Concept of war and conseqences it leaves behind - Essay Example

Concept of War and Consequences it leaves Behind It is difficult to trace with any certitude the origins of the "concept of war"; a concept that has evolved with the codification and progressive development of the law of armed conflicts, and more particularly with the establishment of international criminal tribunals. It had not acquired a clear and stable normative content in contemporary international law until the Judgment of the Nuremberg Tribunal after the Second World War. Historically, the question arose in practice for belligerent States to determine the acts committed in time of war for which they could try the combatants or civilians belonging to the enemy, or possibly to a third, neutral State.

The concept of war was thus initially related, in international law, to the delimitation of the penal jurisdiction of States to prosecute and punish, rather than to the definition of the incriminated acts and the attendant penalties. This latter task was left to municipal law, and more particularly to military codes. Economic Consequences of WarExcept for a few occasional points of contact, a full-fledged partnership between military and economic science was not established until the First World War.

In outstanding works on military strategy like that of Clausewitz, the economic complements to warfare are not even mentioned. To make it applicable to our time, however, his famous statement that war is but a continuation of politics through other methods might very well be rephrased. Today it seems equally reasonable to say that modern warfare is largely a continuation of economic policies through other methods. For thousands of years there was only an indirect connection between the economic system and the method of warfare.

The ends of war were frequently economic, as when men fought to win tribute or slaves, and certain consequences of war, such as starvation and devastation, had economic significance as well. The kind of economic warfare which aimed at impairing the enemy's military resources was often employed, but prior to Bonaparte's blockade against England; it was used only on a small scale. All this, however, is incidental to the patterns of organization for war of economic life in recent years. Not until the vast development of techniques and resources under the competitive system was well advanced could a special organization of society for war take place.

In relatively primitive societies, the economic system was not elastic enough for quick adjustment, nor was any wide economic basis for warfare required. During most of human history a higher civilization was by no means a guarantee of superior war equipment, as Adam Smith emphasized. The capacities or resources which are most important to the waging of war are not necessarily inherent in the more elaborate types of civilization, and history is full of examples of the destruction of highly developed societies by barbarians.

This relationship remained valid, however, only so long as the level of the world's technology was comparatively low and the pace of technical development very slow. Since the invention of firearms the trend has gradually shifted, although it was not until the Ethiopian War of 1935 that incontestable evidence was given of the superiority of modern weapons over martial bravery. It was only in the early years of this century, with the development of the machine gun and other automatic weapons, that war technique attained the level of industrialized society.

Only the airplane and tank fleets of the Second World War truly correspond to the technical level of the machine age and at the same time necessitate a centralized economic organization.What was in the First World War a temporary improvisation became in the recent period a permanent state of affairs. A considerable portion of what had to be done after 1914 had this time been anticipated before the outbreak of military hostilities. Even the starting point of the new war economy did not correspond to the state of affairs in 1914 but rather to that of 1917 or 1918.

Those measures which had been begun so late in the last war that there was no time to work them out adequately, have now been inaugurated on an incomparably larger scale and have been implemented at a much faster pace. The foundations of the traditional social system and the orthodox concepts of diplomacy, strategy, and economic policy have been shaken and widely replaced by new, though often not morally superior, conceptions. For a realistic understanding of what has recently been going on in the world one cannot be content with knowledge of the experiences of the First World War, but must make a thorough-going inquiry into the realities and tendencies of the contemporary period.

Consequences of War on AnimalsAlthough hundreds of thousands of animals have died as a consequence of human war making, no comprehensive effort has ever been made to assess the numbers or types of animal casualties during or after past conflicts. The prospect of killing or injuring animals has never had a deterrent effect on those making decisions about war. A few recent international agreements, reached in efforts to mitigate the impact of war on the environment, have not translated into significant restrictions on military activity, let alone explicit measures to protect animals in time of war. (home.ecn.ab.ca/puppydog/gulfwar.htm)The relationship between animals and war has received historical attention with regard to the uses of animals in military missions and military research.

However, the war in Vietnam marked the first time that the environment and animals received close attention as victims of war. The chemical defoliation of massive tracts of forest in Vietnam killed, wounded, or evicted many of the animal inhabitants. The Gulf war added a new dimension to the risks for animals as well as humans: the use of oil as a weapon. Along with their economic and tactical effects, oil spills and fires make animals their principal living victims since, for the most part, they are unable to escape their devastated habitats. (home.ecn.ab.ca/puppydog/gulfwar.htm)War as it was waged in the Persian Gulf is now capable of unleashing long-term ecological devastation on a scale never before experienced, even without the use of nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons.

Because animals' lives are more fully integrated with the natural environment in their day-to-day interactions than are those of humans, their deaths are not only individual tragedies, but also indicators of a much larger ecological cost of war. That cost must be calculated as part of an overall assessment of the potential environmental impact whenever nations consider going to war in the future. (home.ecn.ab.ca/puppydog/gulfwar.htm)Reference:home.ecn.ab.ca/puppydog/gulfwar.htm