George Friedman on World War III
The geopolitical scientist predicts which nations will be fighting for world power in 2050
- By Terence Monmaney
- Smithsonian magazine, July-August 2010, Subscribe
George Friedman holds a doctorate in government from Cornell University and is the founder and chief executive of Stratfor, a geopolitical consulting firm in Austin, Texas. His most recent book is The Next 100 Years: A Forecast for the 21st Century. He spoke with Terence Monmaney.
Commentators have declared the end of American dominance. You disagree. Why?
The 20th century wasn’t the American century. In the first half of the century, the United States was a peripheral player—marginal to what was happening. From 1945 to 1991, the United States was caught in a terrific conflict with the Soviet Union. The United States has been the sole global power [only] since 1991, less than 20 years. People say China is emerging as a power. The U.S. economy is roughly three times larger than China’s. That’s a $10 trillion difference. Twenty-five percent of the world’s economic activity happens in the United States. The U.S. Navy controls all the oceans. We are an order of magnitude more powerful than anyone else. Undermining that kind of power can happen, but it normally takes wars, and it certainly takes generations.
You posit a third world war starting in 2050.
My expectation is we’re going to see a fragmentation in China because of internal social stresses, and the weakening of Russia. Three powers are emerging on the periphery of Eurasia. One is Japan, which is truly the center of gravity of Asia; it’s the second-largest economy in the world. Unlike China, Japan does not have a billion people living in sub-Saharan-type poverty. It is unified. It has the largest navy in Asia. Second is Turkey, now the 17th- largest economy in the world and the largest Islamic economy. And whenever Islam emerges into a coherent political entity, which it hasn’t done for a century, Turkey is almost invariably at its center. Turkey has by far the most powerful and effective military in Europe and is going to be a major Mediterranean power. The third country is Poland. Few people know that Poland is the 21st-largest economy in the world, the 8th-largest in Europe, and by far the most dynamic. It is also a country very much afraid of Germany and Russia. Russia is right now in the process of rebuilding itself. This makes the Poles very uneasy. The Germans are reaching out to the Russians. Poland feels trapped.
Japan is utterly dependent on the sea lanes for the import and export of products. And those sea lanes are controlled by the United States. The United States controls the oceans, and its view is that that is the foundation of its national security. As Japan and Turkey become greater maritime powers, the United States will become hostile toward them. Japan and Turkey each wants to be a maritime power and each sees the U.S. as a threat. Poland has no interest in being a maritime power. It’s afraid of Turkey, and interested in the U.S. There’s a natural coalition.
The center of gravity of American military power is in space. Everything from navigation to communication to intelligence satellites operate in space. If any power were to knock out the United States, it would have to knock out those assets. If the Japanese and Turks were to take on the United States, that would be the place they would have to strike first, to blind us, to cripple us. I would expect the war to start there. It seems like science fiction, but one wonders how somebody in 1900 would have felt about a description of what World War II was going to be like.
The details may not be as I say—there may be other players, it may not happen in 2050—but every century has a war. The 21st century is not going to be the first century without major warfare.
Subscribe now for more of Smithsonian's coverage on history, science and nature.
Comments (29)
+ View All Comments
This is a load of rubbish!
Posted by on August 20,2012 | 02:15 AM
Chairman Jensen, from the 1976 film "Network", had it spot-on when he explained "There's no such thing as countries anymore - the world is a college of corporations". The billionaire club, 500 strong in 2000 and 1200 strong today, show little regard for countries, preferring Pentagon global rule over democracies. As long as the U.S. dollar is backed by black gold, the status quo will continue its reign.
Posted by Bob Williams on July 1,2012 | 11:13 PM
This can be true turkey has now the 7th strongest army of the whole world so maybe its true but lol poland im not Shore about that
Posted by Secret on March 19,2012 | 04:28 PM
I read the next decade. I didn't read next 100 years. Although some of the point, Friedman does about Turkey. Some are exaggerations. But I am educated in Germany. Years ago I said to my German friends that Turkey is a powerful country with respect its resources. They didn't believe me. Turkey didn't have good manager that was the Turkey's short coming. I believe that Friedman has an overall correct judgment about Turkey.
Posted by Eyup Akgun on March 7,2012 | 08:59 AM
LOL, this must be another American. Turkey and Japan? Heck, Japan's economy is going down and Turkey doesn't have such a strong military that it can invade even Georgia. This weirdo has supported my claim that Americans are warmongers.
Posted by A.I World AL LOL TABZ on December 30,2011 | 12:14 AM
I have finished reading Mr Friedman's book just last month which was September of 2011. The book was written clearly in 2008. Just three-four years after the books prediction, many of his initial estimates seem to be clearly way off.
I still advise reading it thought because he is still on point in regards to some issues.
He is correct about the rise of Turkey. Turkey is currently the worlds 2nd fastest growing G20 economy after China. Additionally, Turkey has just announced its intention to domestically design and manufacture a 5th generation stealth fighter jet, which will definitely be leased it large numbers to its Middle Eastern and Muslim allies. Very few nations have a domestic fighter jet. USA, Russia, France, UK, China just to name a few. Also, Turkey is the only member of NATO which is increasing its military expenditures (vastly) while all other NATO members, including EU and US, who are in great financial turmoil, are in the process of cutting and slashing military expenditures. Additionally, Turkey is currently embarking on a massive military modernization program which will leave it with the most powerful conventional military by 2025 in the Middle East and South Europe.
Mr Friedman is clearly off in regards to the US. Japan, and China. Its pretty much official; the US is in irreversible decline. China is still growing at 10% a year and is the US's largest loaner. Chinese nationalism is stronger then ever and the likelihood that over 500 Million Chinese people are going to throw down their shovels and just over throw their government is not an impossibility- but very close to it. Japan according the Price Water House Coopers will continue to play a less role in terms of GDP output in the world and is clearly rocked by a host of domestic issues. China is clearly the future superpower of the world.
Posted by Adam from Atlanta, Ga, USA on October 16,2011 | 01:11 AM
Yes space will most certainly be a battlefield in the future. No one in the 1800's could forecast an air war, so a space war will be very different than anyone can forecast. Maybe even one fighting enemies from other galaxies or beyond. That would make any war ever fought as primitive as cave men hurling rocks. Could those primitive beings ever imagine nuclear energy or iPads? Let's never say never to the idea of a space war with creatures beyond our forecasting capabilities.
Posted by Boat52 on July 1,2011 | 07:51 AM
Yes, there will be a war - but it will be unlike previous wars. This war will more be a result of mankind's destructive use of the planet and the resulting shortages of food and water with lots of flooding than anything else.
Poor Poland. They have had troubles since before WWII, but FDR and Stalin really screwed them after Hitler during the uprising of the Poles against the Nazi forces (Russie held back until most of the Poles had slaughtered before entering the fray).
Posted by Glenn McGrew on November 2,2010 | 07:36 AM
If Turkey adopts the Islamic empire again for economic reasons, then it is in their best interest to remove any other super power from the Middle East. That is most likely the U.S.
What Friedman suggests is chaos. Any other power trying to claim a leadership role in the world will attempt to stir up America's national security because U.S. is the #1 influence. Heck, when Germany wanted to claim superpower status, they tried allying with Mexico to defeat any U.S. threat. That didn't work out, but alliances occur all the time and it is likely Turkey or Iran come up with new alliances to conquer the Middle East. China could very well ally with Turkey because China doesn't want an American superpower in the Eurasia (it is unlikely that Iran allies with other powers like China or Russia because it is so chaotic).
Japan depends on trade. Without raw materials and an efficient immigration policy, they suffer. This requires an aggressive strategy to reclaim their economic status that they have today. In 2050, they could very well be suffering as an island and will be seeking alternative ways to retrieve resources. China is the closest and most likely source. This will not go over well between the two economic giants.
Posted by GR on September 12,2010 | 01:44 PM
I'd replace Turkey with Iran, and japan with China, and move the events several years earlier. After all, before the rise of the Turks and the Ottomans/Seljuks were the Persians, and before Japan was cohesive the Chinese had an empire. Only after that will Egypt, Turkey, then later Greece, and Japan, have resurgences in development. And then Mexico, probably around the same time.
Posted by Andy on August 31,2010 | 01:55 AM
It takes several generations of increasing tolerance to overcome any form of prejudice: racial, national, religious, cultural . . . . The Twentieth Century may be remembered as a time when people began to see more of themselves in peoples their ancestors viewed with ignorance and intolerance. It is a slow, painful process. Our American forefathers -- from day one -- exhibited every form of prejudice. All of these prejudices arrived with the immigrants that represent ALL (excepting the Native Americans) of our population. The hatred inherent in this thinking spawned Hitler, Josef Stalin, Idi Amin, Pol Pot, Slobodan Milošević, Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, among others. In every case there was either a "hated" minority, a "hated" religion or "hated" way of life.
The USA is truly a melting pot, but the melting is a slow, slow process. Of all the countries of the world the population of the USA is the most heterogeneous and has constantly struggled to live up t5o the ideal that "all men are created equal. If or when WWIII happens it will undoubtedly be instigated by some deeply rooted form of ignorant hatred.
Posted by Joseph on August 10,2010 | 07:35 PM
I was appalled by Friedman's apologistic stance on population growth. While by necessity we will makes incredible strides in the next few decades in energy, water and other efficiencies, his obvious ignorance of basic ecology is shocking for a man in his position. 90% of the creatures in the sea are gone, 50% of the coral reefs are destroyed, and when I was going to forestry school 40 years ago 50% of the topsoil in the U.S. had disappeared. The Colorado River's water has been over-appropriated a few decades. And on and on...point being, overpopulation is real and the biggest reason for impending global disaster; every single person on earth should be aware of this and no one more than those in government and university teaching positions. Time to man up!
Posted by James Wolford on August 10,2010 | 04:36 PM
While Friedman makes his predictions he typically overlooks the corrosive effects of domestic social injustice and economic hardship. We could remain a military super power while our society falls apart from within.
Corruption in government and business contributes to a growing cynicism in the population. How long will our society stand when our people have stopped believing in it?
How long can we survive if the rest of the world, disgusted by our lack of respect for human rights and our bullying tactics, turns it's back on us?
Given our behavior as of late, and given our backward status in the developed world as applies to social rights and justice one has to ask the question: Do we even have a right to survive, let alone dominate anything?
Posted by David on August 2,2010 | 11:45 AM
The writer is applying a 1910 form of strategic analysis here that's a century too late. If the current state of world affairs was only about territorial and industrial dominance and the control of shipping lanes, it might work. However, much of 21st century communication and commerce lies outside the scope of this rather Edwardian model.
Posted by Tom on July 26,2010 | 06:10 AM
+ View All Comments