A Strategic Framework for Global Stability and Sustainable Development

Reassessing National Strategies in Alignment with the 2030 Agenda

Global strategic analysis is increasingly focused on the scale of national capabilities and the determination of states to expand their influence. This has prompted a re-evaluation of policy frameworks to ensure they not only maintain stability but also actively contribute to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). A revised approach to international relations and strategic planning is required, adapting to global challenges through a lens of sustainability, peace, and institutional integrity. Recent analyses and simulations indicate a need for new concepts, including the disaggregation of critical assets to build resilience, the use of strategic communication to ensure successful outcomes, and the centralization of impact assessment even with decentralized operational control. This report outlines a strategic framework that reinterprets traditional security concepts to align with the SDGs.

Promoting Sustainable Innovation and Resilient Infrastructure (SDG 9 & SDG 12)

A central characteristic of modern development is the pursuit of advanced technological solutions. However, these are often complex, resource-intensive, and carry significant environmental and economic costs, running counter to principles of sustainable development.

• Embracing Sustainable Technology: A strategic shift towards simpler, low-technology solutions can align with SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production). This approach allows for the expansion of resilient capabilities at a greater scale, replacing larger, more expensive systems that have long development periods and high carbon footprints.
• Building Resilient and Inclusive Infrastructure: Low-tech approaches are often more difficult for external actors to disrupt and can exhibit greater survivability. This focus on resilience is a core target of SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure), which calls for building resilient infrastructure, promoting inclusive and sustainable industrialization, and fostering innovation.
• Reducing Systemic Vulnerabilities: Advanced technological systems can be vulnerable to external interference and supply chain disruptions. By promoting locally sourced, sustainable technologies, nations can reduce these dependencies, fostering economic self-reliance and ensuring the integrity of critical infrastructure, in line with SDG 9.

Fostering Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions (SDG 16 & SDG 10)

The greatest long-term threat to national and global stability is the erosion of trust between a populace and its governing institutions. A focus on good governance, human rights, and institutional accountability is paramount for achieving sustainable peace.

1. Supporting Accountable Governance: In line with SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions), a key strategic objective should be the global promotion of transparent, accountable, and inclusive institutions. Efforts should focus on highlighting the impacts of corruption and poor governance, which undermine sustainable development and exacerbate inequalities, a challenge addressed by SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities).
2. Promoting Public Access to Information: Throttling dissent and freedom of expression is a direct barrier to achieving SDG Target 16.10, which aims to “ensure public access to information and protect fundamental freedoms.” Strategic information efforts should focus on empowering civil society and promoting platforms for open dialogue and reform.
3. Facilitating Peaceful Transitions: An international effort, perhaps through a dedicated multilateral think tank, could be established to explore governance models that support a post-authoritarian, pluralistic future. The goal would be to leverage the power of ideas to weaken systems of oppression and facilitate peaceful transitions toward governance structures that uphold the SDGs, focusing on reducing corruption (Target 16.5) and developing effective institutions (Target 16.6).

Enhancing Global Partnerships and Strategic Dialogue for Conflict Prevention (SDG 17 & SDG 16)

In an era of pervasive surveillance and information gathering, strategic communication and diplomacy are essential tools for preventing conflict and maintaining global stability, which is a prerequisite for all development goals.

• Strategic Deception for De-escalation: The concept of military deception can be repurposed as a tool for strategic de-escalation. As demonstrated in historical conflicts, misleading adversaries about intentions can create time and space for peaceful resolutions, preventing catastrophic conflicts that would devastate progress on the SDGs. This aligns with the overarching goal of SDG 16 to promote peaceful societies.
• Protecting Operations for Global Good: Strategic communication must be employed to protect critical operations related to humanitarian aid, climate action, and peace-building, obscuring them from actors who may wish to disrupt them.
• Strengthening Multilateralism: These efforts must be adopted to counter pervasive surveillance that undermines trust and international cooperation. This reinforces the importance of SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals), as managing strategic competition through sophisticated dialogue and multilateral channels is essential for building the trust required to address shared global challenges like climate change, poverty, and health crises.

SDGs Addressed or Connected to the Issues Highlighted in the Article

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  This is the most relevant SDG as the article’s central theme revolves around military conflict, national security, and the nature of governance within China. The article discusses the threat of war, which is the antithesis of peace. It also explicitly mentions issues of governance, corruption, and fundamental freedoms, which are core components of SDG 16. The proposed U.S. strategy involves exploiting these institutional weaknesses, such as corruption and lack of accountability, and highlighting the suppression of freedoms to weaken the Chinese regime.

Specific Targets Identified Based on the Article’s Content

SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

1. Target 16.1: Significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates everywhere.

   The article addresses this target by focusing on its inverse: the potential for large-scale military conflict. The entire premise is the “military threat from China,” the expansion of “armed forces,” and preparations for a potential war over Taiwan. The discussion of war games and military doctrines is directly related to the preparation for, and potential escalation of, violence.

2. Target 16.5: Substantially reduce corruption and bribery in all their forms.

   This target is directly identified when the article proposes a strategy for the U.S. to “highlight corruption and abuse within the regime.” This suggests that corruption is a significant issue within the Chinese government that can be used as a point of leverage.

3. Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.

   The article points to the lack of such institutions in China. It states that the country has “leaders, who are unaccountable to their people.” The proposed U.S. information operations effort would aim to “facilitate a peaceful transfer of power from the Communist Party to a more pluralistic system,” directly addressing the need for more accountable and representative governance.

4. Target 16.10: Ensure public access to information and protect fundamental freedoms, in accordance with national legislation and international agreements.

   The article explicitly mentions the violation of this target in China. It states that “the government has throttled dissent, freedom of expression, and freedom of assembly.” This suppression of fundamental freedoms is identified as a key vulnerability of the Chinese government and a source of “serious discontent” among its people.

Indicators Mentioned or Implied in the Article

SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

• Indicators for Target 16.1 (Reduce Violence): The article implies indicators that measure the risk and scale of conflict, rather than peace. These include the “enormity of its [China’s] capabilities,” the continuous expansion of “armed forces,” and the execution of “war games” simulating an invasion. These serve as negative indicators, showing a move away from, rather than towards, the target of reducing violence.
• Indicators for Target 16.5 (Reduce Corruption): An implied indicator is the existence of “corruption and abuse within the regime,” which the article suggests a dedicated think tank could be created to expose. The level and frequency of such exposed incidents would serve as a measure of this problem.
• Indicators for Target 16.6 (Accountable Institutions): The article implies several indicators for the lack of accountable institutions. These include leaders being “unaccountable to their people,” the presence of “domestic unrest,” and a system of government that is not “pluralistic.” The level of public discontent is presented as a direct consequence and indicator of unaccountable governance.
• Indicators for Target 16.10 (Protect Fundamental Freedoms): The article provides direct indicators for the suppression of freedoms. These are the government’s actions to “throttle dissent, freedom of expression, and freedom of assembly.” The prevalence of such restrictions is a clear measure of the failure to protect these fundamental rights.

Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: dailysignal.com