Future Peace: Technology, Aggression, And The Rush To War

By Robert H.  Latiff

University of Notre Dame Press, 2022

978-0-268-20189-0

Reviewed by Jim Gallen

War History Network readers usually focus on past wars, but our interests also encompass contemporary and prospective tensions and conflicts.  Books about future war and peace often soar into the ether of speculation and science fiction.  “Future Peace” is grounded in current and developing technology, recent history of domestic and international relations and trajectory of prevailing trends.  Author Army Maj. General (ret) Robert H. Latiff, has crafted a thought-provoking examination of the Sword of Damocles that modern politico-military establishments suspend over a unsuspecting orb.

This slight volume consists of four chapters examining the military as “A Giant Armed Nervous System”, the “Urge to Violence”, the risk of “Stumbling into War”, and methods of “Avoiding War” followed by the author’s conclusions.

Natiff presents the image of autonomous systems controlling the road to war without the mediation of human reason.  He posits a world in which hypersonic events occur so rapidly that humans must react, without time for reflection, on information transmitted and actions directed by pre-programed circuits.

The author asserts a rising urge to violence, to the exclusion of diplomacy, as the American response of choice to international crises.  He attributes this both to inadequate civics education nationwide and the separation of the American public from the costs of war as economic costs are shifted to later generations through borrowing and wars are fought by fractions of the American public.  He quotes President Eisenhower’s still appropriate waning against the influence of the military-industrial complex.  Natiff suggests that advances in military technology drive demand, particularly to a customer like the United States military that can rely on its public and politicians’ fear of falling behind.

Perhaps the most alarming section is that on Stumbling into War.  Could a local commander trigger a response that could get out of hand?  Could a piece of space debris destroy a spy satellite and thereby set off retaliation against another power’s device?  As our adversaries close the gap in power and quality, does the United States, through overextension risk opportunistic attack that it could not repel?

At its core, this tome is Gen. Latiff’s call for citizens to pay attention to developments and to modify behavior of the leaders they elect.  I am a conservative who generally views with suspicion claims that the United States should withdraw from the world stage and leave the field to aggressors.  I ask, if we wait to be sure that an attack is real or a threat is serious, what will our adversaries do?  Will they follow our lead and lesson the treat of stumbling into war, or will they take advantage of our hesitation?  Against this background, Gen. Latiff has cause me to pause and think.  Is the United States obligated, or even justified, in becoming involved in opposing evils across the globe?  I have often viewed American foreign policy as benign and focused on protecting America’s vital interests and the defense of the weak against aggressors.  These pages have caused me to consider how others may view our actions.  Is American strength a threat only toward predators or could its claimed purposes be perceived as a veneer covering more sinister motives?   “Future Peace” has not reversed my word view, but it has encouraged me to assess it more critically and sharpened my concern for the situation in which we live.  For that it is a worthwhile read.