History

The author of the document is Captain Simon Bernard from Germany. He explores the concept of Revolutionary Military Affairs (RMA) and argues that regardless of the fact that the innovations unveiled during the gulf war were revolutionary, we are presently very far from genuine Revolutionary Military Affairs. Essentially, Revolutionary Military Affairs refers to a basic advancement in technology organization and doctrine that makes the current approaches of warfare obsolete. In his review, Pudas indicates that definition of RMA is compounded by various factors that range from the dynamic nature of technological advancements, the nature of operational or organizational innovation that seeks to address a distinct problem to the critical and dynamic social, economic and political environments that influence the military sphere (1).

Bernard argues that a revolution is a complex conception that is multifaceted and all inclusive in nature. Thus it addresses various intricate and augmenting factors that are beyond the introduction of new operational concepts or technologies. Although innovation is at the center stage of the conception, its effectiveness in attaining revolution is highly dependent on augmenting factors such as organizational and operational contexts and decision making processes.

The author argues that technological innovation can not be entirely used to define RMA. He cites Kingston who indicates that a true revolution has the capacity to change all the facets of the game (185). In this regard, the author argues that it does not only change the game but also the equipment, rules and size of the opponent. In addition, it alters the organization of the constituent teams, their tactics, training, doctrine and virtually everything. Of great importance however is its ability to change the relationship between the society and the game. Classic examples presented by the author in this respect are Agrarian revolution, industrial revolution and the introduction of information technology that impacted upon all facets of human survival. Seemingly, the power to achieve this lies in the employment of information technology in warfare. Presently, America uses information technology in warfare sparingly (Sullivan, 5). According to Mahken, use of information technology is largely limited by its dynamic nature as well as the political, economic and social environments (40).

In order to attain this true revolution, the author indicates that the current approach of destroying the enemy needs to be replaced by destroying all the options that the enemy has. This would in return make the enemy vulnerable to manipulation. Notably, this can only be attained through employment of precision weapons whose innovation is likely to be completed in the next decade. In particular, they work by detecting, selecting, visualizing and finally acquiring the target. Further, the author cites Gray who shows that an ideal RMA would break the enemys will to engage in warfare and further oblige the same to sue for peace (121). Thus there would be no any human losses. Notably, America has not attained this scenario as it still employs a battle field in fighting with the enemy.

Indeed, it is certain that an ideal RMA has not yet been achieved and can not be entirely defined by innovation of new technologies. It is true that the nature of RMA is complex and it is characterized by various factors. While technology is critical in the same, Latham acknowledges that information systems and organization of operations is equally imperative (1). Further, the political, economic and social environments also need to be given equal consideration in war. This is because of the fact that these environments have direct influences on the involvement of a given country in war.

However, Anderson contests the idea that strategic planning in war can ever be attained by technology (70). This contention is complemented by Watts who postulates that war conditions are usually chaotic and that it would be difficult for the country to employ strategic fighting (1). In particular, it would also be challenging for the country to decipher the approaches being employed by the enemy. Likewise, Murray and Millet contend that technological invention and innovation is also taking place in the south and various new approaches to warfare are continuously being devised (371). Thus effective warfare using the precision techniques needs to put in to consideration the emergent strategic approaches and information that the enemy might employ. As indicated earlier, effective RMA can not solely depend on new technology.

In the Canadian context, the review of RMA and the related factors is important. Currently, OHanlon indicates that Canadas investment in warfare has been compounded by various political and social factors (2). Thus in order to attain the desirable status of RMA, there is a dire need for the country to address these inconsistencies. Further, Blank appreciates that this review is vital for strategic planning as it ensures that emergent concerns are incorporated in the final decisions. Nevertheless, it is worth noting that warfare is a dynamic field that requires consistent research and implementation of credible findings.