Benjamin Sanders
There is no doubt that the goal of war is to win. War aims may differ considerably depending on the context, but at the end of the day victory is the ultimate aim. This is why the struggle during conflict is long and arduous, because the aims can lead to great rewards. Yet there comes a time when one side, usually the losing side, must begin to consider realistically its future ability to carry on. Indeed sometimes this applies to both sides, as the cost of continued fighting outweighs the geopolitical benefits. Initially, there may only be private utterances among senior officials, or classified communiques between diplomats, yet they begin to form the basis of a ‘get out’ strategy as prospects decline.
In the medieval period, deals were very common after rebel barons failed to defeat the king in battle. The monarch may take the head of the leading conspirator and attainder his lands, but most of the co-rebels would be free to return to their estates if they reaffirmed their commitment to the king. In the 19th century, British gunboats would bombard relentlessly, yet they didn’t necessarily do this to conquer; instead, they sought to force China or other states to open their ports to trade or acknowledge their status as vassals of the empire. Britain never sought to conquer China during the Opium Wars, because there were other ways of acquiring victory and achieving a lasting peace. This methodology still applies in the present day.
No comments:
Post a Comment