The article "Idealistic and pragmatic forecasting", Peter Faber proposes to analyze the National security Strategy of the USA 2010. According to the author, it illustrates the fundamental changes in the modern paradigm of predictive activity.
The conceptual core of the 2010 Strategy is a synthesis of "practical" and "theoretical" futurology. The document proposes to map the range of possible and desired future scenarios, and to propose a cognitive design that provides the most beneficial to the subject of management position. Presented in the document, politicized and "filtered" perception of the future is not scientific in the full sense of the word, as, for example, political predictions Bueno de Mesquita, and are examples of "practical" and "theoretical" futurology.
The author notes that strategizing in the area of national security is a challenging analytical activity, which many countries do not do. For some leaders, strategies for any areas not more than a declarative document for the victory in the political struggle. However, some strategic documents geopolitical players represent a major tool of the process of forecasting and modeling of future development in the specified area.
This modeling is carried out in the National security Strategy of the U.S. 2010, by manipulating meanings and models set out in the document. The author enumerates several concepts that, in his opinion, are ambiguous to interpret and has the potential manipulative effects. One of the key provisions of the Strategy emphasizes the "structural transformation in international relations" and the need for "a new, multi-polar and interdependent world order to respond to these changes".
The author of the article points to the objective of the above provisions, but emphasizes that the management of the "multipolar world", in the view of analysts the United States must make a "functional and flexible cluster of like-minded countries" working in concert, but to meet their interests. "In the new global system the United States will act as Chief coordinator and Chairman, but not as a Hegemon", the "chairmanship" in the control cluster policy implies the same global leadership, only, according to Faber, "behind the scenes".
Realizing the trend of moral deligitimation unipolar world, intelligence departments of the USA, combining the possible and the desirable "vision of the future", offer the transition to the model of multipolarity, but with inherent potential for covert hegemony "from-for backs of like-minded people". In addition, the national security Strategy of the USA 2010 proclaims the principle of "management by conditions in the international environment, not reactive." This provision directly points to the reflexive control paradigm, we propose to use to achieve the desired situations of the future.
For the full implementation of this approach proposed to use "abseloutely approach" in strategyreview, as the individual Ministry or Department, of course, impossible to manage "conditions" in the world political environment. The author notes that the described multipolar and pluralistic ("has already become synonymous with harmony") the world model is easier to manage with the help of latest socio-political technologies "indirect" or mediated effects. Central to the strategy is a call for revival "economic power".
Building on the ideas of Sir Normand Angela, the Strategy proclaims economic interdependence as the main guarantor of peace and stability. This idea sounds really rational, but does "interdependence" - the course on an equal partnership? Or will it attempt to "think the unthinkable and to manage the unmanageable"? Peter Faber also points out that a number of serious security problems not mentioned in the document ("the struggle for geopolitical supremacy"), although it is logical to assume that in a multipolar world she may be one of the most urgent.
Wouldn't the promotion of multipolarity trends to fragmentation of the global political space with the consequent formation of a dictatorship of the "control cluster"? Perhaps it is to this model of the future and lead the ideas inherent in the Strategy 2010. The author believes that it is important to note that, starting from the Strategy of the Bush Administration 2002, of the concepts reflected in the national security Strategies of the USA, represent a fundamental change in prognostic and management thinking and the fundamentals of the technology "indirect" effects, based on postclassical paradigm of the theory of management.
Peter Faber (Peter Faber), Head of Strategies and Operations ISN
Summary translation: Medvedev Dmitry Andreevich
Tags: assessment , financial center , strategy , USA , crisis , Exchange