Product Description

George Friedman, founder of Stratfor, has become a leading expert in geopolitical forecasting. Drawing on a profound understanding of history and geopolitical patterns dating back to the Roman Empire, he shows that we are now, for the first time in half a millennium, experiencing the dawn of a new historical cycle.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #1488139 in Books
• Published on: 2009-01-01
• Formats: Audiobook, Unabridged
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 7
• Binding: Audio Cassette

Amazon.com Review
Amazon Best of the Month, January 2009: "Be Practical, Expect the Impossible." So declares George Friedman, chief intelligence officer and founder of Strategic Forecasting, Inc. (Stratfor), a private intelligence agency whose clients include foreign government agencies and Fortune 500 companies. Gathering information from its global network of operatives and analysts (drawing the nickname "the Shadow CIA"), Stratfor produces thoughtful and genuinely engrossing analysis of international events daily, from possible outcomes of the latest Pakistan/India tensions to the hierarchy of Mexican drug cartels to challenges to Obama's nascent administration. In The Next 100 Years, Friedman undertakes the impossible (or improbable) challenge of forecasting world events through the 21st century. Starting with the premises that "conventional political analysis suffers from a profound failure of imagination" and "common sense will be wrong," Friedman maps what he sees as the likeliest developments of the future, some intuitive, some surprising: more (but less catastrophic) wars; Russia's re-emergence as an aggressive hegemonic power; China's diminished influence in international affairs due to traditional social and economic imbalances; and the dawn of an American "Golden Age" in the second half of the century. Friedman is well aware that much of what he predicts will be wrong--unforeseeable events are, of course, unforeseen--but through his interpretation of geopolitics, one gets the sense that Friedman's guess is better than most. --Jon Foro

From Publishers Weekly
With a unique combination of cold-eyed realism and boldly confident fortune-telling, Friedman (Americas Secret War) offers a global tour of war and peace in the upcoming century. The author asserts that the United States power is so extraordinarily overwhelming that it will dominate the coming century, brushing aside Islamic terrorist threats now, overcoming a resurgent Russia in the 2010s and 20s and eventually gaining influence over space-based missile systems that Friedman names battle stars. Friedman is the founder of Stratfor, an independent geopolitical forecasting company, and his authoritative-sounding predictions are based on such factors as natural resources and population cycles. While these concrete measures lend his short-term forecasts credence, the later years of Friedmans 100-year cycle will provoke some serious eyebrow raising. The armed border clashes between Mexico and the United States in the 2080s seem relatively plausible, but the space war pitting Japan and Turkey against the United States and allies, prognosticated to begin precisely on Thanksgiving Day 2050, reads as fantastic (and terrifying) science fiction. Whether all of the visions in Friedmans crystal ball actually materialize, they certainly make for engrossing entertainment. (Feb.)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

From Booklist
Friedman, author and founder of a forecasting company, sets out to provide a sense of the twenty-first century. He is confident that rather than being on the verge of decline, the U.S. has actually just begun its ascent and will be the center of power. This is a book about unintended consequences and how the constraints of time and place impact the behavior of individuals and nations and offer a view of future events. With many unknowns and acknowledging potential for error, Friedman carefully explains his position on the ultimate collapse of Russia, our next opponent after the Islamic conflicts, and he evaluates China and concludes it will not become a major threat. He provides thoughtful rationale for Japan, Turkey, and Poland to emerge as great powers, and his theories are fascinating on a confrontation between the U.S. and Mexico, a major economic force at the end of the century. This is an excellent book and will intrigue many library patrons. --Mary Whaley

Customer Reviews

Predictio ad Absurdum
Although I am a large fan of America's Secret War and respect Mr. Friedman's logical thinking and intelligence, this book is an undertaking so far beyond the capability of man -trying to outline how the next 100 years of history will look- that even though it started off captivating it ultimately left me feeling like the whole thing was a fool's errand. It's not that the author is illogical or a nutcase as some of the negative reviewers have suggested, it's just that there's no way to meaningfully try to predict the simply unpredictable, regardless of the complexity of your analysis. And as the author stretches his future history farther and farther away from the present it simply becomes an implausibility on top of an implausibility on top of another implausibility to the point that any value the reader could derive nearly evaporates and I wish I had spent my time reading actual history.

Of course the author believes some rough prediction of the future is possible based on trends analysis, an understanding of strategic nature, and other such information. I immediately concede that trying to predict the future is not only necessary as a basis for security planning but can be done profitably over maybe 10 years, 20 at the extreme, but only if you build in a huge amount of risk management / "reserve" into your planning results to account for the inevitable unexpected. Thus my critique is simply with the overly ambitious timeline of the author rather than the endeavor itself.

There are some positives of the book which were informative and argue in favor of reading perhaps the first half for pertinent information and analysis. This information revolves around such things as brief overviews of European history and it's rise to power, a brief and plausible (though not necessarily entirely convincing) theory of a cyclical nature of American politics/economics/history, explanations of Russia's geostrategic challenge and how it has historically approached it, global demographics (birth rates declining, the reasons why they are declining and the possible results) and some highlights of the Chinese economy and political system in addition to some other fascinating minor topics. Frankly these topics could have easily formed the basis for an excellent book that tries to project what they could mean over a more modest timeframe, which coupled with Mr. Friedman's direct and straight to the point writing style would have been well worth it. But beyond this the book is more interesting as a work of science fiction than a source of illumination or fuel for strategic analysis.

Even over the relatively strong first half of the book or so there were some things that struck me as cautionary flags with regards to the author's conclusions. Mr. Friedman is Bismarckian to a very high degree, and pretty much limits his assumptions of state behavior to each state trying to enforce a balance of power amongst all other states within its means. There is seemingly no consideration of moral factors, such as alignment of like minded cultures or political/economic systems because they are like minded, in his analysis. His explanation of US grand strategy culminates in what strikes me, as an active duty US Navy Officer, as incongruous. (Which I can't figure since he has close military ties and his son is also in the military.) He essentially claims that US grand strategy is to ensure dominance of the oceans, which is correct but only a single facet of a much more variegated and complex animal. But in his analysis of how this grand strategy has influenced American action he tries to explain that this has motivated America to intervene in Kosovo and Iraq, i.e. to forestall an eventual Eurasian power from building a Navy that can challenge ours! Serbia and Al-Qaeda seemed pretty far from that goal to provide the clarifying rational of American behavior, and this explanation fails to account why we are doing nothing to forestall Chinese and Indian naval developments, and why the previous CNO and current CJCS, Adm. Mike Mullen, launched the "1,000 ship Navy" designed to reduce the need for enlarging the US Navy size by leveraging closer ties with allied nations' navies and developing their naval capabilities synergistically. He also claims that as part of our strategy of preventing a dominant Eurasian continental power we went into Iraq to intentionally de-stabilize central Asia. Again, this flies completely in the face of my entire personal experience in the military, as so many of our forces are working themselves to the bone to try to re-stabilize the region away from weak and antagonistic states that allowed the growth of radical Islam to stronger, more functioning entities that can integrate better with the world and root out Islamic fundamentalism on its home territory. Such a change requires a period of instability to go from a "bad" regime to a "good" one, but that necessary instability is a daunting obstacle being actively tackled and not a goal. (Whether what we are doing is a pipe dream or not is an entirely different matter, but I personally find his explanation of our current strategy simply false, if not quixotic.) Instead it is the overtly stated belief of the US strategic community that it is exactly instability and/or weak autocratic based regimes that causes groups like Al-Qaeda to operate. Other concerns I have with his analysis are that Iran, especially a nuclear Iran, makes virtually no appearance, nor does India. Also, in my subjective opinion, he completely under-rates the strength and staying power of radical Islam essentially claiming that is already defeated and won't even be a factor beyond the mid 2010's, and thus he more or less ignores it.

And although it is probably ridiculous to critique an absurdity, there were some issues I had with his analysis of the period of the 2040's and beyond. He envisions an American space based strategy with three very large (i.e. hundreds to thousands of crewmembers) space stations he calls "battle stars" forming its core. Each would be a command and control node as well as being armed with directed energy and kinetic weapons, and he claims that they will be built under the assumption that they are invulnerable. Yet given the delicate nature of lightweight space structures (in order to be able to get them into space at an affordable cost) and the relative ease of anti-satellite weapons to wreak massive damage on such a system cheaply, his assumption that the US will think they are invulnerable flies completely in the face of a technological reality that is already widely recognized in the US space community. Last, he also envisions hypersonic aircraft providing close air support for ground forces, which is frankly ridiculous. There is more I could quibble with his far out year predictions, but honestly what would be the point?

An odd book. Mr. Friedman has some formidable strengths that shone brilliantly in America's Secret War, and glimmer here and there in the Next 100 Years, but beyond the midway point the book sadly devolves into the absurd.

Is This How It Will Go?
When one takes into account the staggering advances that took place in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, it is a brave forecaster who would even attempt to predict the course of our (still relatively) new century. George Friedman undertakes this task in "The Next 100 Years".

Friedman opens by taking the reader through the twentieth century at twenty-year intervals, showing how the concerns in any given time period are quickly forgotten and replaced by new concerns. This prepares the reader to see that the twenty-first century will also be anything but static, either, as America will not be facing the same set of challenges by 2020 as we did on September 11, 2001, and will be dealing with many different issues as the century progresses.

The author is a very incisive thinker, relaying stunning insight after stunning insight in demonstrating how we arrived at where we are now, with Europe having been supplanted by America as the world's focal point.

Friedman contends that, far from declining (as many fear), America is just beginning its rise. The century will be characterized, he predicts, by regional powers attempting to form coalitions to limit American power, and America attempting to prevent the formation of such coalitions. This will ultimately result at mid-century in a war that will have many similarities with World War II--the war will begin with a surprise attack on a key American military target, will be fought against a familiar foe, will result in the development of stunning new technologies, and will be followed by a new golden age redolent of the one following World War II.

This book also takes a look at the worldwide population bust--policy debates in American politics will be driven in part by debates about the number of immigrants needed as a result of the bust. The author asserts that our politics operates in fifty-year cycles, and that both transition points of American politics in the twenty-first century will be driven by immigration. One of the predictions in the book is almost made as an aside--the author is really hanging his neck out on the line, since we will be able to see in not 20 or 50 years, but within the next two years whether the author is correct in his prediction about how much President Obama will be able to roll back the basic policies that President Reagan put in place in the early 1980s.

The book closes by examining some of the technological breakthroughs such as robots and space-based energy that will transform life later in the century, and asserts that the end of the century will be characterized by increasing disharmony with Mexico over the American Southwest.

Anyone interested in what the future might hold (that is, just about everyone) would enjoy reading "The Next 100 Years". The only regret you will have when you have finished reading it is the realization that you will not be around in 2100 to see if all of the predictions in this supremely fascinating book come to pass.

Challenging, eye opening
George Friedman's THE NEXT 100 YEARS has a serious "wow" factor. It's going to get people talking.

Friedman, as the chairman of Stratfor, the global intelligence firm, believes that geography, population, and the surprising way history has of confounding our expectations are all important. He also believes that conventional political analysis and forecasting "suffers from a profound failure of imagination." The convergence of these axioms leads Friedman to write a book that should flabbergast more than a few of the talking heads who populate the airwaves and cable frequencies. I would venture to guess that none of them have the intellectual wherewithal to engage his predictions knowledgeably. I guess we'll see, because no doubt Friedman will be making a splash in the press with this surprising book.

His predictions--they will raise your eyebrows. But two things will keep you from dismissing them for their outlandishness. One, Friedman, though ambitious and writing with a strong sense of self-confidence, keeps his ego in check. (He says he'll be pleased not if he's proven right on all points, but merely if his grandkids tell him some day, "Not bad.") And two, he makes a convincing case that throughout history, almost nothing in world affairs has turned out the way common sense or the prevailing notions of smart people (or journalists) thought that it would.

There's no arguing with any of that, though it's very easy to lose sight of.

At the start of the book, Friedman sets the table for his forecast by reviewing the changes in the world's geopolitics during the 20th century. He shows that every 20 years or so the world turned completely on its head. Though these events in hindsight seem to us today to be ordinary and unexceptional, if not completely predictable, if forecast in their day they would have seemed astonishingly unlikely. Please bear with me here...

In 1920, with Europe in tatters after World War I, the one thing that was sure was that peace had been forced on Germany and it would not soon lift itself up off the mat.

By 1940, of course, Germany not only roared back, but conquered most of Europe, with Russia as an unlikely ally. Britain stood alone. There was no way Hitler could lose.

Now to 1960. Germany is a ruin and the U.S., no world power at all in 1940, was contending only with the Soviets for world domination. The U.S. dominated the world's oceans and could dictate terms to its rivals, or, if it wished, just nuke them. Stalemate was the best the Soviets could hope for.

Come 1980, the U.S. had been beaten in a war--not by the Soviet Union, but by little North Vietnam--and was widely seen as in a slow, permanent retreat, expelled from Iran and watching helplessly as the oil fields fell into Soviet hands.

Now one more leap, to 2000. The Soviet Union had collapsed. China was communist in name only. NATO had advanced into Eastern Europe and even into the former USSR. (It was always supposed to happen the other way around!) The world was prosperous and peaceful. Everyone knew that the "end of history" was here, as considerations of war and power and realpolitik became secondary to spreading benign prosperity globally. Then came September 11, 2001, and the world turned on its head again.

Got all that? Good. After that unsettling review of recent world history, Friedman has set the stage to unleash his considerable imaginative and rhetorical gifts in predicting the following:

* That the U.S., which is now an adolescent power -- immature and impulsive -- will grow into the full glory of its power in the 21st century. By 2040, however, expect the unexpected. Two strong rivals will emerge to challenge us, and I probably shouldn't blow the freshness of the surprise by revealing here who Friedman believes it will be. (Just be sure, for one, not to buy real estate too close to the Rio Grande.)

* The industrialized world is facing a dramatic population drop, which will bottom out in 2050. As a result, we're in for a severe global labor shortage. The result? Today's immigration debate will flip 180 degrees as countries actually compete for immigrant laborers.

* Al Qaeda and the jihadist threat? They're history mostly, just a nuisance. (John Kerry was basically right in 2004.)

* Ditto environmental problems and energy crises: a single technological breakthrough, space-based solar power, will change everything.

* In the 21st century, minerals will become scarce on earth. Mining operations on the moon will be significant.

* The art of war is moving into orbit, and a robust space industry will develop around massive new expenditures by the U.S. and other countries.

* The U.S. will be challenged by some surprising new powers. Hint: you might want to start following news from Warsaw, Mexico City, and Istanbul a little more closely.

And so on. The book reads very accessibly and the argument at each turn is not hard to follow. The book is not at all academic or full of the jargon you might expect. There's a startling insight on every other page. By the end of it, you realize that you're a complete fool if you take any course of global events for granted.

Remember when it looked like the Berlin Wall was a permanent fixture in East Berlin? The only constant in the world is a lack of constancy. (Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio?) We are, all of us, in for a lifetime of surprises. Friedman humbly takes a shot at forecasting the likeliest of them in a challenging and easy-to-read book.

You won't lack for conversation at your next lunch date if you spend an hour or so with this book. But read it quickly, because you don't want to be the fourth person in your circle of acquaintances to go around saying that war with Turkey lies in America's future. (Okay, I blew a surprise there, but that's what happens when you're lucky enough to get hold of a review copy, and the book has more than a few of them.)