Small is not only big, but also takes up a lot of space. Sachets getting shelf priority and micro-ideas capturing a significant mind-share are just few examples of how bite-sized phenomena are not only creating paradigm shifts in industries, but also becoming pervasive in our daily lives. Communication has been transformed drastically: letters have been replaced by 160-character SMSs and 140-character tweets (now 280) as the preferred mode. The attributes of simplicity, availability and frugality of apps have crawled their way into diverse tangents of life, including conflicts. In a world full of apps and devices, even conflicts are broken down into many tiny manageable chunks: appified into various dimensions.
War has evolved from a clash of swords to the looming threat of massive destruction at the press of a button. Technology has facilitated every process it has come in contact with, and warfare is no exception. Satellite surveillance and unmanned aerial vehicles containing explosives have nullified the necessity of having a large army to inflict damage. A war used to be relatively short-lived with a huge casualty: it was a special event. Today’s war runs parallel to the natural flow of people’s lives, akin to culture, and has a much lower death toll. There is no war zone or formal declaration of war, since everyone, in their own capacity, is already an active component of the global conflicts.
The concept of war has been reshaped beyond the classic definition that required a specific landmass, a sovereign state and sizable troops and fleets. We now witness non-state entities peddling chaos comparable in impact to that of legislature-approved ones. It was once virtually impossible to foresee the catastrophic damage that can be dealt today by means of a coffee-shop, internet access and a small group of people with strong intents. Even the nature of intentions has evolved. Conflicts are nowadays driven more by an appetite for economic benefits rather than political ideology
Another shift in conflict patterns is evident through states and non-state entities alike favoring proxy wars. Instead of engaging directly to protect one’s interests, the players choose to play an indirect game. This involves imposing sanctions, arming enemies of the enemy, and the constant streaming of propaganda across all media. An ongoing conflict, such as that between Israel and Palestine, also has a franchise in social media. Advocates and critics on both sides are expressing their views through social networks. The hashtag revolution is not merely a fad, but a rich source of readily assimilated public opinion. It is now equally important to dominate the web as it is to claim territorial control. The use of media to manufacture the context of a war has popped out of the screen and into our front yards. Hollywood movies such as Wag the Dog demonstrated the ‘business case’ of war through misdirection and diversion of people’s attention. Now, we see states using media to propagate bias and invade a country based on speculative “alternative facts”. As far as human actions and their consequences are concerned, objective reality is a theoretical entity best reserved for academicians to ponder upon. A much bigger and more relevant factor in the domain of conflicts is contextual truth, which is shaped largely by the media.
War and peace have now become a conversation that we are all part of, intentionally or inadvertently. The availability of smartphones affordable to the masses and the proliferation of the internet have made it very easy to spread ideology. However, each time the message changes hands or bounces off a blog post to forums to social media, the ideology goes through several adaptations, interpretations and revisions. This is why we are now witnessing the rapid spreading of loosely connected ideology and a greater focus on the economic aspects of the conflicts. People cannot claim a politically apathetic stance so easily anymore. The debates are finding their way into our devices and we feel compelled to engage with them. Modern day conflicts are more personal this way and they require well-crafted personal responses in turn.
The availability of technology has made conflicts cheaper and more accessible. The startup-esque nature of these insta-conflicts, combined with the fast and involved participation of the masses in dialogue, indicate that the impact of our responses and reactions to conflicts leave a much greater mark on history than we may have once imagined.
This article was written in 2018.
pi STRATEGY 