Recent times have raised several questions regarding the ability and authority of nation states to address their economical and military obligations within acceptable financial and security parameters. It is becoming increasingly clear that military growth and the sustainability of military actions is tied closely to the state of finances of nations through which the military acquires its mandate and its funding. The military establishment must therefore take note of changes in the economy since recent trends are likely to affect funding for the military and dictate how the military conducts its affairs. Two theorists, Kaplan and Huntington have delved into some of these issues in the hope that they can shed some light at some of the recent changes as economical forces change the face of national economies. This has brought a necessity to create policies based on a careful analysis of what has come to be referred to as the International Security Environment. This involves evaluating trends which have major impacts for security policies and designing rules which will ensure that we are better placed to deal with future crisis and military needs. Areas of concern include the repercussions of the emergence of new world powers like chon and the increased European integration.
One similarity between the scholarly discourses of both Kaplan and Huntington is their equivocal believe that the nation state has no real future and its end is just a matter of time. Huntington believes that the nation state as we know it is likely to end with changes in civilization. Along the same line of thought, Kaplan believes that this end will be a result of shifts in demographic and environmental factors which will invariably lead to unprecedented chaos. The only difference between these seemingly consensual assertions is the cause of the eventual end and the possible timing. Both these theorists believe that economical forces which tend to push nation states to adopt globalization and in turn erode their sovereign power as independent states. As the state loses its power and companies gain more autonomy to operate on a global scale without the restrictions of borders or local laws, the majority of the world population is likely to use culture as a uniting point against state authority.
In the likelihood that this end does actually happen, what would this spell for the military? The military is tied to the coercive power of the state and an end to state authority and the birth of chaos would end a unified military as we know it. The growth of capitalism has eroded several basic instincts like religion and feudal traditions which fostered respect for law and leaders. Both Kaplan and Huntington agree with this view and feel that the end outcome of continued capitalism would be an overthrow of current systems. The military having no central command and without a unified source of revenue would disintegrate and various groups would raise their own local militia to protect their interests. Over all, the government needs to find ways of ensuring that globalization doe not continue to erode its power since without its sovereign legitimacy, even the military can’t save the nation state.