Psychological Warfare:
A brief History All war has the simple objective of making the enemy bend to one's own will. All losses inflicted upon the enemy, all injuries imposed, and all ammunition expended serve the purpose of changing the enemy's mind. When leaders can change an enemy's mind without firing a round, they secure victory while preserving lives and resources on both sides. Psychological warfare has been practiced to this end since the earliest accounts of conflict. The Biblical account of Gideon presents an ancient example of psychological warfare applied as a force multiplier without regard for the enemy's lives, but without an overt bloodthirstiness.
Gideon tested his volunteers psychologically for willingness to fight, releasing everyone who truly wanted to be elsewhere. He tested them psychologically for aptitude, not wanting any soldiers who lacked the intuition and discipline to lift water to their mouths with one hand, while keeping the other hand free for a weapon. Then, with a force reduced to a few hundred he led a surprise night attack, and routed an army with a few hundred men. At the other end of the spectrum stand leaders like the more modern Shaka, who inflicted terror not just on his enemies, but even upon his own Zulu warriors. Part of his psychological influence came from technological innovation -- the Zulu spear -- and pushing the boundaries of what contemporaries considered the limits of war. As with any conquerors among the world's great historic civilizations, Shaka's reputation preceded him, until he exceeded that reputation himself. Ironically, when centuries later South Africa faced the challenge of uniting dozens of tribal cultures with Euorpean descendants, while encouraging racial equality, its state run television found yet another psychological purpose for Shaka.
The production "Shaka Zulu" used South Africa's still fledgling television industry to provide a sense of shared heritage for South Africans of any cultural heritage. The two approaches, one of winning over hearts and minds, one of forcing masses into terrified submission, have had varying degrees of success. History shows that in most cases the former approach produces the most beneficial and longest term results, but the short term results of the latter are often needed for stability first. History ultimately remembers leaders who rely on terror not just for initial victory, but for maintaining influence, as despots and tyrants. The same psychological tactics that once earned leaders reputations for strength now eventually follow them to The Hague. Such methods have become relegated to the realm of terrorism in asymmetric warfare. The Idi Amins and Moamar Khaddafis of history find themselves locked out of the community of nations as impolite company. The psychology of strict terror remains merely as a tool of desperation.
Cyrus the Great:
The proof of how well Cyrus the Great applied psychological techniques appears in how many today first hear of this 6th Century B.C.E. Persian King through Judeo-Christian traditions. Cyrus released upwards of 40,000 Jewish slaves from Persia, and allowed them to return to their homeland. This seemed to them such an unprecedented act that in the Jewish mind of the day, and in the story as handed down through Hebrew scripture, this pagan king qualified as a servant of Yahweh. Nearly 2,600 years later this reputation endures. While those Jews returning to their ancestral homeland record this as nothing short of an act of God, for Cyrus it was business as usual. He found that tolerance of regional cultures facilitated maintaining stability across an empire stretching from central Asia northward to the edges of the Sinai southward, and from where Turkey now rests in the west to India in the east (Kuhrt, 1995). While that helped him maintain internal peace, one innovation in psychological warfare served Cyrus best in war. He established an elite guard that gained a reputation for immortality.
These soldiers earned their reputation as "Immortals" by never leaving bodies for the enemy to find. With similar armor and concealed faces, the Immortals would fight, and when one of them fell others removed the body from the field. Then another looking just like the fallen took his place. Enemies never had a chance to see how many they killed, and could easily believe they had killed none. The elite force's reputation for immortality arrived before soldiers ever hit the field of battle, making foes reluctant to face them from the onset. By creating this fear in enemies even before fighting them, Cyrus set the groundwork for victory even before he had an argument, much less a battle. This power of reputation as a form of psychological warfare continues through subsequent history as a dominant theme through conflicts of all ages. In the 20th Century it manifests in the reputations of the Israeli Army, British SAS, and U.S. Military Green Berets, Rangers, and Seals. It influenced the Falklands War when the first British troops landed, and many Argentine soldiers chose to abandon posts rather than confront Ghurkas. In a very real way it carries the U.S. military in contemporary international perception. Hollywood exports from Rambo to Act of Valor reinforce -- with obviously differing degrees of believability -- a desired perception of the prowess of American fighting men.
Alexander the Great:
Two centuries after Alexander III of Macedon first led his troops across the Hellespont, Persia may have felt little threat. In a few years, though, the reputation of Alexander the Great always arrived ahead of him in any place he sought to conquer. With each new battle the young genius reinforced his undefeated reputation. While Alexander gained as much a reputation for negotiation as for war, doubtless his prowess at war facilitated negotiation. When an undefeated general arrives to negotiate, it motivates resolution. For Alexander merely winning minds just to win the battle did not suffice. A student of Aristotle, Alexander believed completely in the superiority of Hellenistic culture, He intended to secure conquered lands by including them within one broad cultural empire.
Once conquered, societies soon found themselves speaking Greek, and students learned Greek philosophy. Devotion to literacy marked Alexander's Hellenistic culture. He encouraged soldiers to intermarry with local populations, and to make the traditions of his native Greek city states traditions of all he conquered. Perhaps his most significant psychological battle involved the Gordian knot. While the legend of its origin may only have a remnant of historical validity, historically the legend did exist in Alexander's time. Details of what exactly the Gordian knot was, and exactly how Alexander loosed it, disagree even in ancient accounts (Arrian, 1971 [ed.]; Fredricksmeyer, 1961).
What matters is how it demonstrates Alexander's awareness of the power of symbols. Whether Alexander accepted the legend that whoever loosed the Gordian rightfully ruled Asia did not matter, as long as those he chose to conquer believed so. Whether he literally cut through it with a sword -- as the best known account claims -- or found a way to remove the knot from its post and then untie it, the effect was the same on those who believed the legend. Alexander loosed the knot, so was bound to conquer.
The Mongols:
The effectiveness of Mongol psychological tactics and strategies continues in evidence through modern usage of their word for "army" or "camp". In modern times the word "horde" conjures images of confusion and massive numbers descending on overwhelmed victims. In fact the Mongols often went into battle outnumbered three to one, yet the spread of their empire under Genghis Khan remains unmatched today. Mobility and autonomy served as psychological tools for Mongols. Though heavily armed the Mongol hordes served more as a light infantry of their day than did the heavily armored opponents they faced.
Genghis Khan trusted enough in his army's discipline and training to permit soldiers greater self-direction in the field of battle. Should a unit of 1,000 lose its leader, each unit of 100 understood the strategic priorities and strategies enough to complete the mission. Combined, these factors generated several valuable psychological results. Because the Mongols coordinated movements over great distances with no apparent communication, they seemed to have near psychic control over movements in battle. Their mobility allowed separate units to traverse great distances before converging on an enemy target. Then they seemed to come from every direction at once.
Several men carrying three torches apiece made the forces seem larger. Some also benefitted from Chinese silk in undergarments. This was strong enough to prevent full penetration from arrows fired at a distance. It also protected pierced skin when arrows were tipped in poison. The effect on an enemy of seeing a Mongol fighter get shot by an arrow, pull it out, and keep on fighting would have been unsettling at best. Like the Persians and Greeks before them, the reputation of the Mongols arrived before they did. It made cities more amenable to negotiation and surrender without fighting, especially since Mongols intentionally let some survivors escape to spread the tales of their ferocity in actual combat.
----------------------------------------------------
James Scott is the CEO of Princeton Corporate Solutions, a corporate globalization and political strategies firm, PCS offers a unique blend of think tank, corporate and governmental communication strategies to expedite the facilitation of long lasting relationship building in these necessary sectors. http://princetoncorporatesolutions.com
EasyPublish this article: http://submityourarticle.com/articles/easypublish.php?art_id=291397
No comments:
Post a Comment