War remains one of the challenges facing the world today. Eruption of war is not a new phenomenon because it has existed for many years and continues affecting regional integration, economic, political, and social development, worldwide. Since ancient times, communities have fought against each other because of resources such as land, water, and minerals, territorial boarders and search for political power and authority. In certain situations, leaders from conflicting communities employed conflict management strategies such as peace-talks and dialogue so that to restore peace in the region. This move fuelled enmity and conflict among the communities thus culminating to tribal clashes and war.
Throughout history, war has evolved and formed part of human existence. Today, many nations across the globe either are in war with their neighboring states or are in the process of rebuilding their economy after experiencing continuous internal and external attacks. For instance, North Korea and South Korea have engaged in cold that is characterized with reiteration attacks, military invasion, and declaration of state of war against each other for many years. The conflict between the two parties emerged after world war two when North Korea invaded South Korea, but America intervened and helped South Korea defeat the North Korean army (Kindsvatter, 56). This conflict has escalated and affected economic development in the region. In the same breath, other states have already rebuilt their economy, but they are in the process of restoring their reputation, dignity and respect through regional integration; a move that will promote peace, harmony, coexistence and economic development.
It has been established that war is caused by several factors ranging from economic, political, social, and cultural, to mention, but a few. In most cases, war emerges when two or more countries are in conflict because of natural resources, boarder disputes, violation of international treaties and laws and power imbalance. The conflict over natural resources such as oil, gas, and metal minerals fuelled war in Iraq and Iran, Libya and Saudi Arabia (Kindsvatter, 48). The same aspect prevails in African, Middle East, and Asia and in other continents. This affirms that war remains a main challenge jeopardizing regional integration and economic development globally.
Although there are many factors causing war in the region, they can be grouped in two main categories namely: structural and institutional. Structural approach articulates that war is a contingency of power balance where states compete over it (Magagna, Lecture 1) Victor. It is presumed that two or more countries are more likely to enter into war because of lack of power balance. On the other hand, two or more states will not enter in war when there is power balance; an idea that fuel political stability and democracy.
In order to shade more light on this subject, it is imperative reviewing occurrence of WW1 and reasons behind this memorable event. Before the World War 1, there was power balance between countries supporting either socialism or capitalism ideologies. However, power imbalance occurred when US, USSR and Japan emerged as new powers thus triggering eruption of ww1 and ww2 (Merridale, 78). The involved parties had to compete over power dominance in the region; a move the fuelled enmity and disagreement among them.
Institutional perspective articulate that war occurs when there is a disconnect in the institutional framework in a ruling regime that interferes with sovereignty of other countries. This is evident in an anarchy system that requires effective coordination of the various elements constituting the system, and lack of coordination fuel eruption of war and disharmony. International systems are ranked based on political power, demographic characteristics, number of states constituting it, and economic development. In most cases, major power system fuel war than minor systems because the former explicit more political power over their counterparts in the lower levels. However, this does not mean that minor system cannot trigger war in the region as in the case of Serbia that triggered assassinations against Austral-Hungary allies during the WW1( Magagna,lecturer 5).
War is a political affair that requires support from the political leaders in a country. In most cases, political leaders have the obligation of declaring a state of war before attacking the enemies. However, political leaders should make rational decisions before launching the attack. This implies that leaders should evaluate benefits and cost accruing from a military attack before rationalizing their decision. Normally, it is rational to go for war when the benefits exceed costs and vice versa (Magagna, lecture 3). However, some countries declare a state of war despite cost associated with this act exceeding the benefits. This aspect prevails in inter-societal conflict that involves states, empires, and kingdoms, which join hands in fighting a common enemy such as terrorism and weapon of mass of destruction. Warfare commonly known as inter-societal conflict does not occur without the consent of the involved parties because it need cooperation, mobilization of resources and coordination of functions so that to defeat the enemies. This fundamental cannot be realized without integrating effective leadership strategies in combat compliance.
Leadership remains a fundamental component in a combat compliance and its role cannot be ignored whatsoever. Like any other organization, effective leadership helps leaders influence others towards attaining organizational goals and objectives in a cost-effective manner. Most organization understands the importance of leadership because it is within this facet that their organization realizes and internalize concept of competitive advantages, unleash their potential in conflict management and compete effectively with their arch rivalries. It has been established that effective leadership practices lead to successive and progressive development because leaders are able to motivate junior employees.
Based on this assertion, many organizations have hired qualified and result-oriented leaders who will transform organization policies into attainable goals. In some cases, leaders are supposed to undergo an in house training course where they are impacted with knowledge and skills on effective leadership and management; an aspect that should prevail in the military combat compliance.
In the same breath, leadership plays a pivotal role in the military and in combat compliance because it provides the framework and a guideline on how soldiers should operate, conduct their mission, and launch external attacks against their enemies. Combat compliance cannot prevail without effective leadership because it is within this facet that military officers understand policies, rules, chain of command, conflict resolution strategies, and institutional framework effectively. During warfare, leaders have the sole responsibility of ensuring that they provide the right guidelines and necessary perquisite conditions for the soldiers to work effectively and enhance their performance as a unit. Military leaders understand the importance of leadership because they have wide knowledge and skills about effective leadership practices because they have been trained.
Historically, many countries have been defeated in the battlefields because they failed to articulate the issue of effective leadership in the combat compliance mission. Lack of leadership skills among military leaders allows the enemies plan and launch an attack that lead to destruction of property, deaths, suffering of innocent civilians and lowering economic development. Based on this assertion, it is evident that military leaders have the obligation of ensuring that military unit achieves its goals, mission, and objective professionally and timely.
Leadership is of paramount importance in combat compliance because it enhances bonding, cooperation, and coordination among the military soldiers. It has been established that bonding remains an integral component in the military because it allows soldiers value, appreciate, and devote their life in serving and protecting their country and their fellow colleges at work. It is only in the military that leaders are inculcated with values, principles and moral codes, which aim at serving other people and protecting their country from external attacks (Magagna, lecture 7). Managers leading different organizations do not have these attributes because they are not trained to serve other people, but to execute their roles as leaders (Britt, 89). It is on this premises that military leaders embrace bonding, which facilitate cooperation and coordination of operations during warfare. Compliance in the military is based on the spirit of bonding that provide soldiers with resilience, determination, comradeship, enthusiasm and devotion aimed at motivating soldiers achieve a common goal. Bonding allows soldiers understand the chain of command, follow and comply with institutional policies and devote their life in serving others, enhance teamwork and facilitate unit success and accomplishment. Based on this fact, effective leadership enables military leaders provide favorable conditions for bonding. This implies that they interact, associate and exchange ideas with junior soldiers; an idea that enhances teamwork, bonding and comradeship.
Leadership plays a crucial role in combat compliance because it maintains chain of command and balance of power among the military personnel. Like in an organization, the military docket has a chain of command that articulate roles, duties, and power bestowed upon individual leaders in the hierarchy (Kindsvatter, 56). The chain of command also stipulates orders and laws, which should be followed during warfare and any soldier who travels against these laws is sanctioned severely. The chain of command cannot be effective without embracing transformational leadership style that enables military leaders balance power within the docket and minimize occurrence of conflicts among the soldiers. Lack of effective leadership will prevent teamwork, bonding, and coordination of operations because military officers will not be able to resolve conflicts, wrangles and disagreement accruing from power struggle with the chain of command.
Leadership enhances combat compliance because it allows military leaders address the needs and welfare of the soldiers. During warfare, soldiers are forced to leave their families, friends, and relatives and go for the battle where they spent months and sometimes years. This move separates them from their families and relatives who need financial and moral support from them. In extreme cases, the soldier may be unable to support his family thus affecting his/her performance. In such cases, military leaders should assess the soldier’s situation and assist the family. In a similar vein, military leaders should motivate and reward soldiers based on their performance. In most cases, soldiers suffer from psychological disorders such as stress, depression and anxiety; an idea that lowers their motivation. Military leaders should motivate the soldiers and reward their efforts.
Based on this assertion, it is evident that leadership plays a crucial role in combat compliance because it promotes teamwork, cooperation, and coordination; maintain power balance in the chain of command, evaluates need and welfare of soldiers; enhance motivation, and provide a framework of operations.
Works cited
Kindsvatter, Peter. American Soldiers: Ground Combat in the World Wars, Korea, And Vietnam. New York: University Press of Kansas, 2003. Print.
Merridale, catherine. Ivan's War: Life and Death in the Red Army, 1939-1945. New York: Picador,, 2007. Print.
Magagna, Victor. "Politics and warfare." Price auditoriam . UC San Diego. auditoriam hall, Newyork. 1 Apr. 2013. Class lecture.
Britt, Thomas W.. Military life the psychology of serving in peace and combat. Westport, Conn.: Praeger Security International, 2006. Print.
