Evolution of Modern Warfare

In the modern world, the above issues are covered by a theory that spans a more broad domain inclusive of economic theory, sports & games, evolution, etc. (much more than just war). We refer to this theory (quite frequently) as "Game Theory."

Game Theory is in itself too vast and is beyond the scope of this essay. You could pay a visit to http://www.rationalreview.com/rationalreviewold/archive/tlknapp/tlknapp090102.htmlGround Zero Sum and follow further links on Game Theory and its relevance to warfare, particularly in the context of terrorism.

'War' in conventional terms requires proper identification of the 'enemy' or 'adversary'. In following wars in the 20th century including "World War I", "World War II" (Allies vs Axis), "India vs Pakistan" (twice), "North Vietnam vs South Vietnam", "North Korea vs South Korea", a clear demarcation was possible. Not all these wars were played as Zero Sum Games, some were waged in order to restore a peaceful order and enforce restraint on aggression in the future.

Within the same century another type of warfare sprung in, popularised under the name, "Cold War", a term frequented by a US Political advisor "Bernard Baruch." This was a war of restraint rather than aggression. In the same period, the US learnt that accumulation of military resources could be used to restraint a possible enemy against using similar or less powerful military resources. Undoubtedly it led to an arms race between the players (namely USA and USSR.) It also led to the re-use of "military power" as a negotiating tool (as evident in the Cuban crisis and later in the US employing their battle fleet to restrain any military action in the east stopping China vs. India, China vs. Taiwan to name a few.)

Such interference in the affairs of other nations (not uncommon in the annals of history when one nation's power towered over the rest), led to the a negative referral of the United States under an image it had conceived for itself: "Uncle Sam."

To make my point clear, in the height of the Roman Empire, Egyptian King Ptolemy Antiopter, wrote off Egypt in a will to Rome due to weak economic situation and the lack of a capable heir. After his death, Julius Caesar, as Consul of Rome, interfered, installed Cleopatra as the monarch after assisting in the defeat and murder of other claimants (Ptolemy the Younger and Arsinoe) to the throne. All elements of warfare including siege engines were employed during this operation.

During the height of modern colonialism (through the age of renaissance), many European nations interfered in the affairs of several other nations (who were weaker economically, politically and in military strength, and later became known as the 'Third World') to acquire and use resources to their advantage. This race of colonialism predominantly affected a majority of Asian and African countries, resulted in the formation of many of today's nations where both the Industrial Revolutions and the effects of the Renaissance had not yet been felt. Colonialism became a vehicle for renaissance to reach those nations and bring equilibrium to international affairs. Interestingly, the Science-Fiction series "Star Trek" refers to a "Prime Directive" on exploration which addresses "non-interference" in the affairs of places and people being explored (which is derived from the diametric opposite happening in world history).

In all above cited cases of interference, some form of warfare were employed in addition to "divide and conquer" strategies. At the end of World War II, colonialism was no longer accepted. A lot of work was done by all nations involved to prevent future "interference" under the name of colonialism or for any such purpose (of acquiring propriety on resources of a target nation or league.) Further, an agenda of peace (to be read as "restraint") was established for development in the future. Globalisation promoted global competition, which in some way would allow all countries to compete without using a tool such as 'war'. As competition is deeply-rooted on game theory and satiates a major human necessity, the push on globalisation increased. Globalisation (though slow as a process) began to break borders, open technology and knowledge into the whole world.

The "Cold War" (of militarisation for restraint) was also 'won' by the promoters of "freedom" (essentially "free" competition.) The USSR (a communist and partially fascist regime) fell to the call for such freedom. It had restrained the diversities within itself which led to a fracture. Interestingly "The People's Republic of China" (PRC) has also restrained diversities within itself, but recently tried to introduce "free" competition into society to avoid such fracture. In this path, their size and resources have allowed them to become the next major superpower in the world.

However, despite the advancement of political strategy and a new trend of globalism, until now, most successful warfare has been with the employment of force against a clearly identified enemy. In every case where the enemy could employ camouflage and effectively become invisible to the attacking force, the attacking forces have been at a disadvantage (and in more than one case faced severe casualties.) This was clear in the Vietnam War and later when India offered a Peace Keeping Force to Sri Lanka to curb terrorism caused by Militant groups in North Sri Lanka (called the LTTE.)