A Nation's Ability to Survive is Dependent upon Military Strength?

A nation's ability to survive is often dependent upon its military strength.
Describe a specific situation in which a nation's ability to survive might not depend on its military strength. Discuss what you think determines when a nation's ability to survive is dependent upon its military strength.
___


Militaries serve a crucial role as vehicles for completing a nation's objectives. Their most important purpose is to defend a nation from attacks within and outside of its borders. In addition, they also may launch offensive attacks on enemies for various reasons, such as preventing the suspected accumulation of weapons of mass destruction and helping to depose authoritarian leaders of other nations (to site recent examples). Usually military strength correlates with a country's relative power in the world. However, possession of military strength is not always necessary for a nation's survival.

Militaries have helped their respective countries promote goals in nation building. While the expansion of territories is no longer a widely accepted practice, nations for several centuries have grown their territories through the use of military strength. For instance, the powers of Europe spread their influence in the newly discovered western hemisphere and other parts of the world from the 15th to 19th century . The native people of these territories could not defend themselves using their unsophisticated weapons. Those nations with guns and other tools of military strength quite easily took over wide areas of land. The New World countries eventually gained independence from the colonists; However, today's inhabitants of the western hemisphere continue cultural traditions inherited by the conquistadors, including language and religious practices.

Militaries have also played an important role in ensuring victories during times of war. The United States, especially following WWII, started to strengthen its military in response to the Communist threats. While major wars, such as those in Vietnam and Iraq have not been characterized as "successful," the US military strength helped achieve its defense and security goals in many other smaller contexts. In the present, this includes subduing various actors suspected of terrorism links.

When a nation does not have close allies of great military strength, it is important for it to have its own powerful military capabilities. This is especially important in fending off attacks from outside forces. In a recent example, President Gaddafi of Libya has isolated himself and does not possess allies of great strength. It has been an uphill battle for them to fight against NATO and its allied military forces. Indeed, Gaddafi's military weakness in relation to its enemies will spell the end of his rule sooner or later. The nation of Libya will survive but not under the leadership that they have been accustomed to for the last 30 yrs.

A nation with powerful allies, however, need not have a strong military to survive. For example, the formation of the European Union resulted in a sort of United States of Europe. In times, of war, nations of member nations, such as Switzerland, can probably count on defense assistance from its more military-capable leaders, such as England and France. Also, nations that receive substantial aid from world powers can also survive without possessing its own powerful military. Israel, for example, has a relatively strong military but not nearly as strong as that of the United States. With substantial funding from the US, Israel can maintain this strength and defend itself from certain threats posed by its Arabic neighbors.

Indeed, military strength is a strong indicator of a nation's relative standing in the world. A powerful military not only can help a nation defend itself from outside and inside threats---it can also promote other objectives such as expanding territory and subjugating people of other nations. Use of a military in certain instances, such as fighting a war deemed unnecessary for maintaining a nation's security, may prove unpopular with the people. However, leaders of nations can use their gift of gab and argument to justify any situation they feel warrants military intervention.