Lessons Studied during the Making of Strategy Course - Essay Example

? Lessons studied during The Making of Strategy Lessons studied during The Making of Strategy A strategy is considered a process whereby individuals have the capability to adapt to the changing or shifting conditions and circumstances in the world. This is because the world is dominated by ambiguity and uncertainty and as a result, there is no place for chance. In the world, that we are living in, the intensions and the actions of other individuals remain unknown and seem like a shadow from a distance. Hence, the use of a strategy proves to be of assistance in preparation of the unknown and future events in the near future. Employing strategies makes it possible for one to fill the entire loopholes that uncertainty poses. This is a possibility because all the possible outcomes resulting from a specific action are studied with caution and hence eliminating the element of surprise. Strategies has been successfully used in the past especially in the military when they are about to face their adversaries. Majority of the great military leaders have realized success in battlefields through the implementation of strategies, which led to the development of very efficient tactics, which overwhelmed their adversaries. For a particular strategy to work effectively, the implementation process must be well comprehended so that decisions can be made in a timely manner. This, as a result, promotes efficiency and hence effective decision-making. There are a number of areas, which are of interest, in the making of the strategy course. A strategy implementation model has to be developed. This model enables the particular organization involved in implementing strategies to be in the capacity to adapt to changes through integration mechanisms and objectives necessary for the implementation of the strategy. In the application of strategies, it is also necessary to understand the implementation of the strategy and hence the forces acting in opposition of the strategy will be noticeable and hence develop ways to overcome the resistance. According to Richard K. Betts in, Is strategy an illusion? the use of strategies is the key to the realization of success in the battle field. This success is considered in terms of how morally tenable war is or its consequences in political effectiveness. He considers strategy to be the link between political ends and military means whereby each is a product of the other. Hence, he says that strategy provides the rationality of using force, which results in loss of lives and finances. From his book, he emphasizes that, without strategy, war is a lost cause and hence, he considers it mindless. Power without strategy, according to him, is like a loose cannon, which obliterates everything in its way. Hence, these mindless, which take event because of not applying strategies, are considered criminal acts. Hence, it is the duty of the politicians and soldiers to determine the best strategy to be applied and those opposing the use of strategy are considered pacifists1. Although the application and use of strategy is a necessity in the battlefield, it is not always possible to apply. According to individuals who have had experience in the battlefield, there is a considerable doubt in the capability of strategies to determine the outcomes of a particular activity. From a skeptics point of view, a strategy is just an illusion because of the reason that the events in a battle field as a result of implemented policies to determine the outcomes of wars is very complex and unpredictable. On the instance that this is true, then war is not an instrument of policy. Effective strategy faces a lot of criticism. This is because there is no way of determining whether a particular strategy is effective before its application in the battlefield. Murray, Bernstein and Knox, eds., in The making of Strategy state that there is a lot of focus on the dynamics involved in military revolution. Military revolution is seen to set the bridge between the dynamics involved in military revolution and military affairs. According to this book, many phenomena’s have been implemented over the past centuries. One of them is the is the military revolution. The occurrence of these military revolutions was influenced by changes in and social life. Military institutions also experienced many changes, which occurred because of the revolutions witnessed in military affairs2. Most books on the implementation of war strategies are seen to focus on the on the theorists who happened to develop the strategies whereas other focus on the great military leaders present in the times of war. This book, on the other hand, focuses on the way rulers in the past poorly implemented and messy processes of strategizing in the time of war. This book hence proves to be great importance to strategists and to the students of statecraft. This book shows and analyses how the rulers and states in the past had made and implemented strategy and this is depicted within a common and interpretive network. The constants within the world of the strategist, which is changing rapidly, are clearly brought out. The forces that have resulted in the transformation of strategy are also brought out with clarity and their possibility of continued transformation of strategy in the future. The creation of strategy, in this book, is mostly concentrated on the processes through which states and the rulers in these states managed to develop strategy3. In the book, On War, Carl Clausewitz analyzes war not from perspective but from a theological point of view. The author is seen to define war as acts of violence directed towards opponents in a bid to compel the opponents to fulfill the will of the perpetrators. He also added that war was not an isolated act and that the political decisions made are the ones, which resulted to war. Hence, the party to blame for the occurrence of war is the government and not the military. In addition to war, being considered an elaborate duel or a comedy in the eyes of the party that emerges victorious, war is seen to be a gamble or a game whereby both subjectively and objectively4. The theory of war through an analytical investigation might at times prove beneficial in terms of judgment and reason. Some of the factors to put into consideration in the occurrence of war are the means and ends in which warfare was executed. This is mostly comprised of the tactics and strategy employed. Strategies as used in this book are the plans put in place to achieve victory, whereas tactics are the uses to which the soldiers in the army are put to acquire victory. Hence, the real activity involved in military warfare is determining the tactics to be used in a battle. This is because tactics are what governs warfare in a battle. From the authors’ point of view, the main objective of battle is to overcome the enemy and in other cases destroy the enemy. From a political point of view, the main objective in a battle is to subject the opponents to fulfill the will of the victor. Hence, combatants have the freedom to do as they wish in a bid to establish peace including occupation of the enemy frontier districts5. In the book The Roots of Strategy, David Jablonsky, talks of the strategies and tactics that were implemented by the early theorists and strategists in history. In this book, the authors are seen to revolve around the changes that were brought about by technology and their effect on military operations and consequently the military and political strategy. These technologies saw to developments, which resulted in evolution of both sea and air strategy. These evolutions were made possible with the adoption of strategies to incorporate oil-fired engines, which were the innovative technologies at the time6. The author’s point of focus is observed to be on the principal works on air and maritime strategy. In this book, the author is able to bring out the power and influence that sea power wielded in history. This made the military to result in investing in the maritime strategy, which proved to be of great assistance in the advent of war. The maritime strategy was not the only strategy in play in this book; the air strategy was also implemented in military. The air strategy was more effective as opposed to the sea strategy. Although both of these strategies revolutionized the art of military combat, the air strategy was more effective in terms of speed and agility. The air strategy gave the opponent in battle using this strategy the upper hand and the battle was won when engaging opponents who had applied the air strategy. This book is of great importance especially to the students in the field of air and naval strategy. The book is also considered to be of support to practitioners in the field of air and naval strategies. In this book, there continuity in the development of strategy is brought forth and its effect in the future7. In the book Makers of Modern Strategy, Peter Paret analyzes war from different perspectives, in detail. War strategies are viewed from a political point of view and their social impact in the society. In this book, there is a lot of diversity in the themes that are presented by the author and they are considered from abroad perspective. This, as a result, makes the book rich in history that in the practice and theory of war from the period of the resistance to the present day. The author of the book is also observed to address military leaders who were the governors of the impersonal forces. The author also features major theorists and political leaders to some of the impersonal forces. The nuclear age brings out the relationship between the policy technology and war. The nuclear age propagated warfare to a new dimension whereby the casualties involved were in the millions. During the first and second world wars, military superiority was the determinate factor in the assertion of dominance whereby the superior countries colonized countries that weak in terms of military. The nuclear warfare was seen to be on the rise during the first and the second world wars8. War is clearly depicted in the book whereby one of the most commanding forces in the history of humankind is featured in the book. The evolution of the American strategy is clearly brought out whereby America was seen to be a force to reckon with. This was mostly due to its military superiority whereby most of the countries sought to form alliances with the United States. These alliances were formed whereby all the members benefited mutually from the coalitions. These benefits were in terms of military support in exchange of other resources in the form of raw materials. In The Art of War Martin Van Creveld writes on strategizing on how war should be waged. He is seen to critic strategies employed in the advent of war to realize victory whereby he says that they are fundamentally flawed. The author is also seen to focus on the post Second World War conflicts witnesses in the year and answers the questions that revolve around war. He also goes on to confront the future of warfare. The author also considers contemporary warfare whereby he classifies it into several categories to increase the clarity of his theory9. In his book, he is also observed to bring out the development of nuclear weaponry. These nuclear weapons were not influenced by politics in the sense that the innovative ideas that led to the development of the nuclear weapons were not influenced or affected by politics. There was no one single occurrence recorded whereby the state of processing nuclear weaponry was in a locus to change the status quo through the issuing of threats. The development of this robust weaponry led to the advent of symmetric warfare whereby minimal conflicts translated into major wars especially in the year 1945. The author also stated that war had had changed a lot throughout the years. The nation’s application of the rules that govern warfare may inhibit the victory in some nations due the perceived limitations that were imposed. Owing to this fact, conflicts, which have resulted in warfare, must entail the properties of effectiveness and efficiency to realize victory. The incorporation of both of these elements in warfare will translated into overwhelming force directed towards the opponents. Although armies have the capability to evolve because of changing circumstances, effectiveness and efficiency are crucial to the realization of success in the battlefield10. In conclusion, the application of strategy in warfare is of great importance in the battlefield in terms of becoming victorious. According to skeptics, strategy is just but an illusion in the sense that it cannot predetermine the events, which will transpire, in the battlefield. Skeptics go on to say that, that from the standpoint of soldiers who have a vast experience in warfare state that the application of strategy has limited influence in the outcome of a particular battle. Strategy as witnessed in these war books has been employed throughout the years and has evolved to robust strategy that is being used today in modern warfare. Study shows that a majority of the parties that employed strategy in the battlefield emerged victorious. Strategy involves the application of proper planning techniques, which prove effective and efficient during warfare. Because of employing strategy, the casualties because of battle were minimal. This is because strategy through careful planning assesses all the possible outcomes within a battlefield. In addition, through the application of strategy, the resources spent in terms of ammunition are minimized. Engaging in warfare is very pricy and cutbacks, in terms of expenses, are greatly encouraged. Hence, there has been a lot of success associated with implementing strategy in warfare as observed from the past battles. The use of strategy has because of technological advancement improved through the years into very effective strategies that are considered assets in the battlefield. Without a strategy in place during warfare, the soldiers tend to engage in war blindly and the probability of achieving victory is very minimal. Although strategy in the eyes of skeptics is considered to be an illusion and hence of no consequence, it has its advantages and hence it should be incorporated. Bibliography Clausewitz, Carl von. On War. Edited and Translated by Michael Howard and Peter Paret.Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1989. Jablonsky, David. Roots of Strategy (Book 4). Mechanicsburg, PA: Stackpole Books, 1999. Murray, Williamson, Bernstein, Alvin, and Knox, MacGregor, eds., The Making of Strategy: Rulers, States, and War. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1996. Paret, Peter, ed. Makers of Modern Strategy: From Machiavelli to the Nuclear Age. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986. Richard K. Betts, “Is Strategy an Illusion?” in International Security (Vol. 25, No. 2, Fall, 2000). Van Creveld, Martin. The Art of War: War and Military Thought. London: Cassell & Co, 2000. Read More