Change of Effects of Warfare on Combatants due to New Technological Advancements - Essay Example

?Running Head: Change of Effects Change of Effects of Warfare on Combatants due to New Technological Advancements since Second Industrial Revolution Student Name University Name Subject Name Instructor Name Date of Submission Change of Effects of Warfare on Combatants due to New Technological Advancements since Second Industrial Revolution Introduction This paper enumerates three changes in effects of warfare on combatants due to new technological advancements Since the Second Industrial Revolution. These changes are multidimensional and complicated. Most of the ideas and opinions have been propounded by the means of an example-based approach. Dependable sources for reference purpose have bee carefully selected and utilized. Research Question How have the effects of warfare on combatants changed as a result of new technologies of warfare since the Second Industrial Revolution (c. 1850)? Thesis Statement The changes in the effects of warfare on the combatants due to the utilization of post Second Industrial Revolution weapons technology have made them more impersonal, lethal, cruel, and confident. Armed Conflict Becomes More Impersonal and Lethal The effect: Since the Second Industrial Revolution warfare has become increasingly dependent on technology. This dependence has caused armed conflict to become progressively more impersonal and lethal. Discussion: The modification in the nature of armed conflicts is due to the fact that the combatants are becoming more impervious and also they are lethally very much enabled. In the ancient and medieval ages, combatants used to fight each other in battlefields that generally did not cover the civilian areas. One-to-one battles were not unknown between the warriors and that used to be a matter of glory. Weapons like swords and spears could kill only one combatant at a time. But mass killing by using incendiary bombing, as had been seen in Germany and Japan, testify the fact that the new technologies have made the combatants extremely lethal (Grossman, 1995). Before the Second Industrial Revolution, a warrior has a glorious appeal. He/ she could be a crusader, a protector, or a savior. This appealing warlike personality cult motivated the youth during the post Second Industrial Revolution wars as well. The World War I is a good example of this. But with the advent of new technologies, the appeal of valor culminated at dangerous impersonal missions (Dennis, 2001). According to Smith (1983), “The introduction of the gun will serve in the future to make war more rational and less the product of purely personal enmity.” In ancient warfare, we find personalities like Hector and Achilles who fought for personal glory. However, generals like Trotsky led the masses for almost completely impersonal movements. Rapid fire and faster and widespread communication actually impersonalized warfare (American Political Science Association, 1983). As for lethality once again, World War I provides a good example. Infamous chemical warfare during this period had made the ground reality similar to “Dying like so many rats in a trap” (Cook, 2002: 47). Such situation never came up in the wars of the ancient civilizations. Increased Cruelty The Effect: Second Industrial Revolution has begot such war techniques that cannot be limited among the combatants only. In modern warfare, the degree of civilian casualty is very high and this fact testifies for the increased cruelty of the combatants. Discussion: Atrocities committed by the ancient and medieval combatants were less terrific and had lower psychological effect. In technology-based modern warfare, things are different; especially, psychological effects are too profound. Siege warfare is an important sub-discipline in this regard. During the siege of the cities in the pre 1850 environment, less prominent terror techniques were generally used. Examples of medieval siege warfare like the Siege of Calais (France) by British forces show that human values prevailed to at least some extent in the war. Although siege of Peking by the Mongols was a very cruel event, lack of modern technology makes it comparatively mild with respect to modern sieges (Gravett and Hook, 1990). Modern siege warfare can lead to controlled and cruel massacre. Siege of Sarajevo is an apt example. According to Bassiouni (1994), “UNICEF reported that of the estimated 65,000 to 80,000 children in the city (Sarajevo); at least 40 per cent had been directly shot by snipers; 51 per cent had seen someone killed;” and a staggering 73% of the children had had their homes shelled. In the pre 1850 siege warfare, things like sniper attacks and shelling were unknown. During World War II, it was considered by the Allied Forces “that Berlin, Dresden, Leipzig and Chemnitz – all just behind the German lines on the Eastern Front now – would be suitable targets as they were all vital communications and supply centers for the Eastern Front” (HM Government and Deltaweb International Ltd, 2004). Finally, these cities faced the horror of incendiary bombing and thousands of civilian deaths. Killing unarmed civilians cannot be a glorious task. But applications of modern war technology almost certainly lead to such scenarios. Hence, modern warfare has increased cruelty. Aggressive Diplomacy Backing Increased Confidence The effect: Second Industrial Revolution has changed international diplomacy as well. Modern combatants are aware of the diplomatic developments, and are far more confident since even the isolated and poor countries can threaten to use weapons of mass destruction; and hence utilize aggressive diplomacy through media. Discussion: Weaker and isolated economies often used technology to raise the morale of their armies. For example, Greek catapult technology was often used by the city states of ancient Greece to ward off enemy and help their combatants to defend the forts and cities confidently. (Hacker, 1968) After industrial revolution of 1850, this effect of technology use has become more prominent and profound. North Korea is an excellent example of this effect. Its economy is practically ruined. “However, the North Korean nuclear test certainly prompted Japan to develop a MD system in cooperation with the U.S. In turn, it would push Beijing to spend more money in developing advanced nuclear weapons.” (Joo and Kwark, 2007) This proves that use of advanced technologies can help even a poor country to draw international attention and raise military concern. This emboldens its army too. Recent military exercises further show the change in North Korean military attitude. After Asia, lets move to Africa. Under NATO attack, Libya is today internationally isolated. However, the western countries are still skeptical about a possible secret chemical weapons program. Gaddafi, the Libyan dictator, utilizes this psychological effect and says, “Your (the western powers’) houses, offices, families will be legitimate military targets, just as you have attacked our houses.” (Gaddafi cited in Kine, 2011). This sort of intimidation by the leadership is inspiring the Gaddafi supporters in Libya to fight the NATO forces confidently. In sum, with scientific development, combatants of even the isolated and poor countries are progressively becoming aggressive and most importantly, confident. Conclusion The first effect discussed in the paper makes the combatants more impersonal and lethal in the battlefield. The second effect makes the combatant more cruel and insensitive to the civilian deaths. The third effect helps the leadership to adopt an aggressive diplomacy and create a real or proxy war situation, where the combatants are confident of success. The combined upshot of these three major effects is that the world is gradually becoming a dangerous place after the Second Industrial Revolution. This sort of reality compels us to reflect on the question that whether the advancements in military technology have been a boon or bane. References American Political Science Association. (1983). The American Political Science Review, Volume 77, Issues 3-4. Washington D.C.: Author. Bassiouni, M.C. (1994). Annex VI: Study of the battle and siege of Sarajevo (part 1/10). Retrieved July 25, from http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/comexpert/ANX/VI-01.htm. Cook, T. (2002). “Dying like so many rats in a trap.” Gas warfare and the Great War soldier. The Army Doctrine and Training Bulletin, 5 (4), 47-56. Denis, T. St. (2001). The Dangerous Appeal of the Warrior. Retrieved July 27, from http://www.journal.dnd.ca/vo2/no2/doc/31-38-eng.pdf. Gravett, C. and Hook, R. (1990). Medieval Siege Warfare. Westminster, MD: Osprey Publishing. Grossman, D. (1995). The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society. New York: Londres, Little, Brown and Company. HM Government and Deltaweb International Ltd. (2004). RAF History – Bomber Command 60th Anniversary. Retrieved July 25, from http://www.raf.mod.uk/bombercommand/dresden.html. Hacker, B.C. (1968). Greek catapults and catapult technology: Science, Technology, and War in the ancient world. Technology and Culture, 9 (1), 34-50. Joo, S.H. and Kwark, T.H. (2007). North Korea’s Second Nuclear Crisis and Northeast Asian Security. Burlington: Ashgate Publishing Company. Kine, J. (2011). Gaddafi: We are Like Locusts | NewsAroundThe World.net. Retrieved July 28, from http://www.newsaroundtheworld.net/gaddafi-we-are-like-grasshoppers/171000. Smith, G.B. (1983). Hegel’s views on war, the state, and international relations. American Political Science Review, 77 (3), 624-632. Read More