In the present assignment military downsizing will be analyzed in the sense of its effects on the service members. On the one hand, the basic premise of the paper will be that military downsizing is really dangerous and pernicious policy for the army to pursue. However, on the other hand, there can be certain advantages of military downsizing that will be dealt with in the context of the paper.
First off, it seems reasonable to claim that every military downsizing will reduce the defensive forces of the country and in case of a serious military threat it will be the most decisive factor in the country’s vulnerability. As history testifies, having significantly cut its military force, the country has more often than not, found itself absolutely defenseless in the hour of danger. The initiative that the enemy seizes in the first days of war usually predetermines its course and the heaviest losses for the downsized army are guaranteed. (Dupuy, 1990)
Historical examples of ‘blitz wars’ testify to the righteousness of the above stated opinion. It was already in the Prussian military tradition to exploit its enemies’ weaknesses that resulted from the latter’s inabilities to assess the situation and maintain a sustainable military contingent. Later the same strategy was adopted by other great conquerors that made everything within their means to persuade the enemy that war is not imminent and thus they encouraged him to downsize his army. Then the strike would follow. (Koch, 1978)
The second negative tendency of downsizing the army lies within the fact that the remaining military force becomes too burdened with the responsibilities shouldered on it to consider any possibility of real improvement in training or services provided. In other words, it can be surmised that the remaining military as the result of the army’s downsizing do not do their work properly or simply cannot do continue carrying it out the way it ought to be done. This creates a really precarious situation for the country is practically left without any army whatever.
There is, indeed, another aspect of the problem that cannot be overlooked: the military’s trust in the government is undermined. The public on its part starts looking at the army contemptuously since it fails to carry out its basic functions – first and foremost – to provide the security for the definite country’s population. It results in the growing sense of uncertainty – both externally and internally – the sense that may be triggered by the lack of respect for the army.
In these conditions the army may become radicalized and together with recently laid off officers it may present a real threat to the existing political institutions. Besides, even if it is not the case, the growing unemployment as the result of army’s downsizing will be the additional economic pressure on the whole governmental structure. On the personal level, it may be the cause of many former military men’s falling prey to depression and desperation. (Braswell & Kushner, 2012)
What are the advantages of the military downsizing? Unfortunately, there are not many of these. One might argue that maintaining a big army in the time of peace exerts tremendous financial burden on the society. However, this argument may be parried by the above stated discussion proving that, after all, it is downsizing the army that is economically ineffective and not viable.
References
Braswell, H; Kushner, H. I. (2012). Suicide, social integration, and masculinity in the U.S. Military. Social Science & Medicine 74 (4): 530–6.
Dupuy, T.N. 1990. Understanding war: History and Theory of combat. London: Leo Cooper.
Friedman Benjamin H., Christopher Preble. 2010. A plan to cut military spending. Web. http://www.downsizinggovernment.org/defense/plan-cut-military-spending
Koch, H. W. 1978. A History of Prussia. New York: Barnes & Noble Books
