Skip to main content
March/April 2023 cover
Foreign Affairs Magazine Homepage
Subscribe
Explore Subscribe
  • All Articles
  • Books & Reviews
  • Podcast
  • Anthologies
  • Audio Content
  • Author Directory
  • This Day in History
  • Events
  • Biden Administration
  • War in Ukraine
  • Coronavirus
  • Climate Change
  • Cybersecurity
  • Nationalism
  • Democratization
  • Economics
  • Globalization
  • Migration
  • U.S. Foreign Policy
  • War & Military Strategy
  • United States
  • Ukraine
  • Russia
  • China
  • Iran
  • North Korea
  • United Kingdom
  • India
  • Afghanistan
  • Ethiopia
  • View All Regions
  • Essays
  • Snapshots
  • Capsule Reviews
  • Review Essays
  • Ask the Experts
  • Reading Lists
  • Interviews
  • Responses
  • 1920s
  • 1930s
  • 1940s
  • 1950s
  • 1960s
  • 1970s
  • 1980s
  • 1990s
  • 2000s
  • 2010s
  • 2020s
  • Newsletters
  • Customer Service
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Subscriber Resources
  • Feedback
  • Institutional Subscriptions
  • Gift a Subscription
  • Contact
  • Advertise

Follow Us

Foreign Affairs Magazine Homepage
Explore
My Account Sign In

  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Books & Reviews
  • Anthologies
  • Podcast
  • Newsletters
Search
Subscribe
Subscribe Sign in
Subscribe to newsletter
No, thanks
November/December 2020 Issue

What Are We Missing?

What Are We Missing?
  • November/December 2020
  • 01 A Better Crystal Ball
  • 02 Heads in the Sand
  • 03 The Lawless Realm
  • 04 As the World Burns
  • 05 Coming Storms

What’s Inside

How can responsible policymakers prepare for the next crisis while grappling with current ones?

November/December 2020
Sign in and save to read later
Share
Print this article
Save
Send by email
Share on Twitter
Share on Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Get a link
Request Reprint Permissions

Responsible policymakers try to plan ahead. But how can
they know what the next crisis will be, let alone prepare for it while still grappling with current ones? People are notoriously bad at anticipating the future, and countries aren’t much better. Our lead package this issue explores whether they can improve.

Peter Scoblic and Philip Tetlock kick things off by pulling together decades of research on forecasting world politics. They argue that people and governments can indeed train themselves to make better predictions. The catch is that it requires robust discourse and intellectual accountability—a flock of open minds asking lots of sharp questions and following the answers wherever they lead.

Next, Elke Weber shows how psychology works to undermine reason, both individually and collectively. Cognitive biases, emotional reactions, and mental shortcuts result in poor decisions and bad policy—but they wouldn’t have to, if we could somehow corral our minds and our decision-making processes.

Finally, top experts explore three issues on which today’s complacency could easily lead to tomorrow’s disaster: Marietje Schaake on cybersecurity, Michael Oppenheimer on climate change, and Christopher Layne on U.S.-Chinese relations.

Pessimists don’t expect much, and they are rarely disappointed. Certainly, the world’s pitiful performance in handling the coronavirus pandemic gives little reason to believe that future threats will be called earlier or dealt with better. But optimists can point to the obvious, easy gains that would demonstrably flow from individual and organizational self-discipline and hope that future generations are wise enough to recognize and seize them.

U.S. President Dwight Eisenhower liked to say that “plans are worthless, but planning is everything.” What he meant was that the process of planning forced policymakers and institutions to anticipate, prepare for, and train for a range of possible scenarios that might emerge—and thus develop the skills and muscle memory to respond calmly, flexibly, and sensibly to whatever challenge actually appeared.

At some point, there will be another catastrophe. It will probably involve something we already worry about now but don’t take seriously enough or consider to be urgent enough to address. When the crisis hits, people will do what they can and say, “It is what it is.” But it doesn’t have to be that way. Unless the next crisis really does involve a stray meteorite, the fault for screwing it up will lie not in the stars but in ourselves.

—Gideon Rose, Editor

More:
China Climate Change Strategy & Conflict Cybersecurity U.S. Foreign Policy

Most-Read Articles

The Case for a Security Guarantee for Ukraine

How to Protect the Country—Without NATO Membership

Lise Morjé Howard and Michael O’Hanlon

Iraq and the Pathologies of Primacy

The Flawed Logic That Produced the War Is Alive and Well

Stephen Wertheim

Why the Press Failed on Iraq

And How One Team of Reporters Got It Right

John Walcott

Don’t Panic About Taiwan

Alarm Over a Chinese Invasion Could Become a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy

Jessica Chen Weiss

Get the Magazine

Save up to 55%

on Foreign Affairs magazine!
Subscribe

Foreign Affairs

Weekly Newsletter

Get in-depth analysis delivered right to your inbox
About
About Us Staff Events Work at Foreign Affairs Podcast
Contact
Customer Service Contact Us Submissions Permissions Advertise Press Center Leave Us Feedback Frequently Asked Questions
Subscription
Subscriptions Institutional Subscriptions My Account Give a Gift Donate Download iOS App Newsletters Download Android App
Follow
Graduate School Forum
Council on Foreign Relations

From the
publishers of
Foreign Affairs

North Korea’s Foreign Policy: The Kim Jong-un Regime in a Hostile World
by Editor:Scott A. Snyder
Zimbabwe Limps Toward Elections
by Michelle Gavin
The Dangers of a New Russian Proposal for a UN Convention on International Information Security

Published by the Council on Foreign Relations

Privacy Policy Terms of Use

©2023 Council on Foreign Relations, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Loading Loading