The Future Strategic Context for Defence
A Lesson from History
In 546BC, Croesus, King of Lydia, was considering the possibility of mounting a pre-emptive attack
across the River Halys against his increasingly threatening Persian neighbours. Undecided how to
act, he consulted the Oracle of Apollo at Delphi on his prospects for success. "Croesus, if you cross
the Halys you will destroy a mighty empire" came the divine response. Delighted, Croesus
proceeded to launch his attack, only to suffer a shattering defeat. His empire was annexed by the
Persians.
Accurately predicting the future course of military events is a tricky business.
Introduction
1. The Strategic Defence Review (SDR), which was published in 1998, was foreign policy-led. It
sought to assess our essential security interests and defence needs in the light of changes in the
international strategic environment. In the first stage of the Review, conducted jointly by the Foreign
1
and Commonwealth Office (FCO) and the Ministry of Defence (MOD), a "Policy Framework" was
produced, which sought to analyse the world as it was then and as it would develop in the future,
looking forward to 2015, and to define Britain’s place within it. This framework informed all subsequent
stages of the Review.
2. This paper represents an update of the analysis which underpinned the SDR Policy Framework,
placing particular emphasis on the implications of recent events or emerging trends. It also seeks to
extend the assessment, where possible, to cover a period of 30 years. This is in recognition of the fact
that the impact of many decisions we take today, particularly equipment procurement decisions, will
still be felt in 30 years’ time and beyond.
3. It is in the nature of such an exercise that the further one looks ahead, the less confident it is
possible to be in the robustness of the analysis. The paper will, therefore, where it is helpful to do so,
distinguish between near term and long term trends, and offer more robust analysis of the former. It is
not, in any event, the intention of this paper to be precisely predictive. (It is worth noting in this context
that even short term predictions cannot be reliable - the two years since the SDR have been even
more busy than predicted.) Many of the developments postulated will be generic ones which will
unfold gradually across the period. 2030 simply represents the farthest limit of the analysis. We
recognise that the paper will contain judgements about the future with which many will disagree.
Inevitably events will prove some of our judgements to have been wrong (perhaps this is the only truly
certain prediction which we can make). We will need to update our analysis on a regular basis and
ensure that our planning processes are sufficiently sensitive to respond to changes.
4. The nature of such analysis tends not to identify the possibility of "shocks", low-probability events
with a dramatic impact. Examples might be the emergence of a new deadly disease, global economic
