The Future of War

What wars are we going to be fighting in the next decade -- and with what weapons?

COMPILED BY ELIZABETH DICKINSON | MARCH/APRIL 2011

By Micah Zenko

Expert and popular opinions often don't intersect. And that has become particularly true in a political era characterized by a dislike for Washington, distrust of elite opinion, and the ascendency of Tea Party populism. While elite opinions about U.S. military and national-security affairs are in tune with those of the broader American public in some areas, such as President Barack Obama's handling of China, they diverge wildly in others, such as the threat posed by a nuclear Iran and defense spending. At least some of this divergence may come from the simple fact that Americans' top concerns these days relate to the economy -- not defense issues.

FP's experts and the public see eye to eye when it comes to Obama's performance as commander in chief. Experts rate the president, on average, at 5.2 (on a scale of 1 to 10) as a wartime leader -- a tepid but not negative assessment. Similarly, a July 2010 Washington Post/ABC Poll found that 55 percent of Americans approved of Obama's performance as commander in chief of the military. These marks fall within the range of the margin of error for Obama's overall approval ratings in the same poll, suggesting that he is perceived of as a similarly adequate president on domestic and foreign policy.



Read this Slide Show for the full survey results.

There is also shared skepticism of Obama's signature national-security initiative. FP's experts overwhelmingly (78 percent) believe that the president's vision of a "world without nuclear weapons" will be impossible in practice. Concordantly, in an April 2010 CNN poll, 74 percent of all respondents disagreed with the statement that "the total elimination of all nuclear weapons is possible." This pessimism is striking, given that decades of public opinion polling have shown that roughly seven out of 10 people consistently favor the eventual abolition of nuclear weapons, including America's.

FP's experts assess the probability of a U.S.-China war in the next decade to be low (2.4 on the 1 to 10 scale). Comparable polling for non-experts is lacking, yet a September 2010 Chicago Council on Global Affairs poll found only 17 percent of Americans "very worried" that China will become a future military threat to the United States. And for all the passionate debate on newspaper op-ed pages and security journals, a January 2011 Pew Research Center for the People and the Press poll found that only 22 percent of Americans view China as an adversary.

The experts' assessments were not entirely harmonious with popular views, however. In three areas, the wonks and the hoi polloi diverge markedly.

First, there's discord over the threat posed by Iran. FP's experts largely (67 percent) believe that a nuclear Iran is a tolerable threat to the world. And while identical data is not available, in a November 2009 Pew Global Attitudes poll, 82 percent of Americans said that a nuclear-armed Iran would be a "major threat" to the United States. Puzzlingly, a full 71 percent of Americans think Iran already possesses a nuclear arsenal, according to a February 2010 CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll. Perhaps this misconception about Iran's capabilities explains the divergent opinions. Or Americans overall may put less faith in the deterrent effect of U.S. or Israeli conventional and nuclear forces to deter Iranian assault.

FP's experts also almost uniformly (96 percent) agree that the United States has the world's best military. Compare that result to that of a Gallup Poll, conducted every year from 1993 through 2010, which asked the American public if "the United States is number one in the world militarily." Responses have varied from 51 to 64 percent in agreement. A similar January 2011 Pew Research Center for the People and the Press poll showed that only 67 percent of respondents thought America was "the world's leading military power." While America's costly and inconclusive conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan can explain recent doubts about the U.S. military, it is remarkable that this opinion gap has existed since the pre-Sept. 11 era. Perhaps Americans inherently question U.S. military power, or simply overinflate the military capabilities of other countries.

A plurality of FP's experts called for total defense budget cuts of 8 to 15 percent (or between $45 billion and $85 billion) over the next decade. Meanwhile, in a February 2011 Program for Public Consultation poll that averaged American's responses of which programs to cut among 31 different programs, respondents sought to drastically slash Pentagon spending by 20 percent ($110 billion) in just one year -- that's one to two dozen times larger than the majority of the experts' would recommend. (The next three programs that poll respondents targeted for cuts were also all defense related: intelligence agencies, spending for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and veterans affairs.) Clearly, Americans believe that too many taxpayer dollars are dedicated to funding the national security system. This observation will not be lost on politicians as they target programs to cut to tackle the crippling $3.5 trillion in deficits the United States faces over the next decade.

With Sept. 11 receding in the public consciousness and unemployment rates still bearing down, roughly 60 percent of Americans now oppose the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and defense issues are simply not that important for the vast majority of voters. A January 2011 Gallup Poll found that more than two out of three Americans named economic-related issues as the country's most important problems. The top three non-economic issues came in as health care, dissatisfaction with government, and immigration. National security didn't make the ranking. Paradoxically, however, that may open a window for politicians to listen to expert opinion, since defense issues don't carry the same electoral weight that they used to.

See the rest of the survey results here. 

Micah Zenko is a fellow in the Center for Preventive Action at the Council on Foreign Relations.

Participants (62): David Aaron, Gordon Adams, David Barno, Kayhan Barzegar, Bruce Bennett, Nick Brown, Vanda Felbab-Brown, Richard Burt, Frank Carlucci, Patrick Cronin, Andrew deGrandpre, Abraham Denmark, Barry Desker, James Doyle, Andrew Exum, Richard Falkenrath, Nathaniel Fick, Jamie Fly, Richard Fontaine, Nathan Freier, Charles Freilich, Bates Gill, T.X. Hammes, James Hardy, Jacqueline L. Hazelton, Jeffrey Isaacson, Ken Jimbo, Robert Kaplan, Timothy Keating, Paul J. Kern, Asad Khan, David Kilcullen, Changsu Kim, Richard Kohn, Charles Kupchan, Kristin Lord, Edward Luttwak, Sean Lynn-Jones, Peter Mansoor, Sean McFate, K. Scott McMahon, Merrill McPeak, Steven Metz, Judith Miscik, Philip Mudd, John Nagl, Thomas Nichols, Joseph S. Nye Jr., George Perkovich, John Pike, Kenneth Pollack, Christopher Preble, Guy Raz, Matthew Rojansky, Kori Schake, Peter W. Singer, Donald M. Snow, Richard Weitz, Winslow Wheeler, Thomas Wright, Paul Yingling, Micah Zenko.

INFORMATION DESIGN BY LAURA STANTON

 SUBJECTS: MILITARY
 

MATTW0699

1:15 AM ET

February 22, 2011

What's Wrong with the FP Experts?

"FP's experts assess the probability of a U.S.-China war in the next decade to be low (2.4 on the 1 to 10 scale)."

This is a stunning answer. What is wrong with the experts? Too bad Chinese military officers don't feel the same way.

"An independent survey of Chinese-language media for The Sunday Times has found [Chinese] army and navy officers predicting a military showdown and political leaders calling for China to sell more arms to America’s foes. "

"Now almost 55% of those questioned for Global Times, a state-run newspaper, agree that “a cold war will break out between the US and China”."

Even the Pentagon is starting to acknowledge that nuclear war may be a distinct possibility with China.

"Gates sees what’s going on, and he is worried. So worried, in fact, that he has allowed Pentagon intelligence experts to present an alarming assessment of recent Chinese military moves to the new Congress. The secret briefing describes a pattern of technology investments and breakthroughs signaling that China is likely to be more assertive about its regional security interests in the years ahead. That won’t come as a big surprise to China’s neighbors, many of whom have experienced growing friction with Beijing over maritime sovereignty and territorial boundaries in recent years. But what worries U.S. intelligence analysts is that China is now moving to acquire the kind of sophisticated military systems only America has had — a potentially decisive advantage given the fact that U.S. forces in the Western Pacific are far from home and enjoy access to only a handful of bases in the region."

"What that means for the Pentagon is that America’s military must begin preparing for the possibility that it might be in a war with China sometime in the next few decades. …"

Let's take a look at some interesting historical information.

Great power rivalries in history:

1. Spain versus Holland in the 16th century. [War]
2. Holland versus England in the 17th century. [War]
3. Britain versus France in both the 18th and 19th centuries. [War]
4. France and Britain versus Germany in the 20th century. [War]
5. Germany versus Russia in 1914. [War]
6. Germany versus Russia (Soviet Union) in 1941. [War]
7. Soviet Union versus the US and its allies in the Cold War after 1945. [No War]

Probability of war with great power rivals: 6 out of 7

What's the key to avoiding war? Democracy. If China were a democracy then we might be able to avoid war. Britain and America avoided a great power rivalry, and avoided war in the process.

Why is China expending a lot of resources building underground nuclear bunkers under many of its major cities?

"A senior Chinese general has warned that his country could destroy hundreds of American cities with nuclear weapons if the two nations clashed over Taiwan."

"Major general Zhu Chenghu, a dean at the National Defence University, said he was expressing a private opinion, but his comments, the most inflammatory by a senior government official in 10 years, will fuel growing concerns in Washington about the rise of China."

"Defense analysts for the British intelligence service MI6 believe China is preparing for the “eventuality of a nuclear war.” The conclusion follows evidence that Beijing has built secretly a major naval base deep inside caverns which even sophisticated satellites cannot penetrate, says a report in Joseph Farah’s G2 Bulletin."

"In an unusual development, the analysts have provided details to the specialist defense periodical, Jane’s Intelligence Review, which published satellite images of the base location which is hidden beneath millions of tons of rock on the South China Sea island of Hainan."

What is the problem with the FP experts?

The problem affecting the experts is the same one that affects society as a whole. The experts influence each others opinions, and independence is substantially reduced. They probably don't know anyone that is worried about nuclear war with China.

In a stock market bubble, when everyone agrees that the market can only go up, then that is about the time a crash is going to occur. Start worrying about nuclear war with China.

In the early 1990s Deng Xiaoping introduced the 24 Characters strategy: keep cool-headed to observe, be composed to make reactions, stand firmly, hide our capabilities and bide our time, never try to take the lead, and be able to accomplish something. What does “hide our capabilities” and “bide our time” mean? Just like the word “jihad”, there are different interpretations. The story below provides one chilling possibility. It suggests that America is in trouble.

The Parable of Goujian

The story of the king [Goujian] who slept on sticks and tasted gall is as known to the Chinese as George Washington and the cherry tree are to Americans. He has become a symbol of resistance against the treaty ports, foreign concessions and the years of colonial humiliation.

King Goujian (Yue) was defeated by King Fuchai (Wu) and taken prisoner. He worked in the royal stables and gradually won the respect of Fuchai. Later he was allow to govern his old kingdom under Fuchai. Goujian quietly bided his time and hid his capabilities over eight years until he was strong enough to finally attack and defeat Fuchai. During the eight years he quietly undermined Fuchai and facilitated Fuchai’s growth of debt.

Taken like that, the parable of Goujian sums up what some people find alarming about China’s rise as a superpower today. Ever since Deng Xiaoping set about reforming the economy in 1978, China has talked peace. Still militarily and economically too weak to challenge America, it has concentrated on getting richer. Even as China has grown in power and rebuilt its armed forces, the West and Japan have run up debts and sold it their technology. China has been patient, but the day when it can once again start to impose its will is drawing near.

 

XTIANGODLOKI

3:49 PM ET

February 22, 2011

Israel did a fantastic job in influencing American mindsets

Regardless of whether you are for or against Israel, you gotta admit that it has done an awesome job to frame the Iran Nuke issue so much in its favor.

 

KRYPTER

1:24 PM ET

February 23, 2011

Matt is right

I'd have to second Matt's comment above. If FP's experts think that the chance of a China-US war in the next decade is only 24% then they're completely out to lunch. That war is coming.

And 51% think that the US has improved its advantage over its peer competitors since 2000? After the Chinese anti-sat test? After the Chinese have bought, developed or stolen almost every cutting-edge technology the US possesses, including 5G stealth aircraft? After the continuous cyberwarfare against Google et al., against the Pentagon and pretty much every NATO government? The gap is narrowing very, very rapidly. We're like the British counting our Dreadnoughts in 1913, it seems.

 

GRANT

9:25 PM ET

February 23, 2011

Perhaps the experts who feel

Perhaps the experts who feel that war with China is unlikely are fully aware that A. our economies are so intertwined that a war would devastate both B. despite the fact that the Soviet Union had a far greater reach than China can realistically expect to we somehow managed to avoid war with the Soviets and C. wars are in no way inevitable.

 

ECOX8989

10:59 AM ET

March 1, 2011

WWI anyone?

Grant,

Unfortunately your "economics will quell the threat of war" argument is not currently valid and never was...hark back to WWI if you will. While it may be pessimistic to assume that wars are inevitable, it is unrealistic to assume that economic interdependence will stop rational actors from war. After all, war is simply an extension of policy, is it not?

 

MELISSAROSSI199

3:23 PM ET

March 18, 2011

New Generation Weapons?

I agree with Matt that China has played a much bigger role in war planning scenarios than reflected in this piece. Whether it's the reality or just the perceived threat, being prepared to take on China has been a huge factor in war preparations. HOWEVER, what makes this article seem "outdated" to me is the scanty mention of NEW GENERATION weapons.

Come on: drones and cyberweapons don't begin to hint at our new capabilities and what's being tested. Where is mention of all our NATIONAL MISSILE DEFENSE/Star Wars II weapons and tests? The weather-changing weapons being tested (China and Russia admit they have them, US hems and haws) and what is going on at HAARP. What's happening in outerspace, and satellites with capabilities of destroying others for starters.

This article disappoints: it's like being in World War II and reading about World War I weapons and tactics. We're on a whole new page, but you sure can't tell it reading this. I'm shocked.

 

MARTHA DHEEL

2:48 PM ET

March 25, 2011

The Future of War

What wars are we going to be fighting in the next decade -- and with what weapons?. I agree with Matt that China has played a much bigger role in war planning scenarios than reflected in this piece. Whether it's the reality or just the perceived threat, being prepared to take on China has been a huge factor in war preparations. HOWEVER, what makes this article seem "outdated" to me is the scanty mention of NEW GENERATION weapons. "With Sept. 11 receding in the public consciousness and unemployment rates still bearing down, roughly 60 percent of Americans now oppose the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and defense issues are simply not that important for the vast majority of voters. A January 2011 Gallup Poll found that more than two out of three Americans named economic-related issues as the country's most important problems. The top three non-economic issues came in as health care, dissatisfaction with government, and immigration cheating. National security didn't make the ranking. Paradoxically, however, that may open a window for politicians to listen to expert opinion, since defense issues don't carry the same electoral weight that they used to. See the rest of the survey results here. ". hark back to WWI if you will. While it may be pessimistic to assume that wars are inevitable, it is unrealistic to assume that economic interdependence will stop rational actors from war.