Peter the strategist struggles to answer the question Who and Where are Today’s Military Thinkers? He observes that military thinkers with real military experience, practical or otherwise, seem to be losing out to “today’s military thinkers in universities and think tanks (e.g., Martin van Creveld and Willam Lind), in aid agencies and private military companies, in IT companies, or, heaven forbid, in the blogosphere.”
I think this is a great observation. The thinkers out there today like Berkowitz, Lind and Gray are likely going to come from the think tank side of things for two reasons: 1) economics, and 2) military education.The first reason has to do with training time. Today’s soldier has a lot on his plate and does not have the time to dedicate to study sweeping issues of strategy, like an academic with a dedicated research budget and the freedom to “think.” Our militaries are focussed on tactics. This feeds into the second reason: military education is seen as a means rather than an end in itself. It is simply a box to check off for promotion. This is a sorry state of affairs. I think a closer relationship with civvie institutions will not only help to better the caliber of military education, but will also legitimize military educations in the eyes of academia. War is no longer a battlefield issue, and exposure to a wider set ideas would benefit both milthinkers and civthinkers.
I don’t want to hijack his post so head on over to thestrategist to see some examples of military thinkers old and new, and put in your two yen.
Related: The strategy pendulum
- BROWSE / IN TIMELINE
- « The subscription walls keep coming down
- » The Geography of Russia Through History
COMMENTS / 4 COMMENTS
dj added these pithy words on 23 Jan 08 at 6:39 pmThat site left one huge thinker whose writing are still very relevant today.
Alfred Thayer Mahan wrote Sea Power and its Influence Upon History.
His work put the US Navy ahead of the Royal Navy in theory long before WWI. Some say that the Germans misinterpreting his writings lead to WWI.
The US Navy’s pacific campaign in WWII was textbook Mahan and his theory is still used today.
Some say that the Chinese PLAN build-up is them wising up to Mahanic principles.
Younghusband added these pithy words on 23 Jan 08 at 7:20 pmActually dj, Peter did mention Mahan. We have critically discussed Mahan often on this site. Check it out.
Jesus Reyes added these pithy words on 23 Jan 08 at 9:02 pmIt appears to me, practically speaking, they are coming from Lockheed Martin with a chinese credit card.
strategist added these pithy words on 24 Jan 08 at 6:08 amThanks YH. I could’ve also mentioned Sir Julian Corbett, the British naval strategist – I think you’ve written about him as well as Mahan. I didn’t include Corbett because he did not serve in Royal Navy. But he was associated with the RN as a civilian – historian and strategist. Perhaps he serves as a useful model for links between military and civilian establishments. Umm, will have to look into that.
SPEAK / ADD YOUR COMMENT
Comments are moderated.
