The Blunted Sword: The Erosion of Military Power in Modern World Politics

Evan Luard

London: I.B. Tauris & Co, London, 1988; Pages: 196

In this short book, Dr. Luard makes a strong case that the objectives of modern states are no longer purely economical but political in nature. Whereas competition for scarce resources made conflict an almost constant feature of the international system, sustainable growth has made such problems obsolete. These days, it is not territory that state leaders want, and it is not access to trade routes that they are ready to fight for. Luard argues that the competition today boils down to a quest for security, which is not to be had through traditional military means. Nuclear weapons are irrelevant not simply because no one in their right mind can conceive of using them, but because they, like most other military capabilities, are essentially inadequate to meet the challenges of the new era. According to Luard, political objectives are mostly couched in terms of appropriate political systems: e.g. democracy, which cannot be installed or supported without the consent of the local population. Although rolling in with tanks could possibly remove a leader that is unpalatable to the invader, such action can hardly inspire people to support an alternative. Thus, Luard says, modern international politics works through persuasion (and possibly economic coercion, although he does not mention this).

This is a thoughtful book and the ideas are extremely interesting, if nothing else then as another view as to why so many of the armed interventions are ill-fated. Although not a case against the nukes per se, the book is a good antidote to the arguments advanced by proponents of MAD. I am not entirely convinced that the sanguine look of the author would work without MAD, but then this is not the case he is making. The major thesis of this work is also useful to keep in mind when evaluating findings, especially statistical, that correlate military capabilities with any international phenomena. If Luard is right, this is a pointless exercise.

The second half of the book is dedicated mainly to the failed idea of United Nations. Luard, who has worked for the organization, has the insider scoop on many of the problems faced by this body. Dr. Luard seems to think that there's a huge role to be played by the UN if, and that is a big if, the organization reforms itself sufficiently. He argues that the UN should restructure so that it is better able to anticipate conflict and thus help resolve the tensions before they erupt into hostilities (which are almost impossible to handle through the UN). Luard also envisions a much more active role of Western Europe in world peacekeeping (he is British, so this is not surprising, especially when he makes claims about the long diplomatic experience of European states).

The book is recommended for international security specialists, who have not taken the time to rethink some of the most fundamental assumptions of realist theory. It is also an interesting view that would be useful for the layperson's understanding of the issues involved in world politics, especially US intervention in various places around the globe. Although written during the Cold War, the book's thesis is even more applicable today.

April 18, 2001. BLS

@BOOK{luard-88:blunted,
    TITLE     = {The Blunted Sword: The Erosion of Military Power in Modern World Politics},
    AUTHOR    = {Evan Luard},
    YEAR      = {1988},
    PUBLISHER = {I.B. Tauris & Co.},
    ADDRESS   = {London},
    ISBN      = {1-85043-068-3},
    NOTE      = {Pp. 196}
}