A look forward - What is trending? What can one make of it?

 After spending the past month reading copious news releases, articles, and opinions as well as hearing the insider scoop here at the UN, there are three things to watch for in the next year. Iran, North Korea, and global food instability.

In the next month – Iran.

I do not want to be a Debby-Downer, but things are seriously heated in the situation with Iran at the moment. The major factor – election year in the US. As the world enters the last few months before the election, we hold our collective breaths. No other country’s elections are watched with such reverence, as no other country holds as many exceptionalist positions as the US. (I guess we would also watch Chinese elections with similar anticipation, that is, if they had polarized political parties that participated in elections). Given the consistency and predictability of US elections other countries can also manipulate the process.

Specifically relevant is how Israel is using the election year to radicalize its language regarding Iran. There are murmurs, and more than murmurs, of an Israeli first strike against Iran. This has progressed to the point that there have been peace protests in Israel, stating that people are not for this option. Beyond even that, some people are physically leaving Israel because they fear an immanent war.

Iran on the other hand, continues its defiance of bending to western-led international pressure. Specifically, the nuclear program is the point of contention. What is little known is that Iran has a religious Fatwa against nuclear weapons, deeming them immoral and illegal to own or use. One might say this is only religious jargon, but in a state where religion and politics are deeply enmeshed, this holds political sway. Western politics and media, however, have disregarded this. If it were taken seriously one might believe the Iranian position that they are pursuing a nuclear program for electrical purposes only. The word coming out of Iran, through private conversations, is that the only time nuclear weapons would be built is if Iran was preemptively attacked. At that point, the political will to respond would outweigh even the religious opinion within the theocracy, and nuclear weapons would be developed as fast as possible. So that is EXACTLY what might occur with Israel’s increasingly hostile position, and the ramped up discussion of a preemptive military attack against Iran.

Israel can make such treats, and can back them up, because the response from the US is too predictable. In an election year it would be political suicide not to back up an Israeli attack. Israel does not have the military means (without using its nuclear weapons) to maintain its occupation of the Palestinian territories and make an all out offensive against Iran. Yet, they remain assured of their security because of a guaranteed support by the US. Both political parties in the US must bow to the will of the incredibly rich and politically savvy Zionist lobbies. This has been seen throughout Obama’s presidency as his pro-Palestinian-State opinions have slowly dissolved and been reduced by the constant barrage of these lobbies and their important voting blocks. If it was the first year of a four-year term someone might have the guts to oppose backing Israel, thinking it would be forgotten the next time an election came around, but with only months before the election to refuse to support Israel militarily would destroy one’s political party as well as insure Israel used its nuclear weapons, just like they threatened to do in the 1973 Yom Kippur war when the US dragged its heels in supporting Israel.

Next three months – North Korea.

Depending on what occurs with Iran, Israel, and the USA, North Korea may once again become the focus of hostile American relations. George Bush’s “axis of evil” continues to detrimentally shape US foreign relations. So with Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, tied up in some form or another, the US is forced to re-visit North Korea. Since April’s satellite launch, the relations have been strained so it will be an easy target to revisit.

Though there has been a positive sign on North Korea, Japanand North Korea have begun to talk again. Japan and US have good relations so this may slow further hostile relations. However, this is far from preventing war, but it is a positive sign.

Again, a major factor is that the US cannot afford, financially, to not be at war. The American economy is too enmeshed with the Military Industrial Complex that Dweight D. Eisenhower warned of when he left office. Budgets pass or fail in the US depending on whether the complex, that supports “jobs” in so many of the counties across the US, is upheld. 

By about February or March – Global instability over food prices.

The drought occurring in the US at the moment ought not to be ignored, as it will largely shape the world for the next year. In the developed world we spend, on average, somewhere around 15% of income on food, where as the developing world often spends 50-75% of income on food. Therefore, when the price of food increases it has a disproportional affect on the poor. For someone in North America, the unsustainable and carbon intense products such as Pineapple and Bananas might rise in price slightly. Or maybe more essentials like pasta and bread may see a jump in price, as the world feels the affects of a shortfall in cereals (grains) production. But that really only means one must wait an extra month, maybe two, to buy the latest technology gadget. However, this expected cereals shortfall will have wide ranging consequences across the globe.

This situation has been seen before. In 2008 the first major jump in food prices occurred. The world really did not know how to respond. Food aid was sent around the world, and it received mediocre media attention, but was ultimately overshadowed by the sub-prime mortgage fiasco and the beginning of the economic downturn.

In 2008, maybe most notably, Kenya devolved in violence. There were many factors to the violence, tribal conflict, economic disparity, the spreading of hate messages via radio, and the rising price of food. Whether food was the log that burned, the spark that lit it, or the gas that enraged the fire, is up for debate, whatever the case it contributed to social instability.

What was learned from the Kenyan example? First, that it is hard to prosecute perpetrators who initiate violence along social and economic lines, especially when they are part to the political elite of the country. Although the International Criminal Court is attempting to do so, this remains difficult. Especially when those being charged and questioned are running for president and parliament and the elections will take place in March, almost simultaneous to the trial start date. Regarding food security, the world witness how it can be a major factor in maintaining social order. 2008 brought to the forefront conversation of sustainability, food security, financial speculation on food markets that exacerbates already increasing prices, as well as national food sovereignty programs. It marked a small shift in popular international development thinking, one that began to question a globalized food market.

2010 was also a bad year for food. After seeing a marked drop in prices in 2009, 2010 arrived with a vengeance. Though it did not catch the world by surprise, in the same way 2008 did, it reiterated the importance of tackling speculation on food markets and the implementation of food security programs and alternative agriculture.

As 2010 ended, food prices were rising. It was winter in the north, and as local food supplies began to dwindle the true cost of imported food began to create unrest. Some of this unrest was expressed in the Arab Spring. Though it is pleasant to believe all the protests were about spreading freedom and democracy that is a little a little too idealistic. Much of the dissent expressed in the region was about tangible conditions of life, of which the price of food certainly factored. So Egypt – a cereals exporter in Biblical times, now a cereals importer – was a central example of the unrest caused/initiated/propagated/influenced (choose the word you like) by an increase in the global food price.

When to expect to see some of the ramifications of the drought in the American mid-west? Around February or March. As the local food supplies dry up, and the world begins to seriously play the buy-and-sell game watch for civil unrest, changing political power plays, and tumultuous times as we enter 2013 (provided the world does not end in 2012).

For a further look at how geopolitics might be shifting have a read: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/08/201281123554276263.html

If his hypothesis is true, there may be less US military aggression in upcoming years, and the battle for supremacy will be waged on other terms.