Wars in the Next Decade
Forecasting in areas of strategy is particularly delicate as predictions may impact the course of events. While several major trends in the evolution of conflicts during the next decade can be identified, precise forecasts are impossible. Yet one thing is certain: in the next 10 years, decision-makers face unknown risks of significant consequence.
It is standard practice for those working on issues of national and international security, from political and military leaders, to diplomats and bureaucrats, to academics and think-tankers, to found their work on forecasts of potentially dangerous developments. The record of success in this endeavor, however, ranges from the disappointing to the lamentable. Policy-makers are still regularly taken by surprise – by Argentina’s invasion of the Falkland Islands in April 1982, Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait in August 1990, the sudden collapse of the former Yugoslavia into a series of violent conflicts, the terrorist attacks on the United States in September 2001, and the financial crisis of 2007-2008. Here are some recent examples of surprising developments. They should be salutary to anyone who thought that wise and experienced commentators should be able to forecast how events might unfold. Expectations have been regularly confounded.
— Even as the EuroMaidan protests were intensifying in Ukraine in early 2014, some saw that the Russophile President Yanukovych might end up out of office but most assumed that any response by President Vladimir Putin would be in the realm of energy prices or supplies. Few predicted that Crimea would be annexed. Once this had happened, and with Russian-backed separatists carving out enclaves in Eastern Ukraine, opinion moved in the other direction. Fears were now expressed that Putin was in an aggressive mood, and that other neighbors better watch out. Yet, at least to now, the aggression was confined to Crimea and the initial enclaves. Late in 2018 Russia was opening a new form of coercion by trying to close off the Sea of Azov to Ukrainian shipping. This once again led to speculation about an imminent Russian invasion of Ukraine without explanations of why Russia would wish to do this.
— Until the votes were being counted in November 2016 few expected Donald Trump to become the 45th President of the United States (including Mr Trump). Many of the foreign policy positions he took as President – including his distaste for free trade and alliances, and his sympathy for authoritarian leaders – followed on from positions he had adopted as candidate. An area of great concern was whether the stage was being set for a confrontation with North Korea. The North was already close to a long-range nuclear-tipped missile capable of hitting the United States and its testing led to tensions rising. Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un exchanged insults in 2017. Many then hoped for some diplomatic initiative to calm the tension but no one predicted that the two men would end up exchanging warm letters of mutual admiration in 2018. […]
OUTLINE
- Political forecasting: uncertainties and consequences
- The future of warfare
Lawrence Freedman is Emeritus Professor of War Studies at King's College London. He is the author of seminal works on military issues, including Strategy: A History, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2013.
Available in:
Themes and regions
Share
This page contains only a summary of our work. If you would like to have access to all the information from our research on the subject, you can download the full version in PDF format.
Wars in the Next Decade
Iran: Anatomy of a Power at War
The elimination of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and several high-ranking officials at the outset of the 2026 American-Israeli operation did not succeed in bringing down the Iranian regime. The regime had prepared for such a scenario, notably by decentralizing its structures. Moreover, it continues to adapt to war. The power of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps is growing at the expense of the Shiite clergy. The security apparatus defends the country’s sovereignty and justifies its actions in the name of raison d’état.
“Remodeling” the Middle East?
Chaos continues to spread, seemingly without end, across the Middle East. The Israeli-American attack on Iran has resulted in a clear military and diplomatic failure, but it is paving the way for a regional realignment, the consequences of which remain uncertain. New regional groupings are taking shape, either centered around Israel or built on the prospect of coexistence with Tehran, alongside a decline in American influence and the marginalization of Europe, while China maintains a low-key presence.
Silicon Valley and War: Lessons from Ukraine
Over the course of international conflicts, and particularly in Ukraine, major tech companies have emerged as central actors. Initially subject to wartime maneuvering, they have since become decisive actors in their own right, privatizing a significant share of wartime exchanges, shaping the information flows of societies, and presenting themselves as providers of security. This situation raises important questions about states’ autonomy in making decisions and taking action.
Does Artificial Intelligence Change the Nature of War?
From Gaza to Ukraine and Iran, current conflicts are being shaped by the arrival of artificial intelligence and robots on the battlefield. The changes under way are so profound that humans risk rapidly losing control over entire aspects of the conduct of military operations. While these technological developments are altering the character of war, their impact on the very nature of war itself remains a matter of debate.