Diplomacy as a Constant 

 

  

 

 

  

Leadership and Command

By Terrance Jones

Founder-The JISS Corporation

April 9th, 2010

Today I’m going to cover leadership.

 

What is leadership?  Leadership is a status, and leadership is a rank.  But the status should always precede the rank because the status is proof because it has to be earned.  A leader is made from one who learns to follow, who listens to learn.  Then understanding that from these experiences, one will be able to share what has been learned to protect those who learn from him or her. This is leadership. 

 

We’re talking about leadership, leadership as far as status.  Once again, status should always precede rank because it’s indicative of a skill set that has been developed, a status that has been earned once again. Getting to the rank, rank relates to something that has been earned, but we know that everyone is not promoted in perfect symmetry with their abilities due to mission essential tasks concerning the numerical troop strength of an army.  It’s very important to understand that from the general’s position on down, generalship concerning officers is indicative of a status, a skill set, that has been developed, the status being earned, the skill set being developed.  And it precedes the rank.  It proves the rank, strengthens the rank, facilitates compliance from subordinates.Concerning the status of a leader, of a general, of a junior officer, and, of course, with the NCO corps as well, we know that leadership ultimately is indicative of your position, of your role. 

Let’s get into the more elevated status of leadership, of rank. There is a difference concerning leaders, and this transcends the military.  There’s a difference between leadership and command.  A leader in the military can be tasked with a mission, with a different type of command, a unit, platoon, squad, a troop.  This is leadership relevant to a tasked assignment, an opportunity. 

 

 

Contrast this with command.  Command is indicative of how you lead.  Do you have command of your troops?  Do you have command of the situation in a strategic, tactical and operational sense?  A command could be indicative of your subordinates, their numerical troop strength, their assimilation and variation of the same, squad, platoon, company, troops, battalion, brigade, division, and command can be your influence, your leadership capabilities that compel one to follow orders, to follow instructions in a way that will strengthen the team, the military contingent.  Casualty aversion will be realized at an optimal level as a result. This strengthens the command of a leader.  This also increases the influence and command of the leader and optimizes forced cohesion. We know that there are leaders and there are commanders.  There are commanders who are leaders, and there are commanders who have command over their troops, over the disposition of the same in the strategic, tactical, and operational situations that they address in theater, at home, and abroad. 

 

If you have command, this is a form of governance, but in a political sense, this is not exactly governance because governance can be, in essence, the same as an assigned mission, assigned task, a created opportunity that gives you the opportunity to show that you were worthy of a given status, that you have earned it, and that you ultimately have command over this situation strategically, tactically, and operationally. This is a military related articulation, but we must also make the distinction that relates to the political spectrum as well. Historically, not everyone who has been tasked with governance has been able maintain command of all situations.  This is just the reality. Yet, those who do have command over various situations are excellent leaders and governors in the political spectrum, and given societal regions that strengthens our nation as a whole.

 

 

Too often, there is a distinction between leadership, governance and command. Governance, which is indicative of how you govern, how you lead, should be a clear articulation of how leadership and command strengthens both nations and the leaders who govern. General Douglas MacArthur is the perfect example of this, as he governed in post-World War II Japan for seven years, bringing them from nuclear destruction, the traumatizing effects of the same, to a functional and viable nation in seven years’ time.  You have leadership here.  He was a leader, given a task, given a mission, an opportunity.  He had command of a nation in this sense, and he also had command in the way that he led, the way that he took advantage of his opportunities, the way that he used his resources and his personnel. This is leadership, governance and command in every sense of the word. So this is understanding the difference between status and rank and where status meets rank, and understanding the difference between leadership, command and governance, the similarities between the same and the political and military perspectives that are represented by the same.  

 

 

 

2/24/2010 

Diplomacy Related Balance of Power Variables (BPV)

Terrance Jones

Founder

The JISS Corporation

 

“The United States had been created, enlarged and sustained at every point of its history not only by its own exertions but by the workings of the European state system. Did the decision to go to war in April 1917 mean that the United States had come to realize that fundamental changes in the world balance of power no longer required direct and sustained American participation in the functioning of a reformed system of world public order?”

Eugene V. Rostow, “Toward Managed Peace”

 

The United States clearly understood that their role in global leadership was one of transcendence from participation to leadership as a globally emerging nation. Therefore, the United States also understood that a stated commitment must be indicative of their willingness to act in defense of interests the United States are tasked with protecting as well as preserving. Here is an example of diplomacy related “balance of power” variables that have guided the United States through difficult times:  

 

Oversight

 

Global balance of power issues requires strict oversight from global leaders across the globe, as security and stability are obtained through focus and a high level of preparedness. Redundancy is critical in this respect and plays an influential role in creating scenario’s where the world’s global leaders are successful in forming, managing and resourcing strong alliances.  

 

Exertion

Diplomacy as an inclination and initiative is highly exertive in regards to the economic and societal variables it has substantial influence over. The significant cost and exertions of personnel, materials and budgetary allocations are heavily outnumbered by societal impact that weighs heavily on the mind of all those who participate in diplomatic initiatives.    

 

Sustainability

Diplomatic initiatives as a rule are accepted based on the sustainability of its social, regional and global benefits. Additionally, the previously mentioned oversight variable provides nations with sustainable leadership as well.