Soldiers on the School Run
Last night I was at the Royal Geographical Society for the annual IRC-UK lecture, ‘Soldiers on the School Run: Sensible Strategy or Disastrous Compromise?’ This is the latest in a series of events trying to define what it is we’re up to in the business of humanitarian interventions. It’s clear to honest professionals in both the military and the aid industry that the way we are dealing with complex emergencies is not working and needs to get a lot better – fast. There’s no choice. The rate of State failure is accelerating. We simply cannot afford too many Somalias.
On the one hand, the military is engaged in adapting to WW4 – the kind of battles waged or imagined in WW2 and the Cold War are history. WW4 is a counterinsurgency war. Neither the battles between national armies that characterized WW2, nor the long distance threatening of the Cold War are relevant to today’s forces fighting jihadists in the fields and villages of Afghanistan. It is a far more complex mission than previous forces had to consider. The WW4 soldier is expected to be part diplomat, part aid worker, and part nation builder. Panelist Ahmed Rashid believes there is a crisis between the military and the NGOs in Afghanistan. The rate of change in mission has been too rapid for the military to adapt its strategy from the Cold War, and their command structure is incompatible with the way NGOs work. But the heart of the problem is the very different perspective of each organization.
For the NGOs, whose objectives range from acute disaster relief to long term development, and who therefore expect to spend anything from a few weeks to years in a given place, the issue is how to maintain independence from the military on which they increasingly rely for logistics and security. It is axiomatic in the Aid industry that aid should be ‘independent, neutral and impartial.’ But in the management of complex emergencies there is increasing involvement of the military, and the politics of military intervention means that there is no neutrality or impartiality. The NGOs are fearful that the more they are identified with the military, their safety will be in jeopardy. It is well known that on this basis the Taliban considers Aid workers to be ‘American Slaves. Mike Young is IRCs director for Asia and the Caucasus, and he’s been at it for 12 years. He doesn’t believe in big plans, he’s all for local, which takes time and trust. He’s frightened that if the Taliban remain after the US and UK forces leave, the locals who worked with the Aid agencies will be killed as collaborators. He remains very doubtful of the long term effectiveness of military based Aid, but admits that we’re stuck with what we’ve got.
Major General (Ret.) Tim Cross, who is a veteran the Gulf, the Balkans and Iraq argued that for the military it wasn’t a question of whether they should be doing development and humanitarian intervention, but how. On balance he said that he thought both the military and the NGOs were doing ‘a reasonable job’, but that ‘we have to keep talking to each other.’ So they have very different missions, and very different ways of operating. But they find themselves working together out of necessity. And not only with NGOs. The US marines have been trying to use academics in its efforts for ‘hearts and minds’ and to avoid accidental civilian casualties. The Human Terrain Systems embed social scientists and anthropologists with combat troops to help tacticians with local knowledge. This new kind of counterinsurgency war/complex emergency situation is demanding rapid adaptation, and if that means embedding academics and /or humanitarian workers, so be it.
Uneasy bedfellows they may be, but it looks like they will be stuck with each other for the foreseeable future. Nation building is new and over the last 10 years it’s been pretty hit and miss. Perhaps what is happening is that two distinct mindsets are having to merge, because the prospect of large parts of Africa and Asia collapsing is too dire to imagine.
Links:
Street Fighting Man
Everywhere I hear the sound of marching, charging feet, boy,
‘Cause summer’s here and the time is right for fighting in the street, boy
Jagger Richards 1968
Finally I’m back. My Atlantic trip was extraordinary and I ended up doing two deliveries to and from France, so in all I covered more than 6000 miles.
Before I left I wrote a post called 2010: The Next Leg Down. I wanted to go over it and see how I’m doing in the trend forecasting business.
Oil and the Deep Horizon rig: I’m still waiting for the oil price spike. But the good people at BP are doing their best on my behalf, bless ‘em. Or rather, Transocean. Although Transocean is not well known publicly, it’s the largest rig operator in the world, with about 300 rigs. What makes this accident so important was that it was an ultra-deep drilling operation and if the US bans more ultra-deep in the Gulf of Mexico it will impact oil supply within a year. As the cheap easy oil disappears we are faced with difficult choices: Just how much ecological horror do you think you can stand to stay on the highway? We need to remember that Deep Horizon was no mundane oil operation. They were tapping into the Tiber field – 40,000 ft down. It was the deepest vertical well in history. You could lose Everest and have 13000ft spare in that hole. This was the Apollo mission for deep drilling. Was it dangerous? Of course it was. Whenever we take one of those giant steps for mankind, it’s inherently dangerous. But in all the fervour to get to the 70 billion barrels deep in the Gulf, we chose to suppress that information. What happens if we have a big hurricane season this year?
Nukes: While the west mutters and hovers, Asia is going all out. It will be interesting to follow the split in attitude. Just this week, Monju, the giant Japanese breeder reactor was brought back online after a 14 years of repair. China, which has 11 reactors in commercial production, has 20 under construction. I’m waiting for the argument in the West to get much more heated as people start to wonder how we’ll compete with nuclear Asian countries in 10 years.
Immigration: I get a gold star. In the UK immigration has become the biggest issue in the election. It was an immigration argument with Mrs. Duffy that caused Mr. Brown’s worst moment in the campaign. As we hit the next leg down, and the European economy buckles under the sovereign debt bubble, which will make Lehman brothers look like the teddy bear’s picnic, immigration will turn ugly. Big right wing gains across Europe. As southern Europe goes into full street fighting man mode it’s only a matter of time before they decide that it’s the foreigner’s fault. Look out.
I’m off to the Frontline Club to have a glass of wine and watch as Britain has a revolutionary election, involving three white guys instead of two. No, really. It’s time for real change. Honest.
2010: The Next Leg Down
Before I go off on my transatlantic sailing trip next week I thought I’d make some forecasts for 2010: The next leg down.
Oil and Globalization: First thing is our reaction to the arrival of triple digit oil prices. Right now oil is at $80. I’m not expecting a miraculous recovery in demand, but a political crisis could easily drive prices into triple digits. If so, whether or not you actually believed the news tripe about recovery, oil over $100/barrel will begin the next leg of the post peak oil crisis. Right on schedule. The same process will be broadly applicable to most of Western Europe, the US and the rest of the developed world, but my immediate concern is Britain. This is the year when transport begins to trump labour arbitrage and the global part of globalization starts to look shaky.
On the face of it, this is disastrous. The OECD industries have come to rely on almost completely on foreign manufacturing sources, obviously for the most part China. But in fact it’s a tremendous opportunity, because except for bankers and entertainers, globalization has been a disaster for wage earners. The myth of the service economy has run its course. It was largely an artefact of cheap oil. It brought cheap goods, but the side effects have been an ecological horror. According to a recent report in the Guardian, major companies caused $2 trillion worth of environmental damage just in 2008.
Sir Richard, my new best friend: Probably the most important signal for Britain is Sir Richard Branson’s discovery of peak oil. Dollar short and a day late, but he may be the person to make it mainstream in Britain. He’ll be our Al Gore. It’s a pity that Matt Simmons, Colin Campbell, Jean Laherrere, and all the rest of the ASPO folk couldn’t get any traction for the last decade. Never mind, now that Sir Richard has noticed and the Industry Taskforce on Peak Oil and Energy Security has been formed at the Royal Society finally we’ll see some righteous panic.
Re-Industrialization: I’m expecting to see talk of the rapid re-industrialization of Britain. The flag wavers for the service economy will be ushered off the stage. Despite being the economic darlings of the last decade or two, suddenly they’ll be seen as hopelessly out of touch. Start watching for some new clever marketing speak. Right now in glass walled offices with aluminium furniture, there are eager young marketing drones with perfect complexions, dreaming up the sound bites for the new new clean energy renaissance: Social enterprise resourcing , Clean Tech revolution, Cloudsourced inventory control, AgroUrbanOrganic complex …it’ll be some such jabber. Especially watch for UrbanFoodCommunities.com and “Liveability.” And yes, I have trademarked all these buzzwords, so don’t even think about it, nasty little marketing children.
What it means is that if the bloody Chinese are too far away to make all our stuff we’ll have to remember how to do it ourselves.
Does that mean I’ll have to get mud on my Vivien Westwood?
Yes darling, I’m afraid it does.
Nukes: I’m expecting some real surprises around nuclear energy. I remember talking to Kjell Aleklett in 2003 about the nuclear renaissance. This is one of those issues that gets normally polite ecology people at each other’s throats. Whether or not nuclear energy has an EROEI to make it worth building is one thing, but the politics will be interesting. The current British Government is talking about going from 19% to 40% electricity from nukes in 20 years. I stand in awe of the nuclear energy PR machine that has completely turned the government’s opinion round from 2003 to 2006. Now watch for the demonstrations.
Immigration is going to hit the big time: 2010 will be a tipping point in the collapse of Africa and the mass migration into Europe. For the last 4 decades, more or less since the independence of the last colonies, there’s been a tragic failure of Africa to adapt. As William Easterly puts it, “Spending $2.3 trillion (measured in today’s dollars) in aid over the past five decades has left the most aid-intensive regions, like Africa, wallowing in continued stagnation; it’s fair to say this approach has not been a great success.” A mixture of tribal identity, corruption, over population, infrastructure and ecological collapse combined with increasingly severe climate effects have initiated the collapse of sub Saharan Africa. The collapse seems to be propagating rapidly out of the Horn, and accelerating. The Africans are doing what populations always do in the face of collapse. They die or leave. In this case the death toll will make the term “Biblical” obsolete, by an order of magnitude.
It’s the leaving that’s the problem for Europe. The population of sub Saharan Africa and Europe are roughly the same; something over 800 million. Europe is already far past carrying capacity, probably by a factor of two, like Britain. The transport and agricultural infrastructure, health systems, education systems and societies of Europe cannot successfully cope with such an influx and remain viable.
I’m not suggesting for a moment that Africa is the sole source of illegal migration into Europe. If only. But Africa seems to me to be in the worst shape. Add in the populations of failing countries in the Middle East, Eastern Europe and the Indian subcontinent from which migrants will flood into Europe and the total is well over a 1.5 billion.
The cracks are beginning to show. In Italy last month there was a riot in Rosarno in which illegal immigrants from set fire to cars and shops. Italy’s demographic is changing very rapidly. At least 7% of the population, not counting illegal immigrants is now non-Italian. 1 in 6 babies is born to a non-Italian. Italians are about to wake up to the permanent changes in their country. I expect some desperate headlines as we head into summer. Naturally the cry of ‘racism’ will be the sure sign of backlash.
In 1997, the number of foreigners living in Spain was 500,000. In 2008 it was 5.3 million. That is an order of magnitude difference. In Catalonia 15% of the population is foreign born. The Spanish are now beginning to realize the full effects of such high levels of immigration on its school system.
In Greece, which is already close to financial meltdown, has a non-Greek population of 10%. Until recently most of that influx came from Balkan states, but as Africa’s situation deteriorates more of the illegal immigrants will come from Africa. Aside from street riots in Greece over the economy, expect a backlash over immigration.
The cultural, religious and ethnic divides in the new Europe have been ignored by a generation of politicians. There is even a rumour in Britain that the Labour party secretly decided to allow unlimited immigration to Britain during its tenure since they thought immigrants would be more likely to vote Labour in future. For the past decade it’s been almost impossible to talk about immigration without being silenced by cries of racism. I’d expect this debate to get a lot more difficult in 2010. For better or worse, Europe is now a fundamentally different place demographically than it was 10 years ago. How it fares in the 21st century with this starting population is anyone’s guess, but if history is any guide balkanization is a lot more likely than peaceful integration. I wish there was something vaguely humorous about this whole thing, but I can’t see it.
Fighting in the street: Whole areas of Britain, Europe and the US have fallen into decay. Along with it communities have been destroyed, and we are left with a vast underclass living on benefits. Add to that the tensions in the middle classes as the last of the savings dribble away. People can generally last about 3 years if they’ve got some savings, but now it’s down to the dregs. Living on the kid’s education money and worrying about losing the house. The last shops in the high street boarded up. No room at university for the kids anyway – and nowhere for them to go. 50% unemployment in the under 25s. The austerity measures announced from the balcony of some grand old palace by some unelected Brussels apparatchik with a bad comb over. The human mind can only stand so much. It’s impossible to predict the spark, but if it’s an el Nino hot summer, look for trouble in the streets.
Weather: I know that economists are the only profession with a worse record than weather forecasters, nonetheless I’m going to chance my arm. The la Nina conditions of the last couple of years have given way to a new el Nino. If it persists into summer 2010, as looks likely, we may be getting some exciting weather. As I said above, if it results in a very hot summer look out. Angry unemployed people and 40°c are a bad combination.
War: Rule number 1. Do not under any circumstances allow yourself to be drawn into an endless campaign in Asia. You are not that rich. No empire ever was, nor ever will be. You are thinking in years. They are thinking in centuries. From Babylon, with love, Alex@Macedon.
Anyone got a film crew they’re not using, I’ve got the oil film script re-done. Now I’m going to cross an ocean under sail for the first time. Wish me luck.
The Local
First – Everyone has to watch this video. That’s an order!
You know, it’s funny how things work. Last week I asked for a new paradigm, or at least I wanted to start thinking about how it might look, and bingo, there it was. Jeff Rubin, the former chief economist at CIBC, has outlined it – and it’s what a great many of us have been arguing about for a long time: the end of globalization and the re-localizing of the economy. The difference is that Mr. Rubin is a mainstream economist, so it’s harder to dismiss his analysis.
Perhaps the most important point he’s making is the time factor. This is not something that’s a decade out. He’s estimating triple digit oil prices about 15 months away, with luck. It is almost inconceivable that any significant changes can be made in that time, even if his analysis is believed by policy makers and the markets. As Rubin points out, if the gains of labour arbitrage are eclipsed by the costs of transport – “Distance is Money” – then the entire edifice of globalization collapses rapidly.
As I was saying in Obsolete Paradigms, we need to start acting as if the laws of physics are true, by which I meant full cost accounting (The definitions here can be confusing. I mean accounting that includes the true cost of all resources used, ecological footprint if you like) and the end of artificial externalities. Full cost accounting will force our current model of capitalism to adapt. Certainly the model we’ve used for the last quarter century is, quite literally, bankrupt. Western Europe and the US will have to re-localize at an unprecedented rate. I think he’s right, but my concern is whether or not these economies can adapt fast enough or go through a severe depression towards a new structure.
The western version of globalization, the service economy – or what he calls the barista economy – is obsolete. The entire range of skills of the blue collar world, you know, people making stuff, which most economists have written off, will have to come back. Did any of us really think we were going to run a world class economy on coffee shops and back rubs?
The problems we have with rapid re-localization was driven home to me by an article in the Evening Standard, January 21. Britain is building the world’s largest offshore wind farm, called the London Array, 20 km off the Essex coast in the Thames estuary. You would think it would be a great opportunity for British firms and engineers. Not so. The majority of the contracts to build the London Array are going overseas. Britain has neither the skills nor the manufacturing base to produce the turbines. The major contracts have gone to Dong Energy of Denmark, E.ON of Germany, and Masdar of Abu Dabhi. This is no criticism of those companies. I was in Denmark recently and what they’ve done with wind power in just a few years is extraordinary. It is, however, an appalling indictment of the government’s and British industry’s short sightedness. Britain is the windiest country in Europe and the need for alternate energy sources has been obvious for years. Now with oil prices set to rise to above $100 if Rubin is right, we find ourselves with an army of media studies graduates and baristas to build a new grid for the 21st century.
I said in Recrimination vs Innovation on Christmas day, we have a workforce, what we desperately lack is leadership. These young people need new skills, they need new opportunity, and they don’t need to be burdened with £20,000 for a degree in something they’ll never get a job doing. This is not impossible, but it’s not trivial either. Danny Stevens of the Environmental Industries Commission has called for the Government to establish a National Environmental Skills Academy. I couldn’t agree more, but I would argue it’s on too small a scale. We need to mobilize this generation on a scale that hasn’t been contemplated since WWII. Since the war, Britain has allowed its position as a world leader in science and technology to slip away, preferring to rely on wage arbitrage and cheap transport to support a version of globalization which has benefited a tiny minority, while leaving the economy as a whole in ruins. That flapping you hear is the vultures coming home to roost.
So I’d like to ask the government to immediately establish a British Environmental Engineering Corps, (being that this is Britain I wanted to make the acronym come out as BEER, but Regiment seemed a bit severe), which will train people, for free, forgive the student debts they already have, and go about building a new energy infrastructure, reconfiguring our cities so that they are sustainable and liveable, and making the transportation infrastructure as efficient as the Japanese. In 10 years. Get a move on.
Obsolete Paradigms
“You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.” Buckminster Fuller
A couple of friends have kindly pointed out that it might be possible to interpret my last post – Ghost Acreage and British Immigration – as suggesting that stopping immigration would effectively solve the population problem in Britain. Nothing could be further from the truth. It’s like that old adage; if you find yourself in a hole, the first thing to do is stop digging. The real task will be to get population down this century to manageable levels without chaos. Chaos is the real enemy. The point I was making is that when politicians talk about ecology in a country at twice carrying capacity, without mentioning immigration, it’s inherently hypocritical.
There is another version of ghost acreage that is actually much scarier. It’s sometimes called phantom acreage and means the extra energy provided by fossil fuels and its effect on population. We have relied on fossil fuels to change our environment so that it will support many times the historical world population. But now we are bumping up against hard limits in food supply, water, a host of critical metals and gases, fish stocks, and of course fossil fuels. So we’ve set ourselves up for overshoot. The issue in Britain, and for the rest of Europe, is how to manage population so that overshoot doesn’t cause a chaotic crash. To my knowledge no civilization, in the 69 odd empires so far, has managed it. They just collapsed. I have started to see some alarmed commentary on the ominous figure of 70 million UK population, so perhaps there’s hope that finally it’s sinking in.
Which brings me to my subject: Obsolete Paradigms.
I know that numbers of ecologically minded folk have started to run for the hills, or its equivalent, the transition movement. They argue that it’s already too late to avoid a crash for many parts of the world and it’s wisest to adapt our small towns, like Totnes, to a post fossil fuel community. Well…yes and no. There are two problems with this approach. One is that if things do really collapse, then Totnes isn’t going to be some safe haven. That is unless the good folk of Totnes are considerably better armed than I thought. Two is that it assumes that we are at the end of innovation, and I disagree completely. We are on the cusp of an era of innovation unique in our history. What’s hanging us up is not so much carbon fuels and climate chaos as it is an obsolete paradigm.
The usage of the word Paradigm has changed significantly over the last century, but here I mean it as the axiomatic epistemological framework of a culture. I’m taking it from Kuhn’s idea of paradigm shift in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, but not just applied to science. I mean the entire paradigm of the way we operate on earth.
The one we have right now is cobbled together from bits of desert religions and some economic ideologies based on an early and tragically misinformed interpretation of Darwinian evolution. Its main weakness is that it requires infinite resources and space. On the one hand you’ve got ‘go forth and multiply’ and on the other you’ve got ‘don’t worry when it (whatever it is) runs out or gets too expensive we’ll substitute something else for it.’ Both ideas are idiotic in a closed environment. So we need to get rid of it, as Bucky says, not by fighting it, but by making it obsolete.
We need a new framework. Let’s see if we can hack one out on the fly. We’ll need some basic rules. To make it more interesting we can make it a test. We’ll call it the intelligent species test. If you’re too dumb to manage your environment and population you go extinct.
Axioms of a New World Order:
1. All species that reproduce without limit in a closed environment die in their own poisons. I like this one because of its elegant simplicity. Take your pick, either you set a limit on your reproduction or you make earth an open system, which means you’re going to have to figure out space colonization. Or a bit of both?
2. The laws of thermodynamics are true. There’s no work around. That’s called magic, including those desert religions, and much as I love Harry Potter movies, it’s made up. Have you ever noticed that’s what all magic is about? Some sort of exception to the laws of thermodynamics. Only we’re making up rules for a real planet here, so no cheating.
3. Pollution is not intelligent design, it’s a complete failure of design – a failure of the imagination. Pollution is not waste. It is useful chemicals in the wrong place in the wrong concentrations. It’s our job to manage our chemical and metallurgical environment. Disposable? You live in a closed system dope. (Talking of closed systems did you see the news about the urine clogging up the water recycling on the space station?)
4. Adapt or die. Adaptation is time dependent. Whether we’re talking about a species or infrastructure, it all takes time. We can probably adjust to global average temperatures on a century timescale. On a decade timescale we won’t.
5. Complexity theory is true. Complex systems tend toward the fragile, and once their equilibrium is nudged by some enthusiast with a hammer they can get very unpredictable. Respect recursive environments, especially if you live in one.
That’ll do for a start.
I don’t think there’s much to do about the religions, unless there’s some mass spontaneous waking up experience round the corner. I’m stumped. About capitalism I’m more hopeful. Suppose it’s not the be all and end all of human economic organization? Why are we all so attached to it? I understand if you’re one of the 1% of the population that’s really profited from it, but I don’t understand all the enthusiasm from the 99% who didn’t. The Gini Coefficient numbers on most of the developed world outside Scandinavia are hilarious. It’s virtually feudal.
We can start by including Gini Coefficient in all national economic calculations, in the same way we include inflation etc. Scandinavia looks like it does okay with .25! And we go to full cost accounting, no artificial externalities. No, Virginia, carbon isn’t free. None of this cap and trade malarkey. You smoke it, you pay for it. Why are we subsidizing the use of fossil fuels? How is it that international aviation fuel isn’t taxed, but ground transportation fuel is? Let’s tax aviation fuel and subsidize solar and wind power. Subsidize disaster preparedness – think Haiti.
None of this is particularly threatening as far as I can see.
leave a comment