Time changes technology and the speed of warfare, but time does not change human nature. Sun Tzu writes on the human nature and strategy involved in warfare, and “The Art of War” is a timeless piece of military writing for it. “The Art of War” outlines the grand strategy involved in tactical decisions that will win wars. In my Civil Military Relations class, officers main job description is defined as the managers of violence. It is especially important for us to be able to understand the strategy involved in decision making on the battlefield, as we must manage the use of violence and control the battlefield. Sun Tzu talks about mastering the profession and winning wars. As officers, we are in the business of managing the violence that, in turn, wins wars, so this writing is important to us especially.  The writing was created in 500 B.C., but is still quite applicable today.

As China becomes a rising threat on the international stage today, we can actually use ancient Chinese theology to our advantage. China is expanding in a multilateral way as they too return to their roots of the silk road with their new belt and road initiative. The PRC is expanding into the South China Sea and building sea ports (referred to as their “string of pearls”) along the coasts of Asia, Africa, and most recently Europe. Their goal is to expand Chinese culture and their sphere of influence, but this causes dangers to the rest of the small nations in the areas, and also the U.S.. Many strategists claim that our next conflict will be with China, and we are already engaged in an economic war. The important thing for the U.S. to keep in mind is the history of China, and it may let us explain where they plan on going in current times. Sun Tzu talks about the importance of understanding your enemy and being able to predict their next move, so that you can always be one step ahead. “The Art of War” stresses the importance of knowing the capabilities of your enemies and knowing how to exploit their weaknesses. Currently, China is considered a near competitor to the U.S., so it is important that contain their power and influence before they become more powerful. The effectiveness at which the U.S.  is able to do this very important to our success in the future, and this is very likely to be the main conflict that we will have to deal with throughout our careers.

LaRue: 425

The thought of the “Modern Mongols” is an interesting one. When thinking about the quick rise to power, brutality, and relatively short lived empire, the modern equivalent that comes to mind is ISIS. Yes, ISIS is not nearly as tolerant or fluid as the Mongols, but I do believe that there are similarities in the regimes. The ISIS threat rose relatively quickly, and before the United States knew it, they controlled much of the areas we were operating in. Much like the Mongols, the Islamic State took over their new area by storm, and ruled it with an iron fist. ISIS quickly took over much of the Middle East by using very similar techniques as the Mongols did. Mass brutality and savagery were the way that ISIS manipulated local populations to become obedient to them. ISIS is obviously a radicalized form of Islam, and they are very devout and set in their ways. Any people group that came in contact with ISIS who refused to conform to their policies and strict rule faced decapitation and murder of their family. The Mongols on the other hand, were quite tolerant of other ways of life in the areas that they came to control.

In relative time of rule for an empire, the Mongols were relatively short lived. They ruled for less than a century, but in comparison to other dynasties of that time, this is a small amount of time. The Islamic State is similar in this respect as well. ISIS has essentially been eliminated in the past month, marking the end of their large scale rule over much of the Middle East. Small factions still remain, but the bulk of the ruling state has been eliminated, less than 10 years after their main push for power. The pace at which warfare moves today, this is a relatively short time frame for a regime to be in power. Mechanization, air warfare, and increased intelligence agencies and technology has greatly decreased the average length of a war. These are all reasons that ISIS fell to the power of the U.S. and Coalition forces so quickly, but in comparison, I think that their time in power is comparable to the Mongols considering the time frame in which power moves in this day and age. Additionally, the way in which power slipped away is similar. For the Mongols, their downfall was due to an internal struggle. When Kahn died, the power vacuum created trouble within the internal politics of the regime. Due to this lack of strong leadership and no declared leader, the Empire fell. The fall of the Islamic State is not too different from that of the Mongols. Many regimes have faced similar fates over the years, and many more with have to struggle with it in the future. After increased casualties of high level bombings and military attacks from the U.S. and coalition forces, the leadership began to fall within the State. The internal struggles that were created by the power vacuum, coupled with the crushing force of the U.S. coming down on them, ISIS was soon to fall.

LaRue: 520

If I had a nickle every time I have been told to prepare myself, to take advantage of the opportunities and training here, for we are entering a profession of arms, I would be a rich man. Is the Naval Academy really developing leaders of a winning force? I would have to say that they are training us to win, but by teaching us how to accept defeat first. For Midshipman, it often feels as if it is a “them versus us” mentality. The Academy and the system are the victors, and we as Midshipman are the defeated. I believe that this is by design, for it is preparing us to be stronger men and women in the fleet, and better prepare ourselves for victory in warfare. Midshipman are intentionally given too many tasks in a day. The system bombards us with random briefs, a heavily loaded academic schedule, rigorous fitness standards, parades, formations, and leadership billets to top everything off. The idea is to teach us how to prioritize, manage time, and ultimately to be ready for the unexpected and be able to adapt. Sun Tzu preaches that you must confuse and overwhelm an enemy, and this is often time how the Academy feels. He also teaches that a strong leadership of officers must be in place to have an effective force.

The majority of small unit leadership and day to day activities are run by fellow Midshipman. It is commonly known that peer leadership is the most difficult of all leadership roles. Having an inexperienced leader that dictates the daily battle rhythm of the day is a difficult place to be, and is not necessarily the best system to lead us to success. This is useful though, for a multitude of reasons. For one, it teaches that leader the most effective leadership style for themselves. Some Midshipman are naturally great leaders and thrive in a billet position, while others need this time to develop before going to the fleet. Secondly, this experience of being led by individuals who may have not found their style yet allows the rest of the brigade to learn from their mistakes. This often makes for confusion amongst the ranks, just as Sun Tzu speaks of, but in the end we will all be stronger leaders for it.

To many, it may seem as if the day to day trials that we deal with as Midshipman is busy work or useless, and at the end of the day, the system will always win. In the grander picture, the hardships we face here that are posed to us by the “system” are developing into warriors who will be ready to face hardships, know our leadership style, and know how to defeat the enemy, as often times we feel the Academy does to us.

LaRue: 468

Many of the same themes and problems often trouble societies throughout the world as the cycle of time goes on. Much like the Athenians, American democracy has been facing an issue of citizenship.  In our mock Assembly, the class’s most heated topic was the topic of metics and their citizenship status. For the topic, many points were brought up both in support, and against the granting of citizenship. Socratics and Oligarchs were concerned about diverting power from “true Athenians” and granting it to the numerous metics and slaves. These are the people groups who made up the predominant population numbers, despite the fact that they did not have citizenship. The debates were heated from both sides, as passions ran high. It is almost assured that the same was true for the real Assembly. America is becoming divided on the topic of  immigration and citizenship as well. In recent years, the hot topic issues and one of the major deciding issues of party lines is that of illegal immigration. The fight over DACA has been causing heated debates on the floors of Congress. Many believe that illegal and undocumented aliens, no matter their age, do not have a place in the nation. This is because they did not go through the legal avenues appropriate to become a citizen. The flip side of the argument is that the children who have been brought in do not have a life outside of the nation, and deporting them would ruin their lives. I am of the camp, that the position that your parents put the child in is still illegal, and therefore they would take up immigration numbers slotted for individuals who have worked hard to come into the nation via a legal avenue. The United States provides the largest numbers of visas and citizenship programs out of any other nation in the world, so to say that the nation is anti-immigration would be naive and ignorant. A large number of people are able to go throughout the legal process to gain citizenship. With the debate given in class, I could see the arguments being made on both side, just like I can with the current argument our nation faces.  The difference is that the current issue is not for citizenship of individuals who were born, raised, and work within a given territory, but rather a people group that is knowingly committing a crime to transport their family into a new location. Personally, I think it is terrible to see the conditions in which people live in risking dangerous cartels, human trafficking, and starvation. In the same breath, I think it is extremely irresponsible to put your children through that, and the risks that are involved, all to commit a crime. I was a proponent of the citizenship granted to metics because of their taxation, and residency within the Athenian Empire. The issues are similar in some aspects, but I believe that their central issues are different.

Austin LaRue:477

There is no doubt that in 2500 years, things evolve. Political climates change, challenges take different forms, times change, and in response: lessons are learned, and people adapt. Democracy is no exception. The form it takes today is much different than that of ancient Athens. Modernization Theory dictates that there is a direct tie between wealth and democratizing nations, but the wealth of Athens was more like that of a totalitarian regime. The wealth was concentrated to a select few, and there was a small middle class. The majority of people within the Empire were lower class, the rowers, the farmers, ect. Even though modern democracies do not have this wide gap, but rather a larger middle class, they have still adapted to include all classes. One of the ways the United States does this is with representation. Electing individuals to represent is effective in the modern day democracy to ensure that the government is representative of the citizens. The other way that the United States achieves this, and a way that Athens did not, was to have districts and local governments. All things that affected the Athenian Empire were voted on by those, typically wealthy, citizens who lived within the city of Athens. By opening up the boundaries in which people were allowed to vote, and even having local elections that filtered up to Athens throughout the empire, the citizens that lived within the empire would be better represented. Districts and regions all hold different ethnicities, wealth, and backgrounds. For this reason, the United States Naval Academy has a requirement that they must accept students from every congressional district in the union. This keeps diversity within the ranks, and is a good metric to use, unlike courses of action like Affirmative Action. I digress, but the moral is that the diversity of a nation can be brought out by the diversification of districts. For Athens, certain regions will have more agricultural minded individuals, while others may be more focused on the arts. The key to a successful democracy is representing each voice in the crowd. Power is derived from an active citizen base, and many of these individuals were unable to vote. Athens had strict guidelines as to who could participate, furthermore, they did not compensate those who would travel and could offer a more diverse view. The lack of local districts and diversification was one of Athens downfalls. This is one thing that I believe, in theory, the United States does well, but one thing that the Athenian Model lacked.

Austin LaRue: 422

Tyranny of Today

Tyranny, in the Greek tense of the word, means the rule of any individual who is not rightfully an heir to the throne through bloodline, or some other form of righteous means. Today, and in recent history, the word takes on a new meaning. The most famous to most Americans would be King George, the tyrant whom the colonist revolted under and fought to establish this fine nation. He was a rightful heir, but his rule was merciless. This is the tyrant we know in today’s world: one who is unfair in ruling, ruthless, corrupt, militaristic,  and all of the other trigger words that the free world knows today as a threat to democracy and freedom around the world.

New York Post’s Ralph Peters claims that the world is “descending into tyranny”, and in today’s definition of the word, I would have to agree. Although the modern day definition is not the same that the Greeks would have used, there are some parallels to the roots of the word. Putin and Xi Jinping have both essentially secured their power for the rest of their lives, violating the constitutions of their nations. Although they may have been voted or selected through legal means, the way in which they plan to keep that power is not so. Much like the rulers of old, these modern day tyrants do not plan to give up their power. Human nature is just that, natural, and greed and corruption are no different. To me it makes sense that a man with enough power is bound to become corrupt. The people of China and Russia face the same difficulties as the Greeks did while under the rule of corrupt, tyrannical rulers.

Peters speaks to the dangers of new tyrants, and why they have gained traction in recent times. A post Soviet Union world looked bright and hopeful for the world of Democracies. Democracy carries burdens with it, and the process to initialize into democracy is a quite painful one. Tyrannical governments and leaders give a scapegoat and an easy out for people. There is no thinking involved, but rather simply following. The transgressions experienced are not the fault of the people, but rather that of an outside force. This is contrasted from the definition of the Ancient Greeks, because often times, the leaders were foreign. However it is translated or analyzed, tyranny is no longer a word without a negative connotation, but rather, one that has cost millions of lives.

-Austin LaRue: 413

https://nypost.com/2018/03/20/the-world-is-descending-into-tyranny/