My AccountOrder Now
x

Request Call Back

Banner

Melvin Laird's insight in a strategy for peace is directly applicable today?

Introduction

Melvin Laird’s strategy for peace has been measured as an outline to seek the shift from war to peace. This outline was proposed by the Melvin Laird as a defense strategy to the US president Nixon that primarily focuses on restructuring the forces with fiscal constraints t along with having sustainable force to dissuade threats (Atta, 2008). With the emergence of this strategic proposal, the great debate was observed, which further led the question whether or not this strategy is effective in terms of achieving the utmost goal. As the time passed and new development observed in the geopolitical scenario, new debate began revolving around the applicability of Melvin Laird’s insight for peace in today’s scenario. Best  essay papers.

Melvin Laird’s Insight for Peace and its Applicability in Today’s World

The foundation of Laird’s strategy was the fiscal constraints, security and resourcing anticipations, which is argued to be applicable in today’s scenario (Hollister, 2010). If the applicability of this strategy is evaluated in the current scenario of US, it can be viewed that today US has been experiencing the same situation that it had been facing at the time when this defense strategy was proposed. However, the insight of this outline in relation to nuclear strategy is not applicable in today’s scenario, as the nature of the nuclear threat has been changed from the bipolar nuclear world to multi-polar (Atta, 2008). Thereby, the primary applicability of this strategy in today’s scenario is related only with the fiscal constraints, security issues and other resourcing expectations.

The insight of Laird’s strategy can be taken into account with the applicability in the domestic as well as foreign challenges faced by US. On evaluating the source of this strategy, it is observed that the root of this proposal twigs in the budget policy, security policy and foreign policy evolved from the fighting in the Vietnam War (Atta, 2008). By comparing this root condition in 1970 with today’s situation, it is observed that the US government has been facing the same situation in the result of costly war both physically and financially. As consequent to this costly war, the government appears wondering where and how to exploit the army force in terms of putting fewer burdens on the fiscal resources of the country. Thus, if Laird’s strategic insight is applied today, it can be observed that there is comprehensive argument that helps in restructuring the wartime thinking through following the Nixon's policy of peace.

 

After proposing the strategic outline, it was argued by Laird that sustaining the enforced security at the international level could have been difficult for the US and therefore he proposed to adopt cooperated security measures. Today, the government of US encounters the serious security issues that primary persuades the government to have sustainable policy for the peace. Historically, US have been found with greater security threat than other nations due to its involvement and presence in number of regions that mainly aims to provide support. Similarly, today, in the national security strategy of the president Obama, it is very clear that he has been focused on restoring and reinforcement of international order and for this purpose; he is determined to strengthen the idea of justice and sustainable international order (Washington, 2010). On analyzing this strategy of Obama’s administration with the Laird’s proposed defense strategy, it is indicated that the strategy of Laird is applicable today given the similar nature of the transforming and ever changing world scenario emerging from the prolonged conflicts.       

On the other hand, Laird’s insight is not applicable today in the context of nuclear warfare policy, as when this strategy was proposed, US had been struggling with reinforcement of it position against the single power that was USSR (Terry, 1995). Laird proposed the suppression strategy against USSR however there was absence of non-proliferation strategy against the non-states. Therefore, it is understood that the nuclear strategy proposed was against the non-existent states, yet it could not have been concluded that threat did not exist. In today’s scenario, where threat still exists, it is observed that this threat has turned out to be weakening and threat is diplomatically low, as US sustains effective diplomatic relationship with those potential states.

Conclusion

Considering the Laird’s insight shows effective strategic guidance for defense issues faced by US, because today, the country has been going through distinct challenges both in domestic and foreign environment, which are similar of the time the outline was proposed. US has recently recovered from long war and encountering the similar issue including fiscal constraints, security threat, resourcing issues and nuclear threat. The Melvin Laird’s peace strategy, however, cannot be fully applied in today’s environment due to changing nature of external factors. Therefore, it is conclude that certain strategies related to fiscal constraints, security threat, resourcing present in the strategy can be applied in today’s situation but nuclear policy cannot be applied.