Strategic Assessment of Present and Future Security Environments: A Systems Approach

Recent transformations in world order have resulted in a more complex and unpredictable complex global environment. A requirement therefore exists for ways in which to understand such complexity as a basis for preparing for an increasingly wide range of possibilities that may in uence defense policy and planning decisions. Unhappily, numerous examples of instability and suffering exist but, for the purposes of this paper, Angola will be used as a case study. It is, however, no more than a test-bed for an assessment methodology and does not represent the particular concerns of the Bri t i s h Government. Angola’s problems have been extensively considered in the literature. In essence, Angola suffers from the problems which beset much of sub-Saharan Africa: poverty, malnutrition and high infant mortality in the midst of what might be prosperity from natural resources. Further, since independence from Portugal was achieved in 1975 after a protracted struggle, the country has been torn by con ict between two factions. One well-publicized consequence of that is the widespread prevalence of landmines. The international community has become involved in attempts to alleviate suffering and to negotiate an end to the con ict. There are evident difŽ culties for agencies, whether they be governments, international bodies or charities, in knowing how best to play a role in this humanitarian and political maelstrom. How is the situation to be understood and how might it unfold? Which combination from a range of possible initiatives, such as sanctions, aid, peacekeeping forces and/or political efforts to develop and support peace agreements, might be beneŽ cial, and which might be counter-productive? How might interventions by one agent reinforce or negate those by other parties? Such issues also arise in cases other than Angola, so methods of understanding con icts and the prospects for defusing them are of considerable practical importance. Defense Analysis Vol. 16, No. 3, pp. 299–314, 2000