Change Resistance within Armed Forces - Research Paper Example

College: Why do some armed forces resist change, either conceptual or technological Armed forces feel comfortable with former synergy and tend to resist technological or conceptual changes or both though superior military technology is crucial to win wars though not sufficient. Technology is linear in succession where any invention is potent, improved and lethal compared to its predecessor (Creveld 89). Technology has been rebuffed earlier by strategist like Clausewitz due to the assumption that there has no enhanced technological revolution which has developed to extent of its influence and functionality to prompt future strategists like Fuller and Hart and make them include technology elements in their strategic and tactical doctrines (Irwin 19). Nevertheless, technology has for long time been a potential in civilizations and military theatres. More so, development of technology in 20th century had a big impact to be internalized as being a requisite instrument and a determining factor in warfare. The mentality has been epitomized by the nation states which continually invest large amounts of money, time and resources in research and purchase of the new technology (Creveld 19). The perception of the technology necessity was further powered by splendidly victorious operational functionality of nuclear weapons during the Second World War (WWII) and other following frantic Arms Race take on by the two preceding Superpowers. Thus, put into operation conceptual or technological change in armed forces has always been difficult and a critical task though it has usually been that manner and happens with the great rate of organization changes (Ronald 19). Whether the change is brought by external matters like the wartime scenarios or base rearrangements and closures or from internal influence through leadership decisions, it has always been difficult. Some changes may entail consolidated financial services, weapons refurbishing or fighting technicality (Lamb et al 1984). However, the armed forces may not be opposing the change but the transition or process the changes requires and its influence. In this technology age, there has been a natural inclination to overrate the role of weapons. Prevailing views showed the degree of military technological success was estimate to be astonishing and prove decisively to outcome of wars. The importance of technological succession in the military is that the new equipments would provide a complete advantage that could be translated into an obvious victory. It is known the armed forces of a state are not longer neutral than state itself. The challenging assertion reviews the fact that armed forces like any institution of state get their legitimacy from state itself and established political regime (Kuhlmann 20). The points become most apposite in the liberal democracy where it is usually welcomed as a matter of principle which the armed forces entirely subservient to civil political authorities even when armed forces are deemed into professionalism (Lamb et al 19). When those implementing political power lose their popular support and the entire political regime loses a whole, its legitimacy no longer take pleasure in acceptance and trust of population and the state's organizations are considered inappropriate upon bringing the legitimacy of armed forces into question. In the civilian authority, the opportunity made available by technology would persuade the belief that technology is the only determinant factor in warfare. Essentially, technology is perceived to be the determining factor which offers the potency if deployed which could wane the enemies resolve and fighting capacity (Irwin 13). More so, the induction of technology would limit casualties since mounting casualties may have similar implications of wrath occurrence in its population and a drooping morale which would influence the army plans and resistance to fight. In these circumstances, it becomes a professional responsibility though it goes contrary to standard assumptions of the liberal democracy as well as the apolitical nature of military. This is especially vital in Taiwan where in over 50 years the country has been governed by one political party (KMT). As a result, the Taiwanese military became identified with political regime. In Taiwanese elections of 2000, a new political party (DPP) gained power for the first time and had a diverse agenda especially in the future respect of the mainland China which it viewed now and then as irrelevance (Irwin 19). These constitutional and political developments have always an impact on future relations between the armed forces, Taiwanese people and political authorities. The close political nearness between KMT and Taiwanese armed forces got interrupted and gets to look to novel days of legitimacy to make provision for Taiwan future natural security and future defense. This results into a significant impact on the established Taiwanese military culture in which the affected places takes time to adjust. In most states and in most times, there prevails a time when there is consonance between the armed forces and population on the other hand. Actually the desirable state of affairs is becoming to bring future friction (Lamb et al 47). Since the end of cold war and rest of international tension in the past decade, there has been public pressure to minimize the defense budgets and expectations particularly in the west where the military culture which should closely view the parent society (Ronald 25). There has also been a move to civilize the armed forces and require them conform closely to national and international laws relating to human rights, anti-discrimination and equal opportunities. In some cases, those developments are welcomed since they contribute significantly to minimization of coercive force as a way to resolve international and domestic conflict. Conversely, they tend to oppose the military tradition and challenge to put blockages between the armed forces and the state they serve (Ronald 28). Traditionally conservative through nature, the armed forces tend to resist and focus on objectives and policies which are accountable mainly the defense of state and citizens and protection of the national interests (Lamb et al 50). The Taiwanese armed forces are not different from other military forces in this matter. This functional requirements is the one which has conventionally emphasized particular on the military cultural features like the high value placed on respect for authorities, discipline and emphasis on the team work, esteem on the human characteristics like courage, heroism, loyalty, commitment, self-sacrifice, bravery, physical prowess, and stoicism. Infect most of the socialization process of new recruits necessary to experience in the armed forces is established precisely to enhance those values (Ronald 29). The China's military strategies and planners countenance increasingly hard dilemma as they organize their defense modernization plans in the 21st century. Their armed forces started to get small amount of weapons, technologies, and equipment which are designed for war in latter part of 20st century. More so, advances in the military technology signify potential revolution in the war conduct during the 21st century. wide publication by the Chinese military analysts demonstrate their difficult understanding that face the armed forces as they struggle with implications of advanced technologies toward war in the next century. With the openness in which the China's military leaders and analysts confer to the current problems by their armed forces, we first review connotation of advanced technology warfare as indicated by the Chinese military reviewers. Finally we scrutinize the types of feasible plans and concepts of operations that are contemplated by Chinese planners as they look for specific technologies which offset the benefits of potential adversaries. Revising the China's national military approach resulted in the most crucial transformation of PLA missions following the start of People's Republic in 1949. Up to 1985, the continental defense opposing the massive ground attack was the PLA's basic military mission (Ronald 32). PLA strategy and operations depended mostly on the superior forces against attack and conducting the enclosed attrition warfare to drain the enemy's potential and superior technology forsaking him weak and exposing to counter offensive that could elect him from the Chinas territory. Although the present of military technology is impressive, the operational art and doctrine showed by coalition forces as they utilize those new technologies for victory on the battlefield were considered equally salient (Kuhlmann 29). These analysts found China nowadays disadvantaged in most areas of technology problem to near-term and future warfare. Despite the understanding that superior military technologies alter the war conduct, PLA authors continue to fight with mix of technology and ideology. The military culture is observed organizationally as hierarchical and rule driven institution. However, it is as well an institution driven by a strong culture and its own sense in consideration with external social and political environment (Sweet and Franklyn 64). The cultural sense is adequately strong as the policies which seem odds could meet the considerable resistance from top to bottom of hierarchy. The American military is web organizational and applicable cultures in various levels involving the participant culture which comprises of values and attitudes of individuals who serve. The military organizations and sub organizations, that is marines and navy have distinctive culture which are crucially effective on the manner organizations perform and react on several situations. Despite of this variability through and within the services, the military is described as organization based on formal, rule-driven and hierarchical structure with values which are efficiency, stability and predictability in operations. The structure is reinforced and supported by participants and organizational cultures which are conservative and based on tradition, history and on group conformity, loyalty and more oriented towards obedience of superiors. Any policy change should take place in the military environment (Kuhlmann 27). Most of observers have viewed that the extent in which the conservative military organization values stability and predictability is implicitly considerable to changes which are aversely dictated outside organization. Militaries have always seen themselves apart from other large societies which support them and are constituted to protect. The American military during the cold war through its quick revolution of people in different assignments and posts and via its considerable forward presence in oversees which enhanced separateness and fostered the separated military society and family. The demographic gap in between American military and rest of society has been widened in the last decade with enlarged numbers of two-career families and decline of officer's wife as the occupation. Anyway, most of values in the military families still mirror those of smaller towns and various decades past, which could show the selective enlistment to inherent in the entire volunteer force (Smith et al 23). For most of the senior military people in leadership positions currently, there remain a legacy of hostility in between the American military and rest of society that got to the peak during the Vietnam War (Sweet and Franklyn 45). For those people, the imposing of opposed aspects in the American society of military usually called the "social experimentation" provokes familiar and harsh feelings that could have no support among the top military leaders. Nevertheless the custom of obedience retains and most of observers argue to carry the day. Again, the currently budgetary context could restrain change when the implementation planning fails to be taken responsible. Since the budgets are stagnant, all the new programs are considered as coming at the expense of aged and cherished ones. We then expect that the more the incorporation process it costs, the more it get resented.Another reason of resenting change in the military is that it never makes a lot of sense if the change could serve whatever legitimate needs of military (Kuhlmann 24). Objections that policies are not founded on the needs are toughened by the feeling among most of the military members who not even the president is unwilling for the change. Rather, they believe his support just reflects the commitments which are made in the presidential campaign in exchange of electoral support (Smith et al 43). Although the culture and military structure are the major key features of policy context which are unique to problems of implementing policies, the implementation process is unique in some extent (Sweet and Franklyn 14). Consequently, the empirical findings and usual principles which are delivered from policy studies of implementation and organizational changes, give lessons of the policy implementation. Implementation itself can be described as the carrying out of basic policy decisions which are often incorporated in the statute but can take the form of crucial executive orders or even court decisions (Smith et al 43). Ideally the decision identifies the challenge to be addressed and stipulates the objectives which are to be issued in variety of ways, and structures of implementation process. The policy analysts usually tamper with the change process into two overall theories of getting the desirable organizational changes. The general concept of warfare determinant is not rightfully dissected as there are various determinants which are prevalent in the warfare History in 20th century. Victory is more usual than the induced efforts of technology, tactics, strategy and human will (Creveld 89). With the assurance that technology is not the only determining factor, tactics and renaissance of strategy would continue. Work Cited ARMY WAR COLL STRATEGIC STUDIES INST CARLISLE BARRACKS PA. The Chinese Armed Forces in the 21st Century. Larry M Wortzel. DIANE Kuhlmann, Jean Callaghan. Ilitary and society in 21st century Europe: a comparative analysis. George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies. LIT Verlag Mnster, 2000 David Pion-Berlin. Through corridors of power: institutions and civil-military relations in Argentina. Penn State Press, 1997 Ronald R. Sims. Accountability and radical change in public organizations. Ronald R. Sims. Greenwood Publishing Group, 1998 National Defense Research Institute (U.S.). Sexual orientation and U.S. military personnel Policy: options and assessment. RAND Library collection. United States. Dept. of Defense. Office of the Secretary of Defense, Rand Corporation. Rand Corporation, 1993 Martin Edmonds, Michael M. Tsai. Defending Taiwan: the future vision of Taiwan's defence Policy and military strategy. Routledge, 2003 T. Alexander Smith, Raymond Tatalovich. Cultures at war: moral conflicts in western Democracies. Canadian electronic libraryAuthorsEditionillustratedPublisherUniversity of Toronto Press, 2003 (Smith et al 2003) David, F Strategic Management, Columbus: Merrill Publishing Company, 1989 Lamb, Robert, Boyden. Competitive strategic management, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1984 Sweet, Franklyn H. Strategic Planning... A Conceptual Study, Bureau of Business Research, The University of Texas, 1964 Creveld, Martin.Van. Technology and War: From 2000 BC to the Present. New York: The Free Press, 1989. Irwin, A.S.H. Liddell Hart and the Indirect Approach to Strategy. London: Routledge, 1993. Read More