Introduction
The modern world is at war in a way as real as the Blitzkriegs of the early 1940s and the jungle battles of Vietnam, or even the massed line formations of the American Civil War. In terms of "Generations" of warfare, the 21st century is currently in the 4th. What does this mean? Why does this matter? More importantly, what does this have to do with International Relations?
We can put off the first question for now, there's plenty of time for that later. Now as to the relevance of the subject at hand, I believe that history and the development of the modern world is inextricably linked to the ways nation-states wage wars. One is dependent on the other and the other is dependent on the one. War is, after all, a continuation of politics by other means.
First coined in 1989 to describe the new decentralized form of fighting that the United States was faced with, the concept of the "4th Generation" was expanded on in 2006 by the book The Sling and the Stone by Col. Thomas X. Hammes, USMC. The idea that modern military power will be measured in terms of armies and firepower is becoming antiquated, even as the Pentagon pushes more advanced weapon systems and multi-million dollar fighters designed to swat dozens of other warplanes out of the sky.
In light of a modern military's sky-shattering ability to destroy, a smart opponent becomes subversive, attacking the enemy's metaphorical "rear" in terms of infrastructure at home. An example: cyberspace becomes the new battlefield, and hacking attacks the new surgical strike.
War has always been a method of imposing one's will on an opponent. This will not change. What will change, however, is the methods of waging war. Missing the moment of change will inevitably lead to bloodshed. From the Somme to the Blitzkrieg to the actions of the Comment Crew, each of these events could be taken as a herald of the changing times, with the perquisite disasters to those who failed to notice the newest developments in war.
This will be a five-part series exploring the changes to warfare throughout the past 400 years of military and political history. Unfortunately, it will be Eurocentric as I am best versed in European and Western history. In all fairness, the idea of Generations of warfare is also a rather Eurocentric idea, as you will see.
So grab a helmet, hang on, and let's see if you can't learn some history/politics/strategy/ economics along the way.
In light of a modern military's sky-shattering ability to destroy, a smart opponent becomes subversive, attacking the enemy's metaphorical "rear" in terms of infrastructure at home. An example: cyberspace becomes the new battlefield, and hacking attacks the new surgical strike.
War has always been a method of imposing one's will on an opponent. This will not change. What will change, however, is the methods of waging war. Missing the moment of change will inevitably lead to bloodshed. From the Somme to the Blitzkrieg to the actions of the Comment Crew, each of these events could be taken as a herald of the changing times, with the perquisite disasters to those who failed to notice the newest developments in war.
This will be a five-part series exploring the changes to warfare throughout the past 400 years of military and political history. Unfortunately, it will be Eurocentric as I am best versed in European and Western history. In all fairness, the idea of Generations of warfare is also a rather Eurocentric idea, as you will see.
So grab a helmet, hang on, and let's see if you can't learn some history/politics/strategy/ economics along the way.
No comments:
Post a Comment