The abundance of military strategists across the media encouraged me to risk articulating my two-pennyworth of thoughts.
Only a rare and truly wise few understand the difference between assured victory and inevitable defeat in war. This sacred knowledge of the art of war is passed to a select few through a rigorous mental curriculum, forged by both experience and education. While many find comfort in images of tanks and artillery, history would tell a different story if the outcomes of conflicts were determined solely by superior tanks, fleets, fighter aircraft or even their numbers. It is not hardware, but insight and strategy, that tip the scales.
Conflicts are foresighted and national interests secured decades before wars are waged—in the drawing boards of scientists, the boardrooms of economists and the minds of strategists.
Today, it is both heartening and ironic to witness an abundance of so-called strategists and grand strategists drafting military plans across media platforms with the ease of composing a kindergarten essay, enlightening all with theories based on their perceptions. For most of us, with no credible source of information, Aldous Huxley correctly articulated:
“There are things known and there are things unknown, and in between are the doors of perception.”
No war can be fought based on perceptions. Grasping the whole range of factors—economy, trade, geography, military strength, culture and demography—can truly deliver the desired result. It is only the well-informed few at the helm of affairs who are truly aware. They are the ones who will define the future course of history and carry the burden of decision-making in the complex fog of conflict.