Change Resistance within Armed Forces Research Paper

Change Resistance within Armed Forces - Research Paper Example Nevertheless, technology has for long time been a potential in civilizations and military theatres. More so, development of technology in 20th century had a big impact to be internalized as being a requisite instrument and a determining factor in warfare. The mentality has been epitomized by the nation states which continually invest large amounts of money, time and resources in research and purchase of the new technology (Creveld 19). The perception of the technology necessity was further powered by splendidly victorious operational functionality of nuclear weapons during the Second World War (WWII) and other following frantic Arms Race take on by the two preceding Superpowers. Thus, put into operation conceptual or technological change in armed forces has always been difficult and a critical task though it has usually been that manner and happens with the great rate of organization changes (Ronald 19). Whether the change is brought by external matters like the wartime scenarios or base rearrangements and closures or from internal influence through leadership decisions, it has always been difficult. Some changes may entail consolidated financial services, weapons refurbishing or fighting technicality (Lamb et al 1984). However, the armed forces may not be opposing the change but the transition or process the changes requires and its influence. In this technology age, there has been a natural inclination to overrate the role of weapons. Prevailing views showed the degree of military technological success was estimate to be astonishing and prove decisively to outcome of wars. The importance of technological succession in the military is that the new equipments would provide a complete advantage that could be translated into an obvious victory. It is known the armed forces of a state are not longer neutral than state itself. The challenging assertion reviews the fact that armed forces like any institution of state get their legitimacy from state itself and established political regime (Kuhlmann 20). The points become most apposite in the liberal democracy where it is usually welcomed as a matter of principle which the armed forces entirely subservient to civil political authorities even when armed forces are deemed into professionalism (Lamb et al 19). When those implementing political power lose their popular support and the entire political regime loses a whole, its legitimacy no longer take pleasure in acceptance and trust of population and the state's organizations are considered inappropriate upon bringing the legitimacy of armed forces into question. In the civilian authority, the opportunity made available by technology would persuade the belief that technology is the only determinant factor in warfare. Essentially, technology is perceived to be the determining factor which offers the potency if deployed which could wane the enemies resolve and fighting capacity (Irwin 13). More so, the induction of technology would limit casualties since mounting casualties may have similar implications of wrath occurrence in its population and a drooping morale which would influence the army plans and resistance to fight. In these circumstances, it becomes a professional responsibility though it goes contrary to standard assumptions of