Revolution in military
Revolution in military affairs can be attributed to use of new processes and new tools of waging war like system of systems, command and control, as well as network-centric warfare, all driven by information technology. The term “Revolution in Military Affairs” is used to refer to a major shift in the nature of fighting which is as a result of the application of new technologies which adjusts the nature and accomplishment of military actions, when these technologies are pooled with organizational and operational concepts as well as vivid changes in military doctrine, (Theodor, 1995, pp.3-9).
The concept of revolution in military can be traced back in the 17th century when it was first experienced; during the industrial revolution and the French revolution. Since then, nations have been experiencing innovations in various military operations with an intention of increasing the effectiveness of the military. Arguably, in the last about 200 years, the nature of war has been altered by an advancement of technology combined with the transformation of organizational and operation of military activities, (Lothar, 200, pp.6-12). Some of the significant innovations which have contributed to revolution in military include: construction of railways, telegraph, development of nuclear weapons, and the use of satellites. Most people argue that, the last revolution in military was experienced in 1945 with the development of nuclear bomb. However, the most recent one is the micro chip.
A good example of revolution in military is the gulf war which occurred in the early 1990s. During this war, use of information technology in the military was at its peak. Through new technology, alliance forces were able to easily use and exchange information. Additionally, use of technology was also experienced in precision strikes. Approximately six thousand tons of precision-guided weapons were used. About ninety percent of these weapons hit their targets. Moreover, the military were able to strike heavily defended targets with the help of systems such as cruise missiles and stealth aircrafts.
Finally, technology is one of the major factors that effect the war. The other factors are strategy and organization. However, technology is not the main determinant but it significantly contributes to failures or achievements. As a matter of fact, a side with revolution in military will have an advantage in war, (Theodor, 1995, pp.7-12).
The differences between vertical and horizontal proliferation
In the recent times, it has been reported that the number of nations possessing dangerous weapons such as nuclear weapons, or rather the number of nations applying nuclear technology in their military operations has been increasing. Precisely, there has been an increase in application of nuclear weapons as well as nuclear knowledge and technology in military; and this is what is referred to as nuclear proliferation. Proliferation in this case can take place in two ways: vertical and horizontal. Vertical proliferation refers to chances of the existing nuclear powers increasing their capabilities, which is a threat to non-nuclear countries. On the other hand, horizontal proliferation refers to the increasing number of countries that are in possession of nuclear weapons, which is a threat to the countries which already have nuclear capabilities, (Krieger & Ong, 1995, pp. 1-10).
The concept of proliferation can be traced back in era of the Cold War. During this period, countries more especially the superpowers were trying to outdo one another in terms of possession of superior weapons as there was greater degree of mistrust among nations. Actually, this was the starting point of the arms race. Arguably, vertical proliferation has never been a major issue since the end of the arms race among the superpowers. Horizontal proliferation is the major issue up to the current times. As a matter of fact, many countries, both with and without nuclear arms, are against the spread of nuclear arms as well as development of nuclear technology in the military sector; due to the fear of emergence of nuclear warfare. This is the reason why most nations more especially the developed nations introduced the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
A good example of vertical proliferation was experienced during after the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima by the United States, (Krieger & Ong, 1995, pp. 1-10). Russia also embarked on the production of nuclear weapons as groundwork for the Cold War after this incident. This triggered Britain and France to embark on the same as they felt threatened. On the other hand, an example of horizontal proliferation is production of nuclear weapons in Iran, Korea as well as Israel.
As mentioned above, only horizontal proliferation is considered as being a problem. However, for nonproliferation to be achieved, both kinds of proliferations should be declared as being illegal and should be taken as being criminal defiance.
The UN's Agenda for Peace
After its establishment, one of the agendas and perhaps the most crucial one was the peace agenda. This agenda was mainly concerned with three major issues: peacemaking, preventive diplomacy and peace-keeping. Notably, this body is made up of a number of autonomous nations and all its undertakings depend on what these nations agree upon. Based on the outcomes of the two World Wars, nations agreed that a repeat of the same should never occur again in the future and the United Nations was given the responsibility of promoting world peace, (Secretary-General, 1992, pp.2-8).
The origin of the UN agenda for Peace can be traced back to the time when the UN body was established at the end of the World Wars. Most nations agreed that there was need to establish grounds for permanent peace in the future. According to the Secretary-General (1992, pp. 9-15), the major aims of the UN’s Peace Agenda was to try to discover at the earliest possible stage circumstances that could lead emergence of a conflict, and use diplomacy to solve the problem before eruptions of violence. In the case of conflicts, the UN should try to make peace with the objective of solving the issues behind the conflicts. Additionally, the UN was to ensure that peace is made where fighting has erupted through the peace-keeping operations. This could be done through the implementation of agreements that are made by the peacemakers, (UN Department of Public Information, 1992, pp. 34).
One of example of the UN peace agenda is the establishment of peace in Yugoslavia as well as Bosnia. Another example is the reconstruction of Rwanda and Burundi after successful peace-making operations in these two countries which had been greatly affected by civil wars. Although, this agenda has been realized in a good number of occasions, a lot is still to be done in order to avoid failure in achieving its intended objectives. For instance, the UN is yet to establish permanent peaceful co-existence in Somalia. Lastly, the United Nations should be ready to help in peace-building within various contexts such as reconstruction of infrastructures and institutions of countries that have been affected by civil wars.
The concept of third generation peacekeeping
Peacekeeping is a joint term that encompasses various collections of interventions, which include: conflict prevention, peacemaking, peace enforcement, humanitarian operations as well as peace-building. The concept of peacekeeping dates back to the time of the establishment the United Nations in the Post-War era. This body was given the mandate to “maintain international peace and security.” It was also its duty to ensure that there is no threat to peace thereafter.
In this case, third generation peacekeeping refers to interventions that focus on humanitarian issues, and this is what distinguishes it from other peacekeeping missions. Third generation peacekeeping was approved by the Security Council after realizing that local civilians face stern humanitarian catastrophes, and they encompass multifaceted humanitarian interventions. Although not so clear, these kind of peacekeeping operations have been effectively implemented by the United States as well as the United Nations, (Doyle, 2001, 120-127). The concept of the third generation peace keeping emerged after the formulation of the UN agenda. It was realized that humanitarian issues were very crucial in the peace agenda as it formed one of the foundations of establishing peace more especially in nations affected by civil wars.
Notably, the third generation peacekeeping missions can be characterized by the following attributes: humanitarian focus, complex operations, occasional state-building as well as inability of nation to offer protection for its citizens. There are various examples that can be used to clearly illustrate this kind of peacekeeping. The most significant one is the peacekeeping mission that was and still is being undertaken by the United Nations in Somalia. Another example is the deployment of troops in 1991 during the Gulf War in order to over protection for the Kuwaitis. Lastly, are the peacekeeping operations that were carried out in Balkan.
However, the third generation peacekeeping operations have become contentious lately due to various reasons. One of these reasons is that, studies indicate that, these kinds of operations are not always successful when undertaken with humanitarian assistance objective. As an illustration, peacekeepers were unable to secure safe zones for the civilians when war erupted in Bosnia, which led to the butchery of Srebrenica civilians, (Finnemore, 1996, pp. 153-160) Arguably, third generation peacekeeping are difficult to be obtained they incorporate some aspects of second generation peacekeeping operations and fourth generation peacekeeping operations.
The concept of human security
Human security refers to understanding of global vulnerabilities that are being put in place to challenge the conventional notion of security. It argues that the proper reference of security should be about the individual instead of the state. According to the UNDP, human security entails: economic security, food security, health security, environmental security, personal security, political security, as well as community security.
Historically, human security concept emerged as early as in the late 1940s in the post-war times. However, this concept was spread to most parts of the world after the establishment of the UNDP (United Nation Development Program). The effects of the Wars made most nations to realize the need of protecting humans from such wars. In the world today most of the victims of conflict arte civilians, hence protecting individuals should be of great importance, (Chenoy & Tadjbakhsh 2007: 10-13). The UNDP popularized the concept, which has since then has gained a lot of momentum. Despite all these efforts putting the concept into practice is a big challenge up to date.
It should be noted that, the concept of human security has undergone numerous evolution processes, especially during cold war, international shifts, as well as disintegration of Soviet Union. These activities gave way to recognitions of fresh conflicts and threats (Kaldor, 2007: 35-36). The concept of human security emerged after the cold war, it referred to multi-disciplinary perception of security issues that involved numerous research fields such as international relations, development studies, human rights and strategic studies.
The concept of national security
Perhaps, human beings are the most important creatures that need security in the world. This requires radical thinking in order to achieve national security. The concept of national security has no universal definitions; this is because its meaning varies in different countries. National security is the ability to guard and preserve physical integrity and territorial boundaries of a nation. The goal of national security is to maintain economic relations, protect nature, governance, and institutions of a nation from external destruction, and preserve independence and sovereignty, (Tal, 2000: 3-6).
The origin of this concept is the Peace of Westphalia, where autonomous state under a sovereign, was the foundation of a new international sort of nation states. Since then, this concept has been applied in various parts of the world such as in the United States. The concept of national security entails various elements such as: political security, environmental security, economic security, military security, as well as security of energy and natural resources, (Kirshmer, 2006: 27-28).
A good example of the application of the national security concept is in the US. This concept became an alternative to many concepts in this country after the Second World War, in the struggle to overcome both internal and external threats. The concept was first introduced in the US in 1790 in Yale University when it was applied in issues to do with domestic industries. Moreover, this concept was the guiding principle during the signing of the National Security Act of 1947.
Finally, lately, the concept varies in nations depending on the degree of attacks and level of trauma. For example countries that have been attacked mostly have different and unique policies on national security as compared with those with minimal threats. Generally, in order to deal with national security of a nation, national should use two approaches based on issues and interests (Kirshmer, 2006: 70-74). For example the terrorism threat affects United states more than any other nation, hence they put more emphasizes on it. The 9/11 posed a lot of fear to the innocent citizen of United States, which is why US has become so prominent international security issues.
Works Cited
Chenoy, A & Tadjbakhsh, S. Human Security: Concepts and Implication. New York: Routledge.
2007.
Doyle, M. War Making and Peace Making: The United Nations’ Post-Cold War Record.
Washington: John Wiley & Sons, 2001.
Finnemore, M. "Constructing norms of humanitarian intervention" In The Culture of National
Security, ed. Katzenstein, pp. 153-185, 1996
Kaldor, M. Human Security: Reflections on globalization and intervention. Cambridge: Polity
Press. 2007.
Kirshmer, J. Globalization and National Security. London: Routledge.2006.
Krieger, D & Ong, C. Disarmament: The Missing Link to an Equitable non-Proliferation
Regime, 1195. Retrieved on 24th August 2011 from http://www.wagingpeace.org/articles/2004/03/26_road-prolilferation.htm
Lothar, I. The Revolution in Military Affairs, 2008. Retrieved on 24th August 2011 from
http://www.iwar.org.uk/rma/resources/nato/ar299stc-e.html
UN Department of Public Information, Yearbook of the United Nations 1992, 34
Secretary-General. An Agenda for Peace Preventive Diplomacy, Peacemaking and Peace-
keeping. 1992. Retrieved on 24th August 2011 from http://www.un.org/Docs/SG/agpeace.html
Tal, Y. National Security. California: Greenwood Press. 2000.
Theodor, W. G. Revolution in Military Affairs? Competing Concepts, Organizational Responses,
Outstanding Issues Summary, 1995. Retrieved on 24th August 2011 from http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/crs/95-1170.htm
