When my daughters were growing up, and coming to me for advice on some crucial problem in their lives, I would put them through a three question drill to clarify the issue (not necessarily resolve it):
1) What's the worst outcome you can anticipate?
2) Are you prepared to accept it?
3) If not, what are you capable of doing and willing to do to prevent it?
Again, these questions do not resolve the issue, but they set the boundaries of possible consequences and responses. It seems that a lot of adults in high places need to ask these questions on some critical issues.
Af-Pak-istan
Now that Bin Laden has been summarily dismissed, there is a rising chorus for rapid withdrawal from an enterprise that has been mismanaged from the start. Interesting as a side-note, the President appears to be gaining the bi-partisanship that he has been seeking in Congress: both Republicans and Democrats are rising in support of accelerating withdrawal. I'm not sure whether he is gratified because it now gives him policy wiggle room with bipartisan cover, or rueful in the "be careful what you ask for..." sense. Whatever.
The military, not surprisingly, wants a little more faith from a public whose faith and resources have been sorely strained on multiple fronts, not just the war.
Neither side in this discussion appears to be asking the first question: What's the worst that can happen if we leave precipitously? Or if they've asked, they won't share.
What's the worst that can happen? Afghanistan returns the the primitive moonscape that it was before American boots implanted their footprint. Unfortunate for many of its citizens, specifically the women and children. But they must ultimately fashion their destiny, as we ours.
Pakistan degenerates into civil war. Our presence is an excuse; not a cause of its own home-grown problems. It has the same possibility of selling its nuclear firecrackers to third rate rogues as it always has, and now has in spite of our presence. China fills the vacuum of our withdrawal, solidifying existing ties with its Pakistani client and making new friends in Afghanistan to gain a pipeline to Iranian oil and Afghan resources. India finds itself in a very uncomfortable box between two historic enemies: China and Pakistan. Stuff happens.
Back at home, our military licks its wounds and tries to rebuild its physical and human infrastructure under severe budgetary constraints, while it re-thinks its raison d'etre. As loose nukes and terrorists will be an inevitable hangover of the withdrawal with greater risk, the defensive structure will now retreat to possibly more manageable parameters....or not (See Mexico and the drug war).
If Pakistan and India shoot off their fireworks in a 'miscalculation' responding to the next act of terrorism, we have an environmental and human disaster that dwarf's Japan's nuclear meltdowns. Does our presence in the neighborhood affect this possibility one way or the other, or can we be equally effective as a deterrent from a stand-off position, comparable to the Cold War?
I would like to think that greater minds than mine are contemplating these questions. But the public needs to hear some of the conclusions to inform its own opinions, and political will. On the other hand, I am reminded that for all the puffery by the military about its array of contingency plans for anything anywhere in the world, it came to the table empty handed on Afghanistan after 9/11.
The Debt Limit, Bail-outs, et al.
We've constantly heard the Republican budget hawks and libertarians argue for playing chicken with the natuional debt limit and default, and claiming that the bailouts accomplished nothing. Again, what's the worst that can happen; and, understanding that, are we prepared to accept that? By 'we', I'm not referring to wizards in their secure little think tanks, and business executives well padded by their personal cumulative asset base. I'm talking about the average 'we', living day-to-day on vapors with no safety net.
One way to think about such a future is to visit the past. What was the Great Depression like for the average American? I don't see much t.v. programming or other media reflection on that. It might be illuminating, particularly the process that led us ultimately out of it...and into WWII.
Of course, the Great Repression will not be a replay of the Great Depression, but there are probably enough commonalities in substance if not in form to give us pause before pulling the trigger on any particular strategy. It would be beneficial for people other than just Chairman Bernanke to understand the realities of a default at the grass roots level.
Climate Change and Energy
Unlike the other two issues which are totally in the hands of humans, CC&E has a decidedly different parameter: natural constraints and reactions to human decisions. What's the end game of ignoring climate change--human induced or not? What's the end game of energy options chosen with tunnel vision and short-term goals with indifference to long term consequences and collateral damage.
We are rushing to act on energy and do next to nothing on Climate Change without coming to a critical mass of consensus on the consequences that will be widely shared.
+ + +
I could add health care and drug war policy and infrastructure investment and a number of other critical issues to the above list with similar questions. Any one of these could be a case study in any MBA program. And our handling of all of them to date would get a failing grade, evidence of the on-going disconnect between our human capabilities to do better and our collective inclination to recoil from the risk of responsibility.
But there will be consequences nonetheless. Are we willing to accept them? Will we have a choice? Or will we have abdicated a choice?
* * *
When my youngest daughter was about to leave for college and we went through one of these drills before her departure, she smiled and said to me:
"You know, Dad, I've found a lot of value in this approach to problems. Just one piece of advice. Don't give up your day job to be a motivational speaker."
Onward.
Comments