What drives a country's choice of strategy: capabilities or history - Essay Example

? What drives a country’s choice of strategy: capabilities or history? Introduction In the widely fluctuating environment of world political economy,a country’s strategic choices emerge as key ingredients of competitive advantage. They facilitate a nation to only to penetrate new market but also help it to counter the power and hegemonic ambitions of other countries and safeguard its interests, security and survival. The various imperatives that drive a country’s strategic choices are strongly influenced by internal and external forces that determine its decision-making and shape its future evolution. In the era of rapid globalization, a country’s core interests and how it can safeguard them become the most pertinent issue. The paper would discuss how a country’s capabilities are major drivers for strategic choices that determine its development processes and its survival within the wider context of political hegemony of states and balance of power. Factors influencing a country’s strategic choices History is witness to a nation’s evolving process and helps it to make decisions based on the lessons learnt (Gong, 2001). But at the same time, the changing external environment and factors that impact decision-making become hugely important for developing effective strategies for a country. The market compulsions and interdependency of resources have evolved into powerful factors that tend to influence government policies and political ideologies. The strategic choices adopted by a nation are therefore developed to meet the internal and external challenges that can give it a bargaining position to counter political, military and economic dominance of other nations (Gray, 2007). The example of China and Russia demonstrate the changing political equations that are mainly dictated by external forces vis-a-vis market compulsions and reconstruction of political ideologies that can effectively meet new challenges of time. Kenneth Waltz (1979) has proposed that balance of power is critical factor that influences the strategic choices of a nation. According to him, in the international political dynamics, the anarchical system ensures that states are constantly in a state of flux as they tend to ensure their survival through new mechanisms of imitating successful states while simultaneously, other nations also respond with actions that can continue to give them an advantage. But once a relative balance of power is achieved, the self-interests of the states continue to guide its choices in the guise of other compulsions like market forces and inter-dependency of resources which can add to its economic power and also give it a unique political leverage in the global arena. Thus, regional alliances are made to promote collective bargaining with powers of the developed nations and reduce their influence or interference in the internal matters of the small and developing states. Waltz’s theory is important as it helps to explain how and why countries promote regional alliances and come up with unique strategies to compete and face threats from dominant powers. Gong (2010) asserts that strategic choices of countries tend to use historical events as landmark lessons to improve and improvise their strategies and meet internal and external challenges. The forgotten issues of history like holocaust of Japan and Germany are being re-visited to commemorate the victims and punish the guilty with heavy settlements. Indeed, human rights violations have emerged as important issues that redefine country’s strategies in global arena. Moreover, war strategies and defence of states are intrinsically linked to wider welfare of people and to ensure that catastrophes like German holocausts do not occur again. In the contemporary times, the digitization of media and communication has greatly influenced the strategic choices of nations by highlighting historical events which are exploited by countries to emphasize the mistakes or advantages of nations. In either case, the major aim of media is to promote social justice and create better awareness of socio-political and economic events that influence the development of nations. Consequently, it is seen as major platform that can facilitate a more transparent system for countries to gain leverage in the global market. Katzenstein (1996) strongly believes that in the international relations, the independent nations tend to look at the wider aspect of national security and redefine national interest from new perspective of changing cultural dynamics. Thus, apart from power derived from the material capabilities of nations, the way they respond to environmental changes also become hugely important issue of national interests. The post-cold war period is significant in its re-alignment of interests that redefines national interests in terms of economic restructuring and shifting of power dynamics from military capabilities to new financial power through development of more democratic institutions that support liberal and capitalistic economy. Financial restructuring of emerging new economies like China and India, integration of European countries through formation of strong European Union etc. are prime examples that challenge the hegemony of America and its status as superpower after disintegration of USSR. In the contemporary times, the serve as critical strategic choices to survive and meet the demands of external and internal changing environment (Nugent, 2006). Strachan (2008) says that historically strategy was closely linked to war and comprised of ideas that would help attain the goals of the war or to secure a desired political end. He further quotes Fuller who had asserted that the ‘first duty of the grand strategist is, therefore, to appreciate the commercial and financial position of his country; to discover what its resources and liabilities are…. these quantities and qualities form the pillars of the military arch which it is his duty to construct.’ (40). The war imperatives and socially justified end that incorporated the interests of the states therefore fundamentally became the major drivers for country’s choice of strategy. Indeed, in the cold war period, the struggle for hegemony relied on the military capabilities that used exploitation of potential use of force as strategy to maintain the status quo. Moreover, deterrence also evolved as effective strategy to avert war or war like situations, especially the nuclear strategy that was designed to prevent war and thus stop the recurrence of another Hiroshima and Nagasaki. These strategic choices had distinctly developed from the lessons taken from the history. In the current times, conventional laws of war have become redundant because the causes of wars in the recent times have changed. Militancy and covert means of waging war against states have increasingly become powerful weapons for the vested interests (Cavaleri, 2005). 9/11 was the turning point in history of the nations that initiated fresh rules for war which is now fought to reinstall justice and create peace across the globe. National interests now also incorporate wider welfare of citizens of the world who are vulnerable to the violent acts of terrorisms and may require protection from the authoritarian rulers who exploit their powers. The Afghanistan war, Iraq war, Mau Mau war by British forces to suppress insurgency in Kenya are prime examples where external forces had intervened in the autonomy of states when the welfare of the citizens was at stake. Strachan (2005) contends that these strategic choices were developed as a means to gain political leverage and maintain the hegemony of states, specifically that of America as most powerful agency that exploits its military power to override the sovereignty of states for its own vested interest. How capabilities emerge as major drivers for a country’s choice of strategy: Case of China and Russia The various theoretical assumptions that rely on war for country’s choice of strategy have increasingly become irrelevant in the evolving times when rapid globalization and advancing technology have redefined communication and prompted nations to share resources. Wang (2011) has emphasized that China has fast evolved as strong economic force with competing military power that has considerably helped it to make strengthen its position in the international political economy. The economic interests have emerged as major drivers for strategic choices that have impacted its decisions for economic restructuring and introducing radical changes in its foreign and economic policies (Kennedy, 1991). While the core interest interests of China have widened to include the economic and social development, the political stability of socialist system and maintaining the sovereignty of the state, territorial security and unification have remained crucial part of its choice for strategy on foreign policy. Technology has been one of the most powerful factors that has transformed the dynamics of the international political economy and brought forth explosion of information that has expedited the process of globalization. Barnett’s (2004) connectivity theory proposes that global economy has been restructured and redefined by technology and greatly facilitated the various facets of economic development in terms of the movement of money, services that are complemented by content, and people and materials. This is an interesting perspective that is extensively used by China to strengthen its financial status in the international arena. It has not only created a facilitating environment for foreign influx of business but has considerably expanded its business interests across the globe. China’s economy has seen unprecedented growth of 9% between 1978 to 2006 (Feng, Ljungwall & Guo, 2011). The major factors that have contributed to its success in the international market have been the introduction of market reforms, homogenous demographic structure and continued control essential areas that impact socio-economic growth. It has exploited the tenets of globalization and used technology to advance its interests over wider geographical area. Bleiker (2006) argues that international political economy promotes globalization by cutting across the diversity and complexities of world politics encompassing different cultural, linguistic, political, religious, and ideological experiences. China economic growth succinctly reflects economic integration through liberalization of market. Most importantly, China’s strategic choices have exploited internal resources and external demands to create its own powerful status in the world economy. The reforms highlight its focused approach of mass production based on improved performance through incentive driven strategy. Indeed, the billion plus population is high growth market for foreign investment and at the same time, it is also an asset that is exploited for mass production of quality goods at low cost. It has therefore become important destination for the international businesses that offers huge opportunities of market expansion and growth. The Chinese capabilities vis-a-vis technology, manpower and military power have therefore, collectively helped the country to make decisions based on strategic choices to only compete against the powerful countries like America but their strategies have also enabled them to shift the balance of power and become strong contender in the global market. After the disintegration of USSR in 1991, Russia as a sovereign state was faced with myriad challenges that included the changing political status, flagging economy and reduced influence with its former federation partners that had now acquired fresh status of independent states. But Russia had used its military and technology based capabilities to ensure that its former confederates maintained strong alliances. Moreover, market liberalization gave new thrust to the domestic business and local interests as they were able to exploit joint ventures and alliances to grow and compete with greater success in the international market (Carter & Turnock, 2005). The reforms in the Russian economy reflect significant shift in the socio-political and cultural ideologies. Their economic restructure was designed towards monetary stabilization and to check the escalating inflationary trends. Government initiatives in Russia had introduced widespread changes within the system for guidelines and implementation of new contract rights, anti-trust regulations, securities, rules and policies that could address various issues like conflict of interest etc. It evolved into mixed economy from the command economy to meet new challenges that were market driven. The Russian retail market has come up as one of the fastest developing industries that offer huge potential for international businesses. Indeed, the recent reforms in Russian economy have greatly facilitated business outcome resulting in fast economic growth. Increased FDI activities in sectors like oil, gas, energy, power generation etc. have contributed to its socio-economic development. Russia has judiciously exploited its capabilities to evolve new strategies that would provide it with competitive advantage and help it to regain its lost power in the world polity. Conclusion The various imperatives that drive a country’s choice of strategy are therefore mainly driven by its capabilities that can exploit its internal resources in order to meet external threats and opportunities. China and Russia have both emerged as important players in the global market through their unique capabilities and powers to maintain the sovereignty and safeguard their core interests. The forces of globalization and political realignment of interests become key issues that tend to serve as major drivers of evolving strategic choices. The major drivers of choice for strategy also empower countries with unique capabilities that highlight their growing powers in the international relations that are used contextually and redefine new perspectives that reflect country’s core interests. These are crucial factors that enable countries to exercise their powers more judiciously in international arena within the broader spectrum of globalization and advancing technology. Thus, capabilities in terms of military powers, internal resources and how they protect and advance their core interests become the deciding factors for making strategic choices. (words: 2133) Reference Barnett, Thomas P M.(2004) The Pentagon’s New Map: War and Peace in the Twenty-First Century, New York: Putnam. Bleiker, R. (2006) ‘Searching for Difference in a Homogeneous Discipline.’, International Studies Review, vol.8, pp.128-130. Carter, D. & Turnock, F. (2005) Foreign Direct Investment and regional development in East Central Europe and the former Soviet Union. Aldershot: Ashgate. Cavaleri, David, P. (2005) The Law of war: Can 20th Century Standards Apply to the Global War on Terrorism? Washington DC: CreateSpace. Feng, Xingyan., Ljungwall, Christer & Guo, Sujian. (2011) ‘Re-Interpreting the ‘Chinese Miracle’: A Multi-Dimensional Framework’, International Journal on World Peace, vol. 28, .no. 1, pp. 1-9. Gerrit W. Gong, (2001) ‘“The beginning of history: remembering and forgetting as strategic issues’, Washington Quarterly, vol.24, no.2. pp. 45-57. Gray, Colin S. (2007) Fighting Talk: Forty maxims on war, peace, and strategy pp.47-57, Westport, Conn.: Praeger Security International. Katzenstein, Peter J. (1996) ‘Introduction: Alternative Perspectives on National Security,’ in Katzenstein, Peter J. The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in World Politics , New York: Columbia University Press. Kennedy, Paul, (1991) ‘Grand Strategy in War and Peace: Towards a Broader Definition’ from Kennedy, Paul, Grand Strategies in War and Peace pp.1-7, New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press. Nugent, Neill. (2006) The government and the Politics of European Union. 6th edition, London: Palgrave Macmillan. Strachan, Huw. (2008) ‘Strategy and the Limitation of War’, Survival: Global Politics and Strategy, vol. 50, no.1, pp.31-54. Strachan, Huw. (2008) ‘The lost meaning of strategy’, Survival: Global Politics and Strategy, vol.47, no.3, pp.33-54 Waltz, Kenneth N. (1979) Theory of International Politics ,New York: McGraw-Hill. Wang, Jisi. (2011) ‘China's Search for a Grand Strategy: A Rising Great Power Finds Its Way’, Foreign Affairs, vol. 90(, no.2, pp. 68-79. Read More