two religious communities, there can be no meaningful peace in the world. The future of the world depends on peace between Muslims and Christians. The basis for this peace and understanding already exists. It is part of the very foundational principles of both faiths: love of the One God, and love of the neighbour. These principles are found over and over again in the sacred texts of Islam and Christianity. The Unity of God, the necessity of love for Him, and the necessity of love of the neighbour is thus the common ground between Islam and Christianity."

Recent public opinion surveys in Muslim nations have found dwindling support for terrorism in the name of Islam. Suicide bombings are, in particular, increasingly viewed as inconsistent with Islamic teaching.

Interfaith discussions are certainly not restricted to international conclaves. Recent news reports have highlighted such interactions in Los Angeles, New Haven, and more broadly.

NOTE TO READERS: Over the next several weeks a new set of professional obligations may delay or interrupt regular publication of Monday (P)review.

Obama Sets Homeland Security Priorities

Senator Obama seen at a July 16 Purdue University roundtable on new threats.

The Obama campaign committed significant resources to Homeland Security policy development. While the issue never broke into the first-tier of election issues, the campaign's paper trail suggests a substantive shift from the last seven years.

According to campaign documents, "Barack Obama and Joe Biden's strategy for securing the homeland against 21st Century threats is driven by the twin goals of preventing terrorist attacks on our homeland and investing in national resilience that enables people closest to a crisis to act and achieve an rapid return to normal." This strategy will be advanced through:

1. Preparedness for catastrophic risk,
2. Prevention and mitigation of catastrophic risk, and
3. Partnership with the states, localities and the private sector in prevention, mitigation and preparedness.

On October 19 the campaign released a long-vetted position paper (pdf) on Homeland Security. In thirteen pages the document outlines a wide range of policies. A one-page campaign summary (pdf) gives particular priority to defeat terrorism worldwide, combat 21st Century threats, secure our border and strengthen our infrastructure, and work effectively with state and local governments and the private sector.

The specific threats given most attention are nuclear terrorism, bioterrorism, cyberterrorism, and natural catastrophes. These are threats that can challenge any real recovery.

The Obama strategy leads with prevention. Almost all of the counter-terrorist tactics discussed are prevention-oriented. Improving the intelligence function receives the expected nod. But there is also a specific commitment to "establishing a grant program to support thousands more state and local level intelligence analysts and increasing our capacity to share intelligence across all levels of government."

Headline attention is given to "Prepare Effective Emergency Response Plans." This is something to which the President-elect gave attention as a member of the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee. Some campaign insiders expect this to morph into giving much more priority to local and regional preparedness, prevention, and mitigation planning. Rigorous local plans - instead of detailed DHS requirements - will become the foundation of national risk management.

Woven consistently into the Obama plan is an emphasis on - perhaps even a deference to - local leadership. The campaign policy statement includes, "The risks facing this nation cannot be effectively prevented or managed by the federal government alone. Barack Obama knows that prevention, mitigation, response and recovery are primarily local issues... The federal government must begin by listening to local concerns and acknowledging local priorities. The private sector has proven its willingness and ability to work in support of our nation’s security, but they have not been fully engaged as a partner by the federal government. Barack Obama and Joe Biden will reach out to the private sector in order to leverage its expertise and assets to protect our homeland. Our city police, county sheriffs, firefighters, state police, public health professionals, EMTs, hospital staff, public works personnel, emergency managers, electric utilities crews, transportation workers, Red Cross volunteers – and so many more hometown heroes – must be confident of federal competence, cooperation, and support before, during, and after a disaster."

Also referenced in the campaign documents is, "He (Obama) will invest in strengthening our aging infrastructure to improve both safety and security." This Homeland Security tactic is likely to be amplified as the federal government makes major infrastructure investments as part of its economic recovery effort.

The exegesis could continue. The Obama Homeland Security policy documents are dense and detailed. Many more policy papers remain in campaign (now transition) files, ready to be used. But if even these few strategic priorities are effectively implemented it will mark a decided shift in the Department of Homeland Security and in how our nation engages risk.

November 2 - 8, 2008

Terrorist Threat Growing

Saturday, November 8 - "Secret enclaves of al-Qaeda extremists based in London, Birmingham and Luton are planning mass-casualty attacks in Britain," according to late Saturday reports. The Sunday Telegraph has made this its lead story for Remembrance Sunday.

Pakistan Warns and Welcomes

Saturday, November 8 - Coincident with the obligatory congratulations to the new US President, Pakistan's government and general public continue to protest US operations in the Pakistan-Afghan border region.

White House Hacked

Saturday, November 8 - The Financial Times reports, "Chinese hackers have penetrated the White House computer network on multiple occasions and obtained e-mails between government officials." Similar attacks on the McCain and Obama campaign systems have also been reported.

Pandemic Threat Persists

Friday, November 7 - With the financial crisis diverting politicians’ attention, and no sign after a decade that the H5N1 virus is set to trigger a pandemic, public health specialists are worried that the world is turning its back on the continued threat of a lethal flu outbreak," according to the Financial Times.

Material Support Charge Ruled Unconstitutional

Friday, November 7 - A federal judge in Oregon has ruled a law prohibiting material support for terrorists is unconstitutional because it is too vague. U.S. District Judge Garr King said the Treasury Department violated the rights of the Oregon chapter of a defunct Islamic charity based in Saudi Arabia," according to the Seattle Post-Intelligencer.

Most Leads Don't Lead

Friday, November 7 - The FBI tracked about 108,000 potential terrorism threats or suspicious incidents from mid-2004 to November 2007, but most were found groundless, a Justice Department review found on Friday. (More from Reuters and DOJ Office of the Inspector General)

Tokyo Dirty Bomb Exercise

Friday, November 7 - On Thursday Japanese authorities conducted an especially intricate interagency exercise focused on the threat of a dirty bomb being exploded in Tokyo.

Interfaith Meeting Condemns Terrorism

Friday, November 7 - "A joint declaration issued at the end of the Vatican's three-day Muslim-Catholic forum has called for recognition by both Muslims and Christians of the rights of women and freedom of conscience, and condemned terrorism in the name of religion," according to the Times of London.

Early Blizzard

Friday, November 7 - More than a foot of snow, high winds, white-out conditions, and significant transportation and power problems hit the northern plains.

Secret Deal with Pakistan?

Thursday, November 6 - David Ignatius reports that the US and Pakistan have reached an informal understanding regarding US operations into Pakistan.

CQ Projects Obama Homeland Security Policy

Wednesday, November 5 - Congressional Quarterly provides a quick overview of an anticipated counter-terrorism and Homeland Security policy for an Obama administration. This will be the focus of next Monday's (P)review.

Low Pressure in Caribbean

Tuesday, November 4 - A broad area of low pressure south of Cuba has the potential to strengthen into a tropical storm over the next few days. More from the National Hurricane Center. UPDATE: Hurricane Paloma formed late Thursday. UPDATE 2: Paloma made its Cuban landfall late Saturday night as a CAT4 hurricane.

Pakistan Warns Petraeus

Tuesday, November 4 - The next U.S. president must halt missile strikes on insurgent targets in northwest Pakistan or risk failure in its efforts to end militancy in the Muslim country, the prime minister warned General David Petraeus.

Second Gitmo Conviction

Tuesday, November 4 - A military panel at the Guantánamo Bay naval base convicted Ali Hamza al Bahlul, a former propaganda chief for Al Qaeda, of terrorism charges on Monday and sentenced him to life in prison, according to the New York Times. In separate legal action, six Algerian detainees have filed for a habeas corpus hearing.

Blacklists Challenged

Tuesday, November 4 - The United Nations blacklist of alleged terrorism financiers is facing legal challenges and dwindling support. Challenges to the U.N. list, which contains 503 individuals, businesses and groups, are coming from courts in Europe, including the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg, which ruled the blacklist is illegal because it lacks accountability and a mechanism for those on it to challenge their inclusion, the Washington Post reported Sunday.

Focus on Outcomes not Origins

"The next U.S. president will govern in an era of increasing international instability, including a heightened risk of terrorist attacks in the near future, long-term prospects of regional conflicts and diminished U.S. dominance across the globe," is how the Washington Post summarized a speech last week by the CIA director.

The CIA is appropriately focused on assessing threats from outside the United States. But external threats do not constitute the nation's only or necessarily most serious risks.

Last week President Bush spoke at graduation ceremonies for the FBI Academy. "Here at home, we've transformed our national security institutions and have given our intelligence and law enforcement professionals the tools and the resources they need to do their job, and that is to protect the American people. We formed a new Department of Homeland Security. We created a new Director for National Intelligence. We established a program at the Central Intelligence Agency to interrogate key terrorist leaders captured in the war on terror... Since 9/11, the Bureau has worked with our partners around the world to disrupt planned terrorist attacks."

Counter-terrorism deserves sustained attention. Is there similar priority and sufficient strategic attention given to other catastrophic risks?

Last week a United Nations conference declared the risk of pandemic has never been higher. Concern for domestic terrorism was underlined by the arrest of white supremacists planning a killing spree. An extended wildfire season in many areas of the United States has depleted budgets and exhausted firefighters. We are past due for a major California earthquake. Hurricane recovery continues on the Gulf Coast.

In February 2007 the British think-tank Demos recommended a fundamental reconceiving of national security. The Demos report cites a "broad spectrum of threats and hazards to national security." Among those listed are, terrorism, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, organized crime, espionage, fragile states, natural disasters, pandemics, energy security, and vulnerability of critical national infrastructure.

Rather than focusing on the origin of a threat, the Demos report suggests giving more attention to the outcome of a risk. What is the consequence of a calculated risk? What is the likelihood of a threat? What are our greatest risks regardless of origin?

We can be creatures of our categories, how we organize reality. From time beyond memory we have tended to organize our threats by the enemy outside, the criminal inside, and the unfolding of mysterious fate or divine punishment or random accident. For each of these origins we have had a different attitude and response.

Tactically the focus on different origins can be helpful. Strategically the focus on origins rather than outcomes can discourage effective prevention, mitigation, and readiness. Recognizing this the United Kingdom's 2008 National Security Strategy (pdf) encourages more attention to relative risk rather than just external threats.

Geographically and constitutionally - even geologically and meteorologically - the US situation is more complicated than that of the British. A small island nation two generations removed from imperial ambition is more predisposed to comprehensive risk analysis than a continent-striding superpower.

But the consequences of Katrina - and the entirely predictable economic, social, political, and human consequences of a major California quake or serious pandemic - should be sufficiently clear to encourage more coordinated attention to the whole horizon of risk.

One modest step the new administration might take is the creation of a White House Council for Risk Estimation. This body would work to provide the President and cabinet a framework for prioritizing risk. Similar to how the National Intelligence Council supports the Director of National Intelligence, the Council for Risk Estimation would:

• Coordinate the contributions of Federal agencies to evaluate risk outcomes and priorities.


• Reach out to nongovernment experts in academia, the private sector, and State and local agencies to broaden the Federal understanding of risk.


• Produce National Risk Estimates (NREs) and related products to support policy making and resource allocation.


• Contribute to decisions by the President, Office of Management and Budget and Cabinet agencies to allocate resources in a manner to reflect risk priorities.