What is strategy
and why is it important? Strategy is not confined to one realm of life.
Strategy is not merely political, nor is it confined to the business realm. Simply
put, strategy is ubiquitous. It is a premeditated
attempt to contend with situations as they arise in order to achieve a desired
outcome. Lawrence Freedman, professor of War Studies at Kings College in London
and foreign policy adviser to Tony Blair, describes strategy as “The best word
we have for expressing attempts to think about actions in advance, in the light
of our goals and our capacities.”
A clearly defined
strategy for organizations, governments, and sports teams can lead to more successful
endeavors. A bad strategy, or worse, a lack
of strategy can lead to a grinding halt in the process, or a grinding halt
may be part of a much more elaborate strategy – much like Kristina Vogel in the
2014 UCI Track Worlds. One would believe that a sprint would be a test of raw strength. However,
Vogel, relying heavily on strategy, brings her bike to a standstill in the
middle of the race – hoping that her competition will pass her, thus allowing
her to draft behind and save her legs until she would need to pass in the last
seconds. In an intensely strategic maneuver, she stops her bike not once, but
twice, in the last heat. She established a predetermined final outcome and used
a counterintuitive but brilliant strategy to achieve victory. Regardless, Vogel
ended up beating her opponent using raw skill and strength – showing that
strategy is based on real time events and must be flexible and fluid in
order to be successful.
An
end goal is paramount to the development of a strategy. Freedman emphasizes
that “strategy comes into play where there is actual or potential conflict”. It
would be quite accurate to call the current situation in Syria a conflict. The
ongoing civil war along with the influx of other powers in the region has
caused not only a major migrant problem, but has raised several questions of
international human rights violations.
In
2012 President Obama issued a “red line” for the Assad regime which was
additionally bolstered by a 2003 congressional legislation aimed at forbidding Syrian
use of chemical weapons.
This red line was crossed and surprisingly enough no promised military action
or “enormous consequences” have been taken against those responsible for the
violation. This begs the question: Did the Obama administration have a strategy
for dealing with Syria or did they rely mainly on bluffing in hopes that the
Assad Regime wouldn’t advance further? The US’s delayed reaction to the crisis
in Syria has allowed many other players such as Russia to assert themselves in
the region, leaving us with even worse intervention prospects. As noted above,
a proper strategy must be both fluid and flexible, something that the US
response has not been. The lack of strategy in this scenario left us blindsided
and thus hurt our international credibility. Additionally, the influence of
Russia in the region has shown us Russia’s desire to be an international player
and the strategy used to establish this status.
If
we look to continue to be a world leader it is imperative that we formulate a strategy. Whether this strategy is
driven by a heavy reliance on international intervention or a withdrawn
international presence, it is crucial that we have a strategy. As a leader it
is inappropriate to speak in one way and act in another. We should first look
internally and decide who we want to be, how we wish to act, and most
importantly develop a strategy that mirrors these two ideals.
No comments:
Post a Comment