■
28 JFQ / Summer 1999
T
he Armed Forces are at a crossroads.
There has been vigorous debate since
the Cold War over the nature of future
war. This article identifies four major
positions in that debate and argues that each rep-
resents not only a possible future, but a likely
one. The sign at the crossroads points in four di-
rections and the future lies each way. No wonder
the controversy seems inconclusive.
Debates on future wars and other military
operations are usually set against the inherited
(or legacy) image of war. Proponents of various
persuasions argue that a particular scenario por-
tends the future. They usually contend with con-
servatives who they cast as unwilling to change
rapidly enough to prepare for their view of the
future. The argument is about which future to
prepare for.
The argument that there is only one likely
future leads to premature closure and narrowing
of options as force planners and doctrinal scribes
sense the pressure to translate hazy guesses into
concrete designs. Accordingly, this article argues
that one should recognize that multiple futures
are possible and likely to occur simultaneously.
Moreover, the future will not be one-dimensional
but rather multidimensional. How should we pre-
pare for these multiple futures?
Ian Roxborough is professor of history and sociology at the State
University of New York at Stony Brook; Colonel Dana Eyre, USAR,
currently teaches in the Department of National Strategic Studies at
the Naval Postgraduate School.
Which Way to the
Future?
By IAN ROXBOROUGH and DANA EYRE
0722 Roxborough.pgs 2/8/00 12:23 PM Page 28
