DOCSLIB.ORG

Anticipatory Governance Practical Upgrades

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Anticipatory Governance Practical Upgrades Equipping the Executive Branch to Cope with Increasing Speed and Complexity of Major Challenges Leon S. Fuerth with Evan M.H. Faber October 2012 Cover by Meaghan Charlton Graphics and Design by Meaghan Charlton, Evan Faber, and Jocelyn Jezierny Disclaimer The concepts presented in this report were developed by Leon Fuerth during the period 2001–2011 and refined during a series of workshops held at the National Defense University from April 2011–July 2011. The workshops convened experts from in and outside government to vet, validate, and build upon Anticipatory Governance concepts based on strict criteria for practical implementation. All workshops operated under the Chatham House Rule, meaning participants entered under agreement from all parties that the discussion would be private, comments would not be attributed to individual persons, and it would be assumed that participants spoke for themselves personally rather than for any institution. The initiatives proposed in this document represent a synthesis of the best ideas that emerged from the 2011 working group process. The concepts have also undergone supplementary scrutiny in a series of individual encounters with very senior officials from the present and past administrations that took place from September 2011–April 2012. The concepts described herein do not represent the views or opinions of The George Washington University, National Defense University, Department of Defense, Federal Government, or any other institutions associated with the Project on Forward Engagement. Endorsers The following endorsements reflect a consensus within a group of exceptional public servants that—politics aside—our government systems and processes need to be upgraded to reflect the new realities of today’s complex challenges. These individuals have extraordinary credentials to pass judgment on what is practical and necessary for government. They have not lent their names casually: they have read this report and many of them have commented extensively on its contents. They do not all necessarily support each finding and every specific recommendation. They do, however, endorse the basic spirit and thrust of the proposals. While some of the steps suggested in the report have been tried by administrations in the past, endorsers agree that a more comprehensive and systematic approach is required. Fundamentally, endorsers agree that Anticipatory Governance identifies and addresses an important national problem and that the recommendations in this report are doable, affordable, politically neutral, and should be the basis for action. Madeleine K. Albright Former Secretary of State Charlene Barshefsky Former U.S. Trade Representative Samuel R. Berger Former National Security Advisor Dennis C. Blair Former Director of National Intelligence Carol M. Browner Former Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency Zbigniew K. Brzezinski Former National Security Advisor William S. Cohen Former Secretary of Defense Thomas A. Daschle Former Senate Majority Leader Stephen J. Hadley Former National Security Advisor James L. Jones Former National Security Advisor Michael “Mickey” Kantor Former Secretary of Commerce; former U.S. Trade Representative Thomas F. McLarty III Former White House Chief of Staff Thomas R. Pickering Former Ambassador to the United Nations R. James Woolsey Former Director of Central Intelligence Gordon Adams Former Associate Director National Security Programs, Office of Management and Budget Robert D. Blackwill Former Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Planning Thomas Fingar Former Chair of the National Intelligence Council Michèle Flournoy Former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy James R. Jones Former Ambassador and Member of the U.S. House of Representatives Robert M. Kimmitt Former Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Alan J. Kreczko Former Legal Advisor to the National Security Council James M. Loy Former Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security John E. McLaughlin Former Deputy Director of Central Intelligence Joseph S. Nye Former Chair of the National Intelligence Council Anne-Marie Slaughter Former Director of Policy Planning, U.S. Department of State Mary C. Yates Former Senior Director for Strategic Planning, National Security Council Dov S. Zakheim Former Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) David M. Abshire President and CEO, Center for the Study of the Presidency and Congress Graham Allison Director, Belfer Center, The John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University Hans Binnendijk Former Vice President for Research and Applied Learning, National Defense University Richard J. Danzig Chairman, Center for a New American Security Richard Fontaine President, Center for a New American Security Jerome C. Glenn CEO, The Millennium Project Robert Kagan Senior Fellow, the Brookings Institution Ellen Laipson President and CEO, The Henry L. Stimson Center Timothy C. Mack President, World Future Society Neera Tanden President, Center for American Progress iii About the Project on Forward Engagement® The Project on Forward Engagement was established in 2001 by Leon Fuerth to explore methods for incorporating systematic foresight into the U.S. Federal policy process, and for configuring government systems to deal with challenges that are “complex,” rather than just “complicated.” Leon Fuerth’s career in the U.S. Government spanned more than three decades, including 11 years as a Foreign Service Officer, 14 years on Capitol Hill, and 8 years in the White House as the National Security Advisor to Vice President Al Gore. In the Clinton White House, Fuerth served on both the Principals’ and Deputies’ Committees of the National Security Council and the National Economic Council. Following government service, he became the J.B. and Maurice C. Shapiro Professor of International Affairs at The George Washington University’s Elliott School of International Affairs. He presently holds simultaneous appointments as Research Professor at the Elliott School and as Distinguished Research Fellow at the National Defense University. Evan Faber has a B.A. in Philosophy and an M.A. in International Science and Technology Policy from The George Washington University. For 6 years, his work has focused on applications of foresight and complexity theory to govern- ment, public policy, and foreign affairs, beginning as a student of Leon Fuerth and followed by 2 years as a Research Assistant and 2 years as the Executive Associate for the Project on Forward Engagement. Operating jointly at the National Defense University and the Elliott School of International Affairs at The George Washing- ton University, the Project is supported by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation and the National Defense University, and has also been supported by The George Washington University and the Rockefeller Brothers Fund. Analysis, opinions, and proposals produced by the Project and contained herein do not represent the views or opinions of any of its supporting institutions. The Project on Forward Engagement is nonpartisan, not for profit, and policy neutral. The Project is exclusively concerned with the systems and processes by which policy is produced and implemented. More information is available at http://www.forwardengagement.org. The Project on Forward Engagement ® All Rights Reserved. Special thanks to: Neyla Arnas for dedicating extensive time and contributing wise counsel that was essential throughout the process of developing and promulgating this report The late James N. Rosenau for his brilliant mind and creativity in applying complexity theory to international affairs Rebecca Landis, Jillian Hayes, David Kay, Neil Sroka, Neil Padukone, and Justin Zorn for their valuable administrative and research support of the Project in its early stages, and to Joanna Nicoletti, Meaghan Charlton, and Jocelyn Jezierny for their support during the process of generating this report Students of the Elliott School course on “Forward Engagement” from 2001–2011 for their research, ideas, questions, and open minds, which contributed profoundly to the development of the theoretical concepts underlying this report VADM Ann E. Rondeau, USN (Ret.), Hans Binnendijk, Linton Wells II, Terry J. Pudas, and the National Defense University for their support and hospitality Frank Hoffman and Jeff Smotherman at NDU Press for their publication guidance and for copyediting the report The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Rockefeller Brothers’ Fund, and Stephen Joel Trachtenberg for their generous financial support for the Project. iv Contributors The following individuals contributed significantly to the ideas in and formulation of this report; some participated in the NDU workshops on Anticipatory Governance held at NDU in 2011, others commented on drafts of the report, and many contributed as both workshop participants and commenters. Participants in the workshops were not representing the official views of the organizations with which they were affiliated nor the official views of the U.S. government or any of its agencies. Neyla Arnas Senior Research Fellow, National Defense University John Arquilla Professor, Defense Analysis, U.S. Naval Postgraduate School Jamie Baker Chief Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces Daniel Y. Chiu Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy Alan Cohn Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security for Strategy, Planning, Analysis and Risk Carol Dumaine Founding Director, Global Futures Partnership/Forum Warren
Recommended publications
  • The Elliott School of INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

    The Elliott School of INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

    THE ELLIOtt SCHOOL OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS ANNUAL REPORT 2006/2007 MISSION THE MISSION OF THE ELLIOTT SCHOOL OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS IS: • To educate the next generation of international leaders • To conduct research and produce scholarship that advances understanding of important global issues • To engage the public and the policy community in the United States and around the world, thereby fostering international dialogue and shaping policy solutions Our mission is to create knowledge, share wisdom and inspire action to make our world a better place. A MESSAGE FROM THE DEAN recent survey of scholars ranked the Elliott School’s undergraduate and graduate programs in the top 10. Only five schools in the world were ranked this highly in A both categories. It’s an impressive club. It’s also an important club. The issues we study at the Elliott School—ranging from war and peace to poverty and development—affect the lives of billions of our fellow human beings. Powerful international dynamics—population growth, rising levels of resource consumption, the expansion of the global economy, mounting environmental challenges—will shape the world in the decades ahead. Wise policy and effective international cooperation will be more important than ever. At the Elliott School, the study of international affairs is not an abstract exercise. Our aim is to make our world a better place. The Elliott School is in a unique position to make a difference. Our location in the heart of Washington, DC—just steps from some of the most influential U.S., international and non- governmental organizations in the world—enriches our teaching and research, and it provides us with unmatched opportunities to engage the U.S.
  • Ukraine's Domestic Affairs

    Ukraine's Domestic Affairs

    No. 1 THE UKRAINIAN WEEKLY SUNDAY, JANUARY 7, 2001 7 2000: THE YEAR IN REVIEW on February 22, aimed to “increase the economic inde- cent of farmers leased land, according to the study, while Ukraine’s domestic affairs: pendence of the citizenry and to promote entrepreneurial another 51 percent were planning to do so. activity,” said Minister of the Economy Tyhypko. The survey produced by the IFC came at the conclu- Mr. Tyhypko, who left the government a few weeks sion of a $40 million, five-year agricultural and land the good, the bad, the ugly later over disagreements with Ms. Tymoshenko and was reform project. elected to a vacant Parliament seat in June, indicated that n the domestic front in 2000 it was a roller coast- Trouble in the energy sector the program would assure deficit-free budgets, and even er ride for Ukraine, the economy being one of the budget surpluses for Ukraine, which could lead to repay- few surprisingly steady elements in an otherwise Reform of Ukraine’s most troubled economic sector, ment of wage and debt arrears, a radical reduction in the unstable year. fuel and energy, proceeded much more turbulently and country’s debt load and a stable currency. A stated longer- The new millennium began at a high point for Ukraine. claimed at least two victims. Ms. Tymoshenko, the con- O term goal was the privatization of land and resurgence of At the end of 1999 the nation had re-elected a president troversial energy vice prime minister, was not, however, the agricultural sector.
  • Anticipatory Governance Practical Upgrades

    Anticipatory Governance Practical Upgrades

    Anticipatory Governance Practical Upgrades Equipping the Executive Branch to Cope with Increasing Speed and Complexity of Major Challenges Leon S. Fuerth with Evan M.H. Faber October 2012 Cover by Meaghan Charlton Graphics and Design by Meaghan Charlton, Evan Faber, and Jocelyn Jezierny Disclaimer The concepts presented in this report were developed by Leon Fuerth during the period 2001–2011 and refined during a series of workshops held at the National Defense University from April 2011–July 2011. The workshops convened experts from in and outside government to vet, validate, and build upon Anticipatory Governance concepts based on strict criteria for practical implementation. All workshops operated under the Chatham House Rule, meaning participants entered under agreement from all parties that the discussion would be private, comments would not be attributed to individual persons, and it would be assumed that participants spoke for themselves personally rather than for any institution. The initiatives proposed in this document represent a synthesis of the best ideas that emerged from the 2011 working group process. The concepts have also undergone supplementary scrutiny in a series of individual encounters with very senior officials from the present and past administrations that took place from September 2011–April 2012. The concepts described herein do not represent the views or opinions of The George Washington University, National Defense University, Department of Defense, Federal Government, or any other institutions associated with the Project on Forward Engagement. Endorsers The following endorsements reflect a consensus within a group of exceptional public servants that—politics aside—our government systems and processes need to be upgraded to reflect the new realities of today’s complex challenges.
  • The Future Can't Wait

    The Future Can't Wait

    “Government agencies are not normally known for thinking outside the box. This book is the rare and The Future Can’t Can’t Future The This book is the rare and welcome exception, a genuine breath of fresh welcome exception, a genuine air. It is the kind of project that should become the norm in Washington, breath of fresh air. challenging all of us to look beyond what one participant describes as the – Anne-Marie Slaughter tyrannies of the in-box, the demand for immediate results, the focus on a Former Director of Policy Planning, single sector, and reliance on uni-dimensional measures of success. It should United States Department of State become an annual exercise.” Anne-Marie Slaughter W Bert G. Kerstetter ‘66 University Professor of Politics and International Affairs ait Princeton University Former Director of Policy Planning, United States Department of State Over-the-Horizon Views on Development “Perhaps the most embarrassing failure of international development agencies has been their excessive focus on programming for past problems instead of anticipating the challenges of the future. Black swans have derailed many a development budget by forcing the reallocation of scarce resources to address game-changing events no one anticipated. This thoughtful and timely book remedies this failure and provides some useful guidance to policymaking on how to catch the next black swan before it catches us.” Andrew S. Natsios Executive Professor George H. W. Bush School of Government and Public Service Former USAID Administrator “Development assistance is one of our most powerful and cost-effective tools of national power to promote global democracy and economic growth.
  • AGENT-BASED MODELING in INTELLIGENCE ANALYSIS By

    AGENT-BASED MODELING in INTELLIGENCE ANALYSIS By

    AGENT-BASED MODELING IN INTELLIGENCE ANALYSIS by Aaron B. Frank A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of George Mason University in Partial Fulfillment of The Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Computational Social Science Committee: ___________________________________________ Chair of Committee ___________________________________________ ___________________________________________ ___________________________________________ ___________________________________________ ___________________________________________ Director of Graduate Studies ___________________________________________ Director, Krasnow Institute for Advanced Study Date: _____________________________________ Fall Semester 2012 George Mason University Fairfax, VA Agent-Based Modeling in Intelligence Analysis A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at George Mason University By Aaron Benjamin Frank Master of Arts Georgetown University, 1999 Bachelor of Arts Boston University, 1997 Director: Robert Axtell, Department Chair Computational Social Science Fall Semester 2012 George Mason University Fairfax, VA Copyright © 2012, Aaron B. Frank All Rights Reserved ii Dedication For Desmond Saunders-Newton, an exceptional mentor and friend whose influence is felt every day. iii Acknowledgments I am deeply indebted to many people who offered their assistance, advice, experience and encouragement over many years. I would like to thank my chair, Robert Axtell, and my committee, Steven Bankes,
  • Project on National Security Reform James M

    Project on National Security Reform James M

    PNSR GUIDING COALITION MEMBERS David M. Abshire, President and CEO, The Center for the Study of the Presidency Norman R. Augustine, Retired Chairman and CEO, Lockheed Martin Corporation Robert D. Blackwill, Counselor, Council on Foreign Relations Dennis C. Blair, Former Commander-in-Chief, U.S. Pacific Command Charles G. Boyd, President and CEO, Business Executives for National Security Ashton Carter, Ford Foundation Professor of Science and International Affairs, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University Daniel W. Christman, Senior Vice President for International Affairs, U.S. Chamber of Commerce Wesley K. Clark, Former Supreme Allied Commander, Europe Ruth A. David, President and CEO, Analytic Services Inc. Michèle Flournoy, President, Center for a New American Security Leon Fuerth, Project on Forward Engagement, George Washington University Newt Gingrich, Former Speaker, U.S. House of Representatives James L. Jones, President and CEO, Institute for 21st Century Energy, U.S. Chamber of Commerce James R. Locher III, Executive Director, Project on National Security Reform James M. Loy, Former Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security Jessica Tuchman Mathews, President, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace John McLaughlin, Senior Fellow, Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies The Johns Hopkins University Joseph S. Nye, Jr., University Distinguished Service Professor, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University Carlos Pascual, Vice President and Director, Foreign Policy Studies, Brookings Institution Thomas R. Pickering, Former Permanent Representative to the United Nations Brent Scowcroft, President and Founder, The Scowcroft Group Jeffrey H. Smith, Partner, Arnold & Porter James B. Steinberg, Dean, Lyndon Johnson School of Public Affairs, University of Texas at Austin Ken Weinstein, CEO, Hudson Institute PRELIMINARY FINDINGS JULY 2008 ENSURING SECURITY IN AN UNPREDICTABLE WORLD: THE URGENT NEED FOR NATIONAL SECURITY REFORM This report has been approved by the following Guiding Coalition Members: David M.
  • Strategic Turning Points and the CIA/Dod Relationship Everyone

    Strategic Turning Points and the CIA/Dod Relationship Everyone

    Adapting to Change: Strategic Turning Points and the CIA/DoD Relationship David Oakley Everyone Else is They: A New Framework for Operational Culture Megan Kraushaar The National Security Council Deputies Committee – Engine of the Policy Process Mark Wilcox Fundamentally Restructuring Interagency Operations for Future Success Ryan Hilger An Institutional Analysis of the Commander’s Emergency Response Program Timothy Gatlin Ripples in the Pond: CGSOC Interagency Education Russell Crumrine Faith-Based Peacebuilding in the Former Yugoslavia David Steele The Journal of The Simons Center Vol. 5, Issue 1, Winter 2014 Arthur D. Simons Center for Interagency Cooperation, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas FEATURES | 1 InterAgency Journal The InterAgency Journal (IAJ) is published semiannually* by the Command and General Staff College Foundation Press for the Arthur D. Simons Center for Interagency Cooperation. The InterAgency Journal is a national security studies journal providing a forum for professional discussion and the exchange of information and ideas on matters pertaining to operational and tactical issues of interagency cooperation, coordination, and collaboration. (*Note: The IAJ series may shift to quarterly editions over time.) The articles published in the IAJ represent the opinions of the author and do not reflect the official views of the Department of the Army, the Department of Defense, the United States government, the Simons Center, or the Command and General Staff College Foundation. Contributions: The Simons Center encourages the submission of original articles based on research from primary sources or which stem from lessons learned via personal experiences. For additional information see “Simons Center Writer’s Submission Guidelines” on the Simons Center website at www.TheSimonsCenter.org/publications.

  • Government Foresight Anticipatory Governance

    stiftung neue verantwortung Impulse 12/13 May 2013 Government Foresight Anticipatory Governance: Making Governments Fit for the 21st Century Interview with | Prof. Leon S. Fuerth: Founder and Director of the Project on Forward Engagement, Research Pro- fessor of International Affairs at the George Washington University’s Institute for Global and In- ternational Studies, former National Security Advisor to Vice President Al Gore 1. snv: What does Forward Engagement debate and response by combining systems mean to you and what is the rationale be- for generating foresight and policy. hind this project? 2. snv: In your concept of Anticipatory Gov- Leon S. Fuerth: Forward Engagement is a ernance you state that traditional U.S. gov- term that I created, based on Forward De- ernment structures are not built for the na- ployment – the basic arrangement of NATO ture of 21st century challenges. What is so forces along the inter-German border during fundamentally different about these chal- the Cold War. The concept of Forward De- lenges? ployment embraced the idea of coming to grips with a military threat at the earliest Leon S. Fuerth: In the past we conceived of possible moment, by creating the ability to major challenges, and of government re- respond to an attack fast and coher- sponse to them, as linear. Issues and poli- ently. Forward Engagement recognized the cies could be broken down into sequential need to deal with a different kind of chal- events and sequential steps. Actions were lenge to our values; the onset of very conse- expected to produce proportionate re- quential, complex, and fast moving issues sponses.
  • A Wiser, Firmer Leonid Kuchma? Kyiv - Oleksander Tkachenko Told the Gating Mr

    A Wiser, Firmer Leonid Kuchma? Kyiv - Oleksander Tkachenko Told the Gating Mr

    1NS1DE: e An appeal regarding the fate of verkhovyna - page 7. в Secretary of States comments on Ukraine - page 9. 2 в Nova Nomada showcases emerging art - page 11. THE UKRAINIAN WEEKLY Published by the Ukrainian National Association inc., a fraternal non-profit association vol. LXVIII NO. 5 THE UKRAINIAN WEEKLY SUNDAY, JANUARY зо, 2000 $1.2542 in Ukraine Ukraine's energy bill New parliamentary majority ousts Tkachenko by Roman Woronowycz Mr. Udovenko made the proposal that put when the chairman refused to accept a ontopofYuschenko's Kyiv Press Bureau the issue of Mr. Tkachenko's dismissal to successful majority initiative of January a floor vote. 18 that would have required all floor KYiv - in a move that has split When he was elected in mid-1998 as a votes outside of those mandated by the agenda in Moscow Ukraine's Parliament along ideological compromise candidate after some 20 Constitution to take place in open, by- lines and left lingering a question on the other choices had been rejected, Mr. name polling. Mr. Tkachenko claimed by Roman Woronowycz constitutionality of its action, the newly Tkachenko had promised to guide the that the majority had violated procedures Kyiv Press Bureau formed center-right democratic majority Parliament out of its paralysis and to in that many national deputies voted for of Ukraine's verkhovna Rada on January KYiv - Prime Minister viktor work with the executive branch of gov- absent members, and others who voted 21 ousted the Parliament's leadership, Yuschenko returned from his his first ernment. His tenure, however, has caused did not have the right because they had including Chairman Oleksander face-to-face meeting with Russia's acting increased friction and gridlock, not only taken positions in the government.
  • Roundtable on Governance & Law

    Roundtable on Governance & Law

    - Roundtable on Governance & Law: Challenges & Opportunities World Bank Headquarters Washington DC – Nov 5-6, 2018 BACKGROUND PAPERS 1 World Development Report 2017 - Governance & the 1 Law 2 Global Governance, Human Needs and Values by 42 Winston P. Nagan & Brittany M DiCaprio 3 Session 4: Constitutional and Legal Culture, Social 73 Culture and Human Rights draft by Winston P. Nagan and Samantha R. Manausa 4 Session 12: National Governance in a Global Society 74 draft by Winston P. Nagan and Samantha R. Manausa 5 Who should Govern on What Principles: The Future of 89 Decision Making by Elif Cepni 6 Planetary Security & Anticipatory Governance by Leon 104 Fuerth 7 Foresight & Anticipatory Governance by Leon Fuerth 110 8 Anticipatory Governance: Practical Upgrades by Leon 129 Fuerth & Evan M. H. Faber - 9 Would the Big Government Approach Increasingly Fail 225 to Lead to Good Decision? A Solution Proposal by Rodolfo Fiorini 10 A New Environmentalism: The Need for a Total 245 Strategy for Environmental Protection by Scott Fulton and David Rejeski A World Bank Group Flagship Report 2017 GOVERNANCE and THE LAW Why are carefully designed, sensible policies too often not adopted or implemented? When they are, why do they often fail to generate development outcomes such as security, growth, and equity? And why do some bad policies endure? World Development Report 2017: OVERVIEW Governance and the Law addresses these fundamental questions, which are at the heart of development. Policy making and policy implementation do not occur in a vacuum. Rather, they take place in complex political and social settings, in which individuals and groups with unequal power interact within changing rules as they pursue conflicting interests.
  • Real Generic Viagra

    Real Generic Viagra

    Ukraine’s Quest For Mature Nation Statehood A Roundtable 2 S T ATEMENT OF PURPOSE s Ukraine approaches its tenth year of inde- its prospects for further advancement, including Apendence, a parliamentary majority of cen- fuller integration into the Euro-Atlantic commu- trist and national democratic forces has coa- nity and stronger bilateral relations with the lesced; a reform minded government, under the United States. leadership of Prime Minister Vi c t o r Yushchenko, has been appointed. The goal of the Roundtable will be to Equally important, a national refer- provide, inter alia, a valuable cache endum essentially has expanded the of information, analysis and constitutional powers of President insight pertinent to U.S. Leonid Kuchma, who has committed himself policy formulation vis- to implementing accelerated correctives. Thus, à-vis Ukraine for the Ukrainian nation stands at the threshold of the administration and broad and vital legal, social and economic Congress that take office transformations. following the November 7, 2000 elections. “ U k r a i n e ’s Quest for R O U N D TA B L E Mature Nation Statehood: A I N V O C AT I O N Roundtable”, an event scheduled to be held September 19/20, 2000 in Washington D.C., will O Lord, Master of Heaven and Earth bring together prominent representatives from You have graced Ukraine with academia and the governments of Ukraine and Liberty We beseech you to help Her sustain the U.S. to assess Ukraine’s progress in consoli- Your precious gift dating its national independence and to evaluate 3 S P O N S O R S Congressional Ukrainian Caucus Embassy of Ukraine U.S.
  • Is Germany Capable of Strategic Planning? Anticipatory Governance As the Foundation for Future-Proof Decisions

    Is Germany Capable of Strategic Planning? Anticipatory Governance As the Foundation for Future-Proof Decisions

    Is Germany capable of strategic planning? Anticipatory governance as the foundation for future-proof decisions I. Strategic foresight for an opaque future 1. Huntington’s world The dissolution of the Sykes-Picot order in the Middle East and the annexation of the Crimea are a pointed reminder that geopolitics will remain as strong an influence in the 21st century as in the centuries before. A ring of instability is gradually forming around Europe that is not only threatening the stability and prosperity of the Old Continent but also challenging the European project. Yet after the fall of the Berlin Wall, the West set out to cash in its “peace dividend” and invest it in promoting democracy. Successes, such as the expansion eastwards of NATO and the EU, seemed to be keeping pace with setbacks, for example in the Western Balkans, the Middle East and the Horn of Africa. The overall course was not in question. On the contrary – a deaf ear was turned to Samuel Huntington’s warning that the end of the leaden, bipolar world order would see a resurgence of conflicts delineated by cultural and religious identity. A quarter-century on, Huntington’s forebodings appear to be justified. And cynical observers might even claim that Francis Fukuyama’s prediction of the “end of history” also seems to be coming true – but in a complete reversal of expectations. We are seeing the decline of a world order that was built between 1917/1919 and 1943/45 upon the principles of western values and institutions – an order that defined not only the contours of the political world map but also international law and by extension virtually all the rules governing international relations.