North America
Earlier this month Slate and the Global Business Network got together to think about how the United States might come to an end over the next 100 years.
They devised four scenarios:
- Collapse — A series of disasters fray and ultimately destroy American social cohesion. “The country could fall apart as our national creeds of freedom, democracy, and openness are gradually abandoned.”
- Friendly breakup — “The country dissolves peacefully because the overhead of running a large nation becomes unmanageable.” This includes an amicable version of the red-blue US disintegration scenario.
- Global governance — “The national government declines in importance relative to the world community,” in order “to head off the challenges of the ‘non-zero-sum,’ globalized world: climate change, biological weapons, pandemics.”
- Global conquest — The US and the rest of the world are conquered by force. Peter Schwartz of GBN sees this as the least likely.
The larger world would not fare well in the collapse or global conquest scenarios. Forces large enough to destroy the US would likely handle most other places severely as well. The friendly breakup scenario could be positive or negative: it might indicate that the world was integrated and peaceful, and thus safe for smaller states — the pattern now developing in Western Europe — but it could also leave a power vacuum if the US simply stepped away from its current role.
(Thanks for article tip to Kristin Nauth)
(Image courtesy aprilzosia, Flickr)
As Russia plans to drop paratroopers into the Arctic as part of an exercise, Canada’s Defence Minister said last week that “We’re going to protect our sovereign territory and we’re always to meet any challenge to that territorial sovereignty.”
The Canadian Press article by Elizabeth Macmillan offered this context:
- “Many countries have beefed up their military presence in the Arctic.”
- “Russia, Canada, Sweden, Finland and Norway are increasing Arctic forces or increasing training for existing forces.”
- “International experts say the military buildup indicates that nations with territory in the resource-rich Arctic believe that armed conflict in the high north is a very real possibility.”
There is certainly a “very real possibility,” but that does not equal a high probability; the Arctic is surrounded by countries with a relatively low likelihood of fighting each other. Still, several of the more likely scenarios for future wars involving Canada take place in the Arctic.
(Image courtesy madmack66, Flickr)
Earlier this month Quebec adults were asked two versions of a question about more independence for the Canadian province. How the question was asked heavily influenced the results:
Q — “If a referendum on Quebec sovereignty were held today, would you vote yes or no to the following question? – ‘Do you agree that Quebec should become a country separate from Canada?’”
- Yes — 34%
- No — 54%
- Not sure — 13%
Q — “If a referendum on Quebec sovereignty were held today, would you vote yes or no to the following question? – ‘Do you agree that Quebec should become sovereign after having made a formal offer to Canada for a new economic and political partnership within the scope of a bill respecting the future of Quebec?’”
- Yes — 40%
- No — 41%
- Not sure — 19%
Even the confusingly worded second version does not get even a plurality of support, suggesting why the probability of independence for Quebec in the next couple of decades remains low.
Source: “Question Shapes Views on Sovereignty in Quebec,” Angus Reid, June 12, 2009.
Joel Garreau of the Washington Post reports on the Russian pundit Igor Panarin, who is forecasting that “the United States will break into six parts in June or July of 2010.”
He notes that
Panarin’s disintegration divination comes complete with a map. In it, Alaska goes to Russia. Hawaii goes to Japan or China. “The California Republic” — the West from Utah and Arizona to the Pacific — goes to China. “The Texas Republic” — the South from New Mexico to Florida — goes to Mexico. “Atlantic America” — the Northeast from Tennessee and South Carolina up to Maine — joins the European Union. And “The Central North-American Republic” — the Plains from Ohio to Montana — goes to Canada.
Garreau suggests that Russians may be happily projecting their own past experiences — or future worries — onto the US. And, in fact, Russia is more likely to lose parts than is the US.
Overall, the likelihood of secession in the US seems low. This is the FutureAtlas.com estimate:
And, as Garreau and others point out, Panarin’s divisions are oddly chosen. A more likely division might look something like this:
The most plausible fracture line is the “red-blue” one, as the largest font of true extremism in the US comes from the so-called “Christian right.” One can imagine a scenario in which the Republican Party or a Christan-right splinter of it can no longer win national elections, turns radical, and seeks a split, taking the South, the Great Plains, and the northern Rockies. (Or it might just involve the South, if the Republicans become a regional, Southern party.)
Overall, though, this is unlikely, as American national identity is strong, all parts of the country are somewhat ideologically mixed, and all but the most extreme evangelical Christians seem to understand the realities of living in pluralist, diverse America.
(Who knows what Alaska might do in this circumstance? It might stay in the US, join the red secession, or opt for independence. It would not revert to Russia however.)
Graphics copyright FutureAtlas.com — usable with attribution and link
In a New York Times article by Mark Mazzetti and Scott Shane, analysts say that Al Qaeda has lashed out at President-elect Obama in a new video because he “challenged its worldview,” with his multiracial, multicultural background.
Mazzetti and Shane wrote, “American antiterrorism officials and other experts dismissed the video as a desperate tactic by a terrorist group that suffered a defeat in the global war of ideas with Mr. Obama’s election.”
They quote Dr. Ronald Walters: ““You’re talking about someone who looks like the rest of the world, and that’s got to be threatening to them.”
(Image copyright FutureAtlas.com and usable with attribution and link)
The October issue of Alaska Magazine covers the Alaska independence movement in all its gradations.
In “The Country of Alaska,” Rebecca Luczycki’s portrait suggests that serious secessionists are rare, and that even many members of the Alaska Independence Party (the state’s third-largest) are really just libertarians. The founder of the party may have said, “I’m an Alaskan, not an American,” but many Alaskan “nationalists” seem to want more state-level control and less “interference” from the federal government.
Alaskan independence is very low-probability, not least because of the culture of dependence that has developed. Luczycki quotes Sara Chambers, a member of the Juneau city assembly: “Alaskans are not necessarily dedicated to freedom, but have become dedicated to free stuff.”
FutureAtlas.com now has a section on the future of Canada, including:
New research suggests that the Arctic could be ice-free in summer decades before previous models have indicated.
A team of scientists now says this could come as early as 2013, based on patterns up to 2004. A possible harbinger: 2007’s summer ice cover was the smallest “in modern times.”
Other researchers push the date back, but some have begun to say “that 2030 is not an unreasonable date.”
Reduced or absent ice would speed up debates over Arctic resources, and make it more likely that Canada will face confrontations with rivals for oil and sea lanes.
(Via Arlington Institute; image: NASA)
A group of American Indian activists has declared independence from the US.
The small group, claiming to be acting on behalf of the Lakota, will claim parts of South Dakota, Nebraska, North Dakota, Montana, and Wyoming.
This is more a political stunt than a serious movement: genuine separatism is rare among American Indians, and their populations are too small and dispersed to create viable independent entities.
Only the Navajo and Hopi are partial exceptions in the lower 48 states; native peoples of Alaska, with large swaths of territory and, in some cases, oil wealth, might also be more likely candidates for independence movements.
Overall, the probability of a successful Native American succession movement is very low for the foreseeable future.
A Pew report released yesterday suggests that concerns about an end to assimilation are still misplaced.
The central fact:
The surveys show that fewer than one-in-four (23%) Latino immigrants report being able to speak English very well. However, fully 88% of their U.S.-born adult children report that they speak English very well. Among later generations of Hispanic adults, the figure rises to 94%.