Learning from the Past

MIDN 3/C Ionatan A. Soule, USN

When joining the military one must be fully aware of what they are getting themselves into. While we, the military of the United States of America, may not currently be engaged in an all-out war, we are still engaged in many armed conflicts around the globe. Things may be relatively peaceful now, but there is no guarantee that they will remain as such or that one will not have to partake in some sort of combative role. Put simply, there is still a very large chance that one will be put into harm’s way and be required to make the decision of whether or not to take the life of another human being. As a future officer in the Navy, I will be directly responsible for both the wellbeing of my people and the decision of whether or not it is morally right and just to eliminate a target…I will be responsible for the way in which we conduct war. Sun Tzu’s The Art of War is a masterpiece on military tactics written during the Zhou Dynasty of the Warring States period in China around 750-450 BCE. Though dated, this book contains very important insights on strategy that, with a little modification, are still applicable to today’s modern warfare landscape.

The period itself, the Warring States period, was a period of conflict and change—change of borders, rulers, culture, etc… During this conflict, armies devised new military methods and strategies. By studying this period and the Art of War, I will be better prepared to lead in the future. I believe that one of the most important lines in the Art of War is, “Ultimate excellence lies not in winning every battle, but in defeating the enemy without ever fighting” (Art of War). This quote speaks directly to the truth that war is worse than hell. As an officer, one must not be too willing to charge headfirst into battle. Actual combat must be reserved as an action of last resort when all other diplomatic means have been utterly exhausted. It is important to keep this mentality at the forefront of one’s mind when making military decisions.

Another key insight of Master Sun is the following: “A ruler can bring misfortune upon his troops in three ways: [1] to advance or retreat when they should not, […2] ignorant interference in military decisions, […and 3] ignorant meddling in military appointments” (Art of War). What I glean from this advice is the following: knowledge is power. In each of the three instances the ruler, in our case officer, is making a poor decision because they are ignorant of the truth. In the first, the officer is not up to date on the situation on the ground, sea, or air and makes a poor judgment call that could have been easily avoided had they put time into understanding the situation better. The second is not taking the time to fully understand and analyze what has been decided before interfering with it, an action that could cause chaos and confusion. The third is encouraging anything but a merit-based system of advancement. Those in power should not be there because you like them, they should be there because they have proven time and time again that they are the most qualified for the job, because they have proven to have the necessary experience, insight, and most importantly, knowledge to perform the job well. As an officer, one’s first task should then be to learn—listen and learn as much as you can and this can be achieved through many different means.

One such means is by studying the past. Though Sun Tzu may have lived in a different era, there can be no question that he was a great military leader and strategist. He took the time to compile what he had learned so that we, the future officers of the navy, could learn from him without committing the same mistakes he did.

Word count: 658

Justified War?

MIDN 3/C Ionatan Soule, USN

The First Crusade was the first Christian attempt to retake the holy land promised in the Old Testament. Even though the Crusaders defended Constantinople, they had no greater claim to the holy land than any of the other Abrahamic religions.

To discuss this topic fully, it is important to recognize the significance of the holy land, primarily Jerusalem, has for each of the three religions: Christianity, Islam, and Judaism. To the Christians, Jerusalem is home to the majority of Jesus’ actions and life, especially his death and resurrection. The Church of the Holy Sepulcher is supposedly built on the hill of Calvary, the location of Jesus Crucifixion, and his tomb, where he was resurrected, is located inside. The significance of these is events is core to the Christian religion and it is no wonder that they believe they had the rightful claim to this land during the first crusade. The Muslims would disagree, however, because Jerusalem also contains the al-Aqsa Mosque. This mosque is the third most holy location in the Islamic tradition because it is said that Mohammad ascended into heaven there. For the Jews, Jerusalem contains the Wailing Wall which supported the Holy Temple before its collapse. Additionally, they believe the foundation stone from which the rest of the world was created is located there. All these reasons make it clear that every branch of the Abrahamic religions has significant claims to Jerusalem.

Since every branch has a very good and valid reason why Jerusalem should be under their control, it would be unfair to give one branch sole rights to the area for these reasons. Looking back to the first crusade, the crusaders may have been fighting for what they thought were noble reasons, but their reasons were no nobler than those of the Muslims and Jews. Since they did not have a greater claim to Jerusalem, other methods must be used to determine the justifiability or unjustifiability of the crusades.

Using Just War Theory as an ulterior way to analyze the situation, it is clear that the Christian Crusaders were not justified in capturing Jerusalem. Despite their claims, the local population—with similar claims—had already inhabited that region for many centuries and had established their own government and way of life. Since they posed no threat to the European powers, Europe was not retaliating against an aggressor, rather it was the aggressor thereby making their actions unjust.

Though the Crusaders had many biblical and traditional reasons to fight the first crusade, they were not justified in doing so. An ideal solution would have been to diplomatically arrange safe passage to all faiths in order to make the pilgrimage to the holy lands and practice their beliefs without the need to control the region outright.

Word count: 459

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-26934435

Ancient Influences

MIDN 3/C Ionatan A. Soule

Sun Tzu’s Art of war has been studied for centuries. Even though the context in which he wrote might be outdated, much of his advice through a little abstraction is still incredibly applicable to modern times, especially modern warfare. Here at the Academy, the goal is to produce capable and competent military leaders who will win decisive battles when the time comes. In order to be able to do this, they must be exceptionally well versed in decision making and strategic analysis. All of these components are mentioned and covered by Master Sun. Certain aspects between his doctrine and what is taught at the Naval Academy is remarkably similar and this is no coincidence. Master Sun’s overarching philosophy is one of knowledge and preparation and is very similar to what is taught at the Naval Academy. I think that a proper mixture of both is best as a military leader.

Sun Tzu first stipulates that war is, “A matter to be pondered carefully” (1). This could not be truer and is one of the reasons that officers in the US military must have a college degree and that the Academy exists. He then identifies five areas with which officers should be familiar: 1) the Way, 2) the Heaven, 3) the Earth, 4) Command and 5) Discipline. The Way, “Causes men to be of one mind with their rulers, to live or die with them, and never to waver” (1-2). Translated to modern English this simply means unit cohesion—an integral component of Academy education. Unity and the bonds that are formed are taught as the foundation upon which militaries are built and can be as small as a two-man sniper team or the classic four-man fire team. Sun Tzu’s concept of the Heaven, which includes Ying and Yang does not directly translate into anything taught here. The closest thing I can think of is the need for proper balance in all aspects of warfare to achieve the optimum result. The aspect covered by Earth is taught here extensively because it encompasses all physical aspects of the battlefield: “Height and depth, distance and proximity, ease and danger, open and confined ground, life and death” (2). The final two, Command and Discipline, are incredibly important here at the academy. “Wisdom, integrity, compassion, courage, severity” (2) and “Organization, chain of command, control of expenditure” (2) are heavily stressed here at the Academy in classes such as ethics, leadership, and law. On top of this, these are principle tenants of every single training we conduct.

Because of all this, I would argue that there is a clear similarity between Sun Tzu’s overarching message and what is taught here at the Academy. One difference I did find was Sun Tzu’s principle that, “If [the enemy is] strong, avoid him” (2). For the most part, the Academy teaches this. But it is also a habit in our military to honor those who have the courage to charge an enemy position when death is certain, an action against Sun Tzu’s teachings.

Regardless, I believe that both are still incredibly similar. If I had to choose which is more effective, I would choose the Academy’s simply because it has proven its effectiveness in our modern time.

Word count: 540

New and Different

By MIDN 3/C Ionatan Soule

While the Judeo-Christian model of monotheism is common in our modern western culture, this was not always the case. The birth and death of Jesus Christ, beginning what became known collectively as the religion of Christianity, introduced something new into a relatively peaceful time—the Pax Romana. Under Caesar Augusta, the Pax Romana was a time of growth, abundance, and peace for the Roman Empire. Like a pebble thrown into a glass pond, the establishment of Christianity sent ripples that disrupted the established peace. To the Romans, the spread of Christianity posed a distinct and unique threat to the Empire simply because it was new and, more importantly, different.

In the beginning, Christianity posed no threat to the Empire simply because it had not reached the necessary critical mass. This soon changed, however, as it grew to acquire more and more followers. Its rapid expansion and growing popularity rightly caused worry among the Roman polytheists because Christianity believed in a monotheistic model. Immediately an issue can be seen: poly- versus mono-theist. But, there was more to it than just this disagreement. As laid out in “Voyages,” Roman gods played an integral part in Roman life. They were worshipped during religious sacrifices and looked upon to bring prosperity to the Roman Empire. Each god represented a different aspect of life and each was prayed to individually depending on the nature of the prayer. The fact that Christians refused to partake in these ceremonies insulted other Romans and raised many suspicions. Additionally, since Romans believed that the gods were actively protecting the Roman Empire, the Christian’s refusals to participate threatened the Empire and the Pax Romana.

Another and possibly more serious issue was the semi-divinity of the Roman Emperors. Christians, believing in only one god, refused outright to give the Emperor the respect and treatment he demanded from the Roman people. Their refusal to follow the Emperor and acknowledge his divine status was the most threatening aspect of the Judeo-Christian model. They simply were not buying into the Roman system. In Roman’s eyes, the threat compounded when Christian preachers began voicing their ideas, teaching in the street things that directly opposed Roman’s religious and governmental status quo.

The early Christians posed a threat to the Roman Empire simply because they were different. Though they may have posed no physical threat, their new ideas opposed the Roman ideals that were sustaining the Pax Romana.

Word count: 400

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/romans/christianityromanempire_article_01.shtml

Democracy Needs a Buffer

By MIDN 3/C Ionatan A. Soule, USN

Churchill once said, “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.” I would agree and add that what makes it the worst is its inherent messiness. By allowing the populace to participate in the arduous task of legislating, one can immediately see the difficulty that will arise come the time to agree on what a law should include, agree on how the law should be worded, and agree on how the law should be implemented and interpreted. When it’s hard for a group of five friends to make plans to go see a movie, then how can anyone expect democracy, where the voice of every single person can be heard on every single topic, to be efficiently implemented? Though potential problems are evident, democracy is still so much better than other forms of government—dictatorship, monarchy, oligarchy—because it does allow for the will of the people to be heard. The question then is how it should be implemented. The two major options are a direct democracy and a representative democracy. Of these two, a representative democracy is much better than a direct democracy because it still allows for the voice of the people to be heard, while providing a buffer from mob rule through its indirect nature.

Athenians pioneered democracy in the form of a direct democracy. On paper, this form was the best because it allowed each individual to have a voice. Unfortunately, when put into practice it quickly ran into issues. The primary issue was mob rule—whatever the people wanted they got. One example is when people began demanding compensation to attend to their civic duty of participating and voting in government. Of course, the voter would agree to that proposition. Unfortunately, this created a slippery slope and before long, Athenians were getting paid to go to their own festivals. This ruined Athens’s economy and left no money for other governmental functions such as self-defense and public works.

The Founding Fathers of the United States solved the issue of mob rule through the creation of a representative democracy. The people would vote for representatives who would then go make the decisions in government. Not only did this solution inhibit mob rule while still giving the people a voice, but it also guaranteed that the people making the decisions would be educated to perform their civic duties. All of this helps guarantee the most populous participation in the most efficient manner. One pitfall to a representative democracy is that the representative ignores his constituents because he is, after all, independent of them once voted into office. Though this could allow a representative to go “rogue” and do whatever he/she wants, it also could be beneficial to the government. If the US mob wanted to get paid to vote, then the representative could refuse to heed their wishes knowing that it could potentially ruin the economy and thus serve as a buffer. As long as the representative puts the good of the whole at the forefront of his objectives, then representative democracy is the best form of government there is.

Word count: 515

Is this really Sparta?

By: MIDN 3/C Ionatán A. Soule, USN

Zack Snyder’s 300 is truly an epic movie that does a great job of captivating its audience with strong dialogues and dramatic fights. The question, however, arises: is it historically accurate? Like many historical movies that are not documentaries, I would argue that 300 follows the general history, but takes great liberties when it comes to cinematic elements.

Much of the general storyline is accurate. It follows the life of Leonidas I from birth until his death in battle. In the movie, the newborn Leonidas I is inspected by priests over a cliff. If he were deemed unfit, the priests would have thrown him off. Historically, Spartans did do this because they were looking for the strongest newborns, ones that would make the best soldiers or wives. Later in his childhood, Leonidas I is tasked with killing a wolf as a rite of passage. Actually, Spartan teens were tasked with the killing of a slave. To pass the rite of passage, they would have to accomplish the task without being caught. While the director chose to remain somewhat true to history, it is clear that he altered the facts in order to present a more appealing story to the audience.

Similar choices are made throughout the movie. In reality, Spartans wore significant armor to protect themselves in battle. Snyder, however, has them scantily dressed to show off their toned and chiseled bodies. Another character who does not match up with historical evidence is king Xerxes. In the movie, Xerxes’ nine-foot tall frame towers over all other characters accentuating his supposed divine power when in reality he was a normal sized individual.

Despite these inaccuracies, the plotline follows history with surprising accuracy. The Spartans did in fact hold wave after wave of Persians back despite the Oracle at Delphi’s warning. And, ultimately, their defeat was caused by the betrayal of a Shepard who showed the Persians a path around.

I think that such movies as this provide an easily accessible exposure to historical stories but not historical facts. Unfortunately, the liberties that the director took when making certain decisions, while making the movie more visually attractive, detract heavily from history and the known truth of the matter. While the audience may enjoy the movie immensely, the movie will cause uneducated individuals to leave with inaccurate information. This is a problem because it will cause people to believe things that are simply not true.