Although the modern world is quite civilized, war between states and within their borders remains one of the main methods of solving political problems. Despite the presence of international organizations and protector states, armed conflicts are not uncommon in African countries and in the East. Some states are in a state of constant sluggish armed confrontation. This nature of modern wars and armed conflicts is increasingly common in states where ethnically diverse populations are forced to live within a common border.
Types of wars depending on the scale of the conflict
Due to globalization, the nature of modern wars and armed conflicts is gradually changing. All members of the military can be drawn into an active power conflict.political or economic bloc. And today there are three most high-tech armies. These are the troops of NATO, Russia and China: a hypothetical active war between the two representatives of this list will automatically be large-scale. This means that it will take place over a large area without the formation of a united front of confrontation.
The second, fundamentally different type of war is a local armed conflict. It either arises between two or more countries within their borders, or takes place within the framework of one state. Armies of states, but not military blocs, participate in such a confrontation. It is characterized by a small number of participants and involves the presence of a front.
Nature of hostilities
The nature of modern wars and armed conflicts can be briefly presented in the form of pairs: active or sluggish, positional or generalized, interstate or civil, conventional or illegitimate… An active war is accompanied by maintaining a front or conducting sabotage activities, supporting constant hostilities.
Slow warfare is often accompanied by a lack of significant clashes between the opposing armies, while priority is given to sabotage activities or the rare use of remote attack means. Slow conflicts are often local and can continue even permanently in the absence of hostilities.
This situation is possible in regions with insufficiently formed statehood, which has neither the legitimate right nor the authority to initiate the conclusion of peace. The result of such a confrontation is the emergence of a local “hot” spot, which often requires the presence of a foreign peacekeeping contingent.
Conventional and illegitimate wars
This classification of the nature of modern wars implies their division depending on the observance of human rights and international agreements regarding the use of weapons. For example, conflicts involving terrorist organizations or self-proclaimed states that directly destroy or cause infrastructural harm to existing countries will be called illegitimate. Such are the conflicts with the use of prohibited weapons.
Against the participants in such conflicts, "global arbiters" can form military blocs in order to destroy organizations and armies whose tactics of warfare are contrary to international norms and conventions. However, this does not mean that conventional wars are strongly supported.
Convention war simply does not violate international rules, and the warring parties use legal weapons and provide assistance to the wounded of their enemy. Convention wars are aimed at preserving the civilized nature of warfare, which is designed to save the maximum number of human lives.
High precisionweapons
Due to the peculiarities of the technical equipment of large armies, priority in the conflicts in which they were involved is given to a global disarming strike. This type of warfare involves the comprehensive and simultaneous neutralization of known enemy military facilities. The concept involves the use of high-precision weapons designed to hit only military targets, providing maximum protection for the civilian population.
Distance Wars
An important feature of the nature of modern wars and armed conflicts is the maximum increase in the distance between the opposing armies in order to conduct remote attacks. They must be carried out with the maximum use of the means of delivery of ammunition and the minimum involvement of human resources. Priority is given to the means of warfare that ensure the safety of the soldier of his army. However, as the main military means, those are used that ensure the infliction of maximum damage to enemy troops. Examples include artillery, navy, aviation, nuclear weapons.
The ideological background of wars
In such a broad concept as the nature of modern wars and armed conflicts, OBJ as a field of knowledge highlights ideological training. This is the name of a system of values and knowledge that is natural for a certain nationality or artificially nurtured. It is aimed either at creation, or it brings up the goal of destroying its ideological opponents. A striking example isa direct follower of Christianity is radical Islamism.
In the Middle Ages, Christianity as a very aggressive religion led to numerous wars, including with the adherents of Islam. The latter were forced to defend their states and we alth during the Crusades. At the same time, Islam as a system of knowledge and as a religion was formed against aggressive Christianity. Since that moment, wars have taken on a character not only as a means of achieving advantages in geopolitics, but also as a measure to protect one's value system.
Religious and ideological wars
Strictly speaking, after the formation of various ideologies, power confrontations began to take on a religious character. Such is the nature of modern wars and armed conflicts, some of which, as in the inhumane Middle Ages, pursue the goal of seizing territories or we alth under favorable pretexts. Religion as an ideology is a powerful system of values that delineates a clear boundary between people. Then, in the understanding of opponents, the enemy is really an enemy that has no points of contact.
The Importance of Ideology in Modern Warfare
Having such an attitude, a soldier is more cruel, because he understands how far he is from his opponent in understanding even elementary things. It is much easier to fight armed with such beliefs, and the effectiveness of ideologicallytrained army is much higher. This also means that modern wars often arise not only because of the desire to gain geopolitical advantages, but also because of national and ideological differences. In psychology, this is called an overvalued idea, armed with which a soldier can forget about leniency towards the vanquished and about international conventions adopted to reduce casu alties during wars.
Identification of the aggressor
The main paradox in the nature of modern wars and armed conflicts is the definition of an aggressor. Since in the context of globalization many countries are present in economic or political blocs, the warring parties may have a number of allies and indirect opponents. At the same time, one of the most important tasks of an ally is to support a friendly state, regardless of its correctness. This leads to international problems, some of which are provoked by distortions of reality.
Both frankly negative aspects and positive ones can be distorted. Such crises in international relations threaten war even to those states that did not participate in armed confrontation before fulfilling allied obligations. This is one of the paradoxical features of the nature of modern wars and armed conflicts. The content of the literature on geopolitics directly confirms such conclusions. Examples are easy to find in military conflicts in Syria and Ukraine.
Prospects for the use of nuclear weapons
The hypothetical nature of modern wars and armed conflicts of the Russian Federation suggests the possible usenuclear weapons. Their use can be justified by the UN Security Council both in relation to the Russian Federation and against other states. Such a development of events is possible for the reason that nuclear weapons are highly effective as a means of preemption and disarmament. Likewise, nuclear weapons, like WMD, have no disadvantages in terms of long-term damage to the environment. That is, in the case of the use of nuclear weapons in a certain territory, the defeat occurs due to the blast wave, but not due to radioactivity.
The nuclear reaction stops immediately after the use of weapons, and therefore the territory will not be contaminated with radioactive substances. And unlike local wars, confrontations at the global level are of a different nature. In modern military conflicts, the main approaches are reduced to the maximum protection of the civilian population of the warring parties. This is one of the main pretexts by which the use of nuclear weapons to disarm an illegitimate adversary can be justified in global wars.
Prospects for the use of other WMD
Chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in a global war, as analysts suggest, will not be used. It can be used by the warring parties within the framework of local conflicts. But armed confrontation on a global scale, involving small states, can also lead to the use of chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction by poorly equipped armies.
The army of the Russian Federation, China and NATO are parties to international conventions and have abandonedchemical and biological weapons. Moreover, the use of such weapons does not fully fit into the concept of a global disarming strike. But within the framework of local wars, and especially in the case of the emergence of terrorist organizations, such an outcome should be expected from non-governmental armies not burdened by international treaties and conventions. The use of chemical or biological weapons harms both armies.
Prevention of hostilities
The best war is the one that fails. It is strange, but such utopian ideals are possible even in conditions of constant "sabre-rattling" of weapons, which is often seen in the politics of Russia, NATO, and China. They often conduct demonstration exercises and improve their weapons. And as part of identifying the nature of modern wars and armed conflicts, the presentation of military means and achievements should be considered in the context of demonstrating one's military strength.
This tactic allows you to show your army and thus prevent an active attack by a potentially enemy state. For a similar purpose, nuclear weapons are stored today. It is obvious that its stock in the world is excessive, but developed countries contain it in large quantities for the purpose of the so-called nuclear deterrence.
This is one of the war prevention tactics that requires the possessor of WMD to have common sense and a desire to resolve conflicts through diplomacy. This also confirms that the modern concept of warfare comes down to building up combat power. This is necessary in order to achieve victory withminimal consequences for their army and their own state. However, this applies to defensive wars, and in a civilized world, the predominance in military power is not a sign of aggression - this is one of the war prevention tactics.
