Near-Term Challenges Posed by China or Russia

INTELLECTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE PRACTICE OF WAR
Student's Name
Class Information
Date
1 Introduction
Warfare Studies is a broad and interdisciplinary field of study that encompasses a range of topics related to war and conflict. It involves the study of the causes, conduct, and consequences of war, as well as the strategies, tactics, and technologies employed by military forces. Warfare Studies also explore the broader political, social, and economic factors that shape military conflicts and the impact of war on society and individuals. Warfare Studies have become increasingly important in recent years due to several geopolitical and technological developments. The rise of new powers such as China and Russia, the changing nature of conflict, and the proliferation of new technologies such as cyber weapons and unmanned drones have created new challenges and opportunities for military forces worldwide (Cozad Mark et al. 2020, 1). Understanding Warfare Studies is crucial for military leaders, policymakers, and the broader public to navigate these challenges effectively.[Cozad Mark et al., “People’s Liberation Army Operational Concepts,” RAND Corporation, 2020, /international/capp/pubs/pubs2020.html.]
2 Discussion and Analysis
2.1 Brief Overview
The prompt asks to consider the near-term challenges posed by China or Russia and build a thesis about what strategy elements remain most crucial today. The prompt requires leveraging resources from the Warfare Studies course and using historical examples where possible. To address the prompt, it is essential to understand the models of the strategy presented in Warfare Studies (Cozad Mark et al. 2020, 1). The three models of the strategy presented in Warfare Studies are the Rational Model, the Bureaucratic Model, and the Organizational Process Model. Each Model has its strengths and weaknesses, but they all seek to provide a framework for decision-making that can optimize resource allocation and achieve strategic objectives. The prompt also requires consideration of the nature and character of war. According to the Warfare Studies course, the nature of war is characterized by the factors that shape conflicts, while the character of war is shaped by the tactics and technologies used to fight wars. Understanding the nature and character of war is critical in developing effective military strategies and tactics.[Ibid.]
The course readings emphasize the theory fundamentals of Clausewitz, who believed that war was an extension of politics and that its objective was to achieve a political aim ( Beyerchen 1992, 62). He also argued that war is a continuation of policy by other means and that success in war requires a clear understanding of the political objectives being pursued. Another important consideration for the prompt is the concept of war termination. War termination refers to ending war and establishing conditions for peace. The prompt requires consideration of war termination as an essential element of strategy. The Gulf War is another example of the importance of military theory and strategy( Beyerchen 1992, 59). The war was fought between the forces of Iraq, led by Saddam Hussein, and a coalition of forces led by the United States. The conflict was characterized by strategic moves and counter-moves, from the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait to the coalition's counter-attack. The war ultimately ended in a victory for the coalition forces, but at a high cost to the Iraqi people.[Alan Beyerchen, “Clausewitz, Nonlinearity, and the Unpredictability of War,” International Security 17, no. 3 (1992): p. 59, https://doi.org/10.2307/2539130.] [Ibid.]
The most critical strategy elements for near-term challenges posed by China or Russia combine the Rational and Bureaucratic models. This thesis assumes that the political objectives of any military conflict with China or Russia are clear and well-defined (Beyerchen 1992, 73). Therefore, the Rational Model, which seeks to optimize decision-making through systematically analyzing available information, is appropriate. At the same time, the Bureaucratic Model, which focuses on the decision-making processes within organizations and the role of stakeholders in shaping those processes, is also important. This Model recognizes that military decision-making is not a purely rational process but is shaped by organizational culture, institutional norms, and individual interests. Therefore, understanding the bureaucratic processes that shape decision-making is essential in crafting effective military strategies.[Ibid, 73-74.]
To illustrate this thesis, the Allied strategy in World War II is a historical example of a successful military strategy that combined elements of the Rational and Bureaucratic Model. The Allied strategy was based on a clear political objective: the defeat of Nazi Germany. The strategy was developed by systematically analyzing available information and coordinating military, political, and economic efforts (Anonymous 2020, 2). At the same time, the strategy was shaped by the bureaucratic processes within the Allied organizations, including the political and military leadership of the various Allied powers.[Anonymous, “Irregular Warfare “ Department of Defense, 2020, https://media.defense.gov/2020/Oct/02/2002510472/-1/-1/0/Irregular-Warfare-Annex-to-the-National-Defense-Strategy-Summary.PDF.]
2.2 The Models of Strategy, The Strategic Triangle
In military studies, the models of strategy refer to the various frameworks used to analyze, plan, and execute military operations. Among the most commonly used strategy models are the Rational Model, the Bureaucratic Model, and the Organizational Process Model. The Rational Model is based on the premise that decision-making should be systematic, rational, and objective. This Model emphasizes using data and evidence to support decision-making and the identification of the most efficient and effective means of achieving a specific objective. The Rational Model is useful for analyzing military operations in terms of their feasibility, cost, and impact.
The Bureaucratic Model, on the other hand, recognizes that decision-making is not always purely rational or objective. This Model emphasizes the importance of institutional culture, norms, and individual interests in shaping decision-making processes. The Bureaucratic Model is useful for understanding how bureaucratic processes can either facilitate or hinder the development and execution of military operations. The Organizational Process Model emphasizes the role of organizations in shaping decision-making processes. This Model recognizes that decisions are often made within organizations with their goals, objectives, and cultures(Thu et al.2011, 1). The Organizational Process Model is useful for understanding how organizational dynamics can influence the development and execution of military operations. At the heart of the Strategic Triangle is the political objective.[Thu, et al. "Lost in Translation: The American Way of War." Lost in Translation: The American Way of War | Small Wars Journal, 2011.]
At the heart of the Strategic Triangle is the political objective. The political objective refers to the desired outcome of a military operation, such as defeating an enemy, establishing a stable government, or protecting a specific territory. The political objective is the foundation upon which military strategies are built, providing the ultimate purpose and justification for military action. The political objective refers to the desired outcome of a military operation, such as defeating an enemy, establishing a stable government, or protecting a specific territory. The political objective is the foundation upon which military strategies are built, providing the ultimate purpose and justification for military action.
2.3 Importance of Balancing the Interests
Balancing the interests of the military, the government, and the people is essential for effective functioning in a democratic society (Thu et al.2011, 1). Each of these groups has its interests and priorities, and finding a way to balance these interests is critical to ensuring that the military serves the best interests of the nation as a whole. Balancing these interests requires a delicate balancing act. The military must operate effectively and respond to threats quickly and decisively, but it must also be accountable to civilian leadership and subject to civilian oversight. The government must be able to make decisions that are in the nation's best interests, but it must also be accountable to the people and subject to their scrutiny(David E. Spencer 2010, 1). The people must be able to expect that their government and military will act in their interests, but they must also be willing to support them and make sacrifices when necessary.[Ibid.] [David E. Spencer, “Reexamining the Relevance of Mao to Post-Modern Insurgency and Terrorism,” National Military Intelligence Foundation, 2010, /stable/44327141.]
2.4 The Nature and Character of War
The nature and character of war refer to the fundamental qualities that define the phenomenon of armed conflict. It encompasses not only the physical but also the psychological, social, and political aspects of war. It is an ever-changing concept shaped by historical, cultural, and technological factors (Anonymous 2020, 9). Understanding the nature and character of war is essential for developing effective military strategies and tactics. One of the most influential theories on the nature and character of war is that of Carl von Clausewitz, a 19th-century Prussian general, and military theorist. Clausewitz argued that war is a continuation of politics by other means. He believed that war is a product of the interactions between opposing forces and is shaped by the political and social context in which it occurs.[Anonymous, “Irregular Warfare Annex to the National Defense Strategy,” Department of Defense, 2020, https://media.defense.gov/2020/Oct/02/2002510472/-1/-1/0/Irregular-Warfare-Annex-to-the-National-Defense-Strategy-Summary.PDF.]
Figure SEQ Figure \* ARABIC 1: Motives Behind the American Way of War
(Thu et al. 2011, 5)[Thu, et al. The American Way of War | Small Wars Journal, 2011.]
As shown in the figure above, the American Way of War of several motives. One of the most notable examples is the Second World War, fought between the Allied powers, led by the United States, Great Britain, and the Soviet Union, and the Axis powers, led by Germany, Japan, and Italy. The conflict was characterized by strategic moves and counter-moves, from the German invasion of Poland to the Allied invasion of Normandy ( Thu et al. 2011, 7). The Allied powers ult...