Who goes to war first?

Who Goes to War First?: Exploring the Complexity of Conflicts

Wars are complex and multifaceted events that involve numerous variables and stakeholders. Understanding who initiates or precipitates conflicts can provide valuable insights into the dynamics of war-making. In this article, we will delve into the issue of who goes to war first and examine the various factors that influence this phenomenon.

Initial Questions and Assumptions

When considering who goes to war first, it’s natural to assume that it is the aggressor nation that initiates the conflict. However, the complexity of modern warfare often obscures the lines between belligerents and civilian populations. Moreover, conflicts are often the result of prolonged tensions, political upheaval, and social inequality. To better understand this concept, let’s clarify the following:

• What defines an aggressor state?
• How do regional dynamics and global powers shape conflicts?
• Can individual groups or non-state actors spark wars?

Definition of an Aggressor State

An aggressor state can be defined as a country that initiates hostile military actions against another country, often without a compelling security justification. In practice, determining who is the aggressor can be difficult due to the complexities of political and military contexts.

• Case in point: The 1999 NATO intervention in Kosovo sparked debates about who was the aggressor. The Albanian majority in Kosovo felt victimized by Serbian President Slobodan Milošević’s forces, while Serbia argued it was defending its sovereignty against NATO’s intervention.
• Gray areas: Countries like Israel and Palestine can be seen as perpetuators of violence against each other, making it challenging to identify a single aggressor.

Regional Dynamics and Global Powers

Regional and global powers often have a significant impact on who initiates or perpetuates conflicts. These dynamics can involve:

• Hegeemony: Dominant countries may use their power to shape regional agendas, manipulate events, and encourage smaller nations to align with their interests.
• Conflict zones: Areas experiencing high levels of instability or territorial disputes can create hotspots for conflict.
• Proxy wars: Bigger powers may use surrogate forces to achieve their strategic goals, often in secret.

Table: Notable Examples of Regional Conflicts

Non-State Actors and Conflicts

Non-state actors like terrorist organizations, militias, or rebel groups can contribute significantly to the initiation of wars. These groups may use violent means to achieve their goals, often in regions already experiencing instability.

• Case in point: ISIS exploited Syria’s Civil War and Iraq’s instability to declare a caliphate in 2014. Other terrorist organizations, such as al-Qaeda, have perpetrated similar actions.
• Wider implications: The activities of non-state actors can draw in larger, regional, or global powers, escalating conflicts.

In Conclusion

The age-old question of who goes to war first is intricate and multifaceted. This article has explored various aspects of conflict initiation, from the definition of an aggressor state to the involvement of regional and global powers, as well as the role of non-state actors.

Key Points to Remember:

• Conflict initiation is often complex, involving multiple stakeholders and dynamics.
• The line between aggressor and target is often blurred.
• Global powers and regional hegemonies can influence conflicts through proxy wars, influence operations, and diplomatic means.
• Non-state actors, such as terrorist organizations or rebel groups, can trigger wars or escalate existing conflicts.
• Understanding the drivers and complexities of conflicts can lead to more effective resolution and prevention strategies.

Additional Reading:

• Johnson, C. A. (2016). Understanding International Conflict. Longman.
• Small, M., & Singer, J. D. (1969). Resort to arms: International and civil wars, 1816-1964. Human Conflict.