Get help from the best in academic writing.

The South African Platinum Mining Industry Economics Essay

The problem here is that due to the small sizes of the tunnels, capital cannot be substituted for expensive labour MineWeb, Lawrence Williams, and therefore suppliers are stuck between a rock and a hard place. The badly thought out actions of the labour will result in South African platinum producers reducing supply by cutting shafts over the long-run, which will in turn lead to an increase in prices. As part of my analysis, I will look at short-run supply and demand curves for labour and products. In order to do my analysis of the supply and demand curves, I first need to determine the market structure of the platinum market. In contrast to what economists commonly believe, I would like to prove that it is in fact competitive because platinum producers produce a homogeneous product, they are price takers, with their actions not being able to significantly affect price, and there are substitutes such as palladium available. Also, companies such as Royal Bafokeng Platinum (Royal Bafokeng Platinum, 2011 annual report), with only one operational mine, are able to compete and have entered the market recently. I have included a chart below, in which supply, demand, and average yearly price are reflected between 2002 and 2011 (Platinum Matthey and Kitco). I have calculated the correlation between movement in price and between supply (correlation of -0.22) and then demand (correlation of 0.73). While I understand that there are insufficient data points, I believe it paints a clear and unexpected picture. It therefore follows that there is a much greater correlation between demand and price, than there is between supply and price. One would expect the opposite if supply affected price. This is mainly because supply cannot be decreased significantly in the short-run due to labour costs in South Africa being seen fixed costs as a result of labour legislation. Platinum producers have therefore with the exception of 2008, where there was a reduction in supply by closing shafts, maintained a level of production close to full capacity. Figure : Platinum supply vs demand vs average yearly price (source: Platinum Matthey and Kitco) Another reason that platinum is a competitive market is because demand for platinum is fairly elastic because consumers are able to substitute platinum with palladium, which while also concentrated in a few countries, means that platinum cannot continue above a certain price. I will for the rest of the analysis assume that the platinum market is competitive and would react to changes in market variables as if it were de facto perfectly competitive. In my analysis, I would like to focus on results of recent actions by labour. I will use the short-run supply and demand curves for the provision of labour and for the product. I believe that this is the best way in which one can intuitively convey the message about the true effects of the unprotected strikes in the platinum market. The effect of the strikes in South Africa, and the unified nature of them is that the overall minimum wage, even though it was not set by the government, has increased from We to Wu and has resulted in employment moving down from L1 to L2, while the supply of labour moves from L1 to L3 over the short-term, creating an excess amount of supply. It should be noted that in the long-term this will not reverse as wages in South Africa are ‘sticky’. The strikes have therefore benefited those that have managed to remain employed in the short-term but increases permanent unemployment in a country already grappling with high unemployment of around 25% (FT, 18 October 2012, Rob Minto). Figure : Labour market equilibrium before unprotected strikes Figure : Labour market equilibrium after unprotected strikes What is also interesting about the platinum market is that South Africa provides c.80% of the world’s platinum supply and therefore major players are forced to remain in the country even though the macro and micro economics do not always stack up. So their only choices are to reduce staff, if possible, or to leave the industry. The industry wide wage increases will result in the amount able to be supplied to decrease from Q1 to Q2 as a result of shaft closures. This will in turn lead to the price to increase from Pe to P*. This will result in the world having to pay a higher price for platinum, which would potentially result in consumers switching to palladium in order to lower their costs. However, this would not happen in the short-run as auto-making processes take time to change. Figure : Product supply-demand equilibrium post strikes Figure : Product supply-demand equilibrium prior to strikes The key learning from the analysis is that workers by striking and asking for wages above the equilibrium will cause greater unemployment and a higher cost of platinum for the world. It could also result in certain companies such as Anglo American pulling out of the economy all together or companies continuing to invest in research and development relating to mechanisation of platinum mining. Both of which would be detrimental to current mineworkers. The workers should never forget that there are two factors that can be used in production and where there is a will, there is a way. To prevent this type of unprecedented scenario from happening again, the President of the Republic of South Africa has recently announced that all private and public sector executives and officials should freeze their salaries for the next twelve months in solidarity with the workforce. As he has realised that it is not only the wages of the workers that cause productivity to decrease and industrial action, but also the difference between those on the top and those at the bottom of the corporate hierarchy. South Africans and the international community will continue to watch this space.

MBA 5080 Capella University Human Resources Management Plan for CapraTek PPT

MBA 5080 Capella University Human Resources Management Plan for CapraTek PPT.

I’m working on a business project and need a sample draft to help me understand better.

Hello,I am working on a 10-part project and I am looking for some support. I have included all the instructions and guidelines. This is a 4-part assignment with each having it own guidelines and instructions. Please pay particular attention to each guideline that is required for each part. This would be most helpful in my completion of this project. Your support is greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance for your attention to detail, grammar, puntuations and no plagiarism please. I need original insights. Take care and stay safe!
MBA 5080 Capella University Human Resources Management Plan for CapraTek PPT

JWI 555 Strayer Univeristy Organizational Change and Culture Discussion Question

custom writing service JWI 555 Strayer Univeristy Organizational Change and Culture Discussion Question.

I’m working on a business question and need support to help me study.

Good evening team,undefinedI’ve been in a situation where my group was very complacent about a change that involved the centralization of business
processes. My team primarily dealt with customers day to day. As such,
many processes were handled at the field level ultimately giving some
autonomy to the employees as long as they followed general protocol and
provided a high level of customer service. When the centralization of
processes took place, many
team members felt anxious and disinterested. They went from doing all
the transactions to doing 20% of their old job. Needless to say, they
felt threatened. Thus, they did not put any effort in their role
anymore. This originated from taking part in widespread change
with no buy in from front line employees. Senior leadership realized
there needed to be changes to enhance the customer experience, minimize
audit issues and most importantly prevent risk. Many controls were put
in place to ensure we were compliant. However, 60% of the organization
did not understand the needs for change though they were warranted. undefinedThe groups located in our central operations received the change very well. They were given more responsibilities and ultimately viewed it as job
security. Conversely, the groups in the field offices located across
the US did not receive the change very well. The roll out came with
definite challenges and opportunities. There were many questions and
feedback after the initial announcement, however, it was challenging for
people to comprehend. In fact, a negative atmosphere ensued. I do
believe if there was a change management team to facilitate and oversee
the changes, there would be less resistance and complacency. One of the
most effective ways to is to listen to the people on the front line.
These employees have the most valuable feedback. Communication needs to
be constant and candid from front line employees to upper management.
The second most effective way is to show the data! Employees appreciate
transparency and any data to support why change is needed should be
shared. “Usually top management shields people from disquieting news.
Then when they try to initiate significant changes, a low sense of
urgency within middle management makes execution painfully difficult.
The change effort eventually fails or falls far short of top
management’s aspirations” (Kotter, para.7).undefinedAfter managers provided the feedback to senior leadership, additional steps were taken to address the valid concerns. Senior leadership
provided additional training and faciliated town halls to address
questions and concerns across the organization on a continuous basis.
Middle managers provided 1-1 sessions with employees and provided
resources to erase the negative inertia the change exuded. After much
effort, employees began to feel at ease about their job once again. More
importantly, complacency waned and a positive energy took over.undefinedThank you,undefinedTrishundefinedReferencesundefinedKotter, J. (2009). Four Ways to Increase the Urgency Needed for Change. Retrieved from, B. (2017). Why Complacency Kills Organizational Efforts. Retrieved from
JWI 555 Strayer Univeristy Organizational Change and Culture Discussion Question

Project management principles

Introduction of project management Project management is a planned and structured effort to achieve an objective or is the process of managing, allocating, and timing available resources to achieve the desired goal of a project in an efficient and expedient manner, for example, creating a new system or constructing a project. Project management is widely recognized as a practical way of ensuring that projects meet objectives and products are delivered on time, within budget and to correct quality specification, while at the same time controlling or maintaining the scope of the project at the correct level. Project management includes developing a project plan, which includes defining and confirming the project goals and objectives, identifying tasks and how goals will be achieved, quantifying the resources needed, and determining budgets and timelines for completion. It also includes managing the implementation of the project plan, along with operating regular ‘controls’ to ensure that there is accurate and objective information on ‘performance’ relative to the plan, and the mechanisms to implement recovery actions where necessary. Projects usually follow major phases or stages (with various titles for these), including feasibility, definition, project planning, implementation, evaluation and support/maintenance History Project management has been practiced since the early civilization. Until 1900 civil engineering projects were generally managed by creative architects and engineers by their selves, among those for example Christopher Wren (1632-1723) , Thomas Telford (1757-1834) and Isambard Kingdom Brunel (1806-1859) It has been since the 1950s, that organizations started applying systemic project management tools and techniques to complex projects. Henry Gantt (1861-1919), the father of planning and control techniques. As a discipline, Project Management developed from diverse fields of application including construction, engineering and defense. In the United States, the two forefathers of project management are Henry Gantt, called the father of planning and control techniques, who is famously acknowledged for his use of the Gantt chart as a project management tool, and Henri Fayol for his creation of the 5 management functions, which form the basis for the body of knowledge related with project and program management. Both Gantt and Fayol were known as being students of Frederick Winslow Taylor’s theories of scientific management. His work is the forerunner to modern project management tools including work breakdown structure (WBS) and resource allocation. Principles of project management The Success Principle The main goal of project management is to create a successful product. Without making a successful product there is no good point in incurring the project Management overhead cost. opposing to conventional wisdom, there have been many Projects that have been “On time and within budget” but the product has not been successful, and similarly many that have not been “On time and within budget” yet the product has been very successful. The Commitment Principle A mutually acceptable assurance between a project sponsor and a project team must exist before a viable project exists. A project sponsor is a knowledgeable person in place of the eventual owner of the product of the project and who is responsible for providing the necessary resources (money, goods, services, and general direction, as appropriate.) A project team is a knowledgeable and qualified group capable and willing to undertake the work of the project. A mutually acceptable assurance is one in which there is agreement on the goals and objectives of the project in terms of the product’s scope, quality grade, time to completion and final cost. The Tetrad-Tradeoff Principle The core variables of the project management process, namely: product scope, quality grade, time-to-produce and cost-to-complete must all be mutually consistent. The core variables of scope, quality, time and cost are interrelated rather similar to a four-cornered frame with flexible joints. One corner can be anchored and another moved, but not without affecting the other two. The Primary Communication Channel (or Unity-of-Command) Principle A single channel of communication must exist between the project sponsor and the project team leader for all decisions affecting the result of the project. This principle is essential for the effective and efficient administration of the project Commitment. The owner of the eventual product, if represented by more than one Person, must nevertheless speak with one voice. Similarly, at any given time, the project’s team must have a single point of responsibility, a project manager, for the work of the project. Such person must have the skills, experience, dedication, commitment, authority and tenacity to lead the project to success. The Cultural Environment (or Suitability) Principle An informed management must provide a helpful cultural environment to enable the Project team to produce its best work. An informed management is one which understands the project management process. A supportive cultural environment is one in which the project is clearly backed by management, and plan team members are enabled to produce their best work without unnecessary bureaucratic hindrance. This rule includes the need for management to ensure that the leadership profile and management style are suited to both the type of project and its phase in the project life-cycle. The Process Principle Effective and efficient policies and procedures must be in place for the conduct of the project commitment. Such policies and procedures must cover, at a minimum, clear roles and responsibilities, delegation of authority, and processes for managing the scope of work, including changes, maintenance of quality, and schedule and cost control. The Life-Cycle Principle Plan first, then do. A successful project management process relies on two activities – planning first, and then doing. These two sequential activities form the basis of every project life-cycle, and can be expanded to suit the control requirements of every type of project in every area of project management application. The project life-cycle, characterized by a series of ‘milestones’ determines when the project starts, the ‘control gates’ through which it must pass, and when the project is finished. Appraise the viability of projects and develop success/failure criteria Introduction There are a few factors to consider before any actual projects begin. The project developers must contain steps or project phases, most importantly, the original concept must be determined, and so as feasibility study, business plan, risk assessment, public enquiry, permission, organization, planning, design, procurement, fulfillment, test, handover, economic life. Project managers has the task of monitoring projects to be guided into a success, unfortunately, there are some projects that were not completed on time, over budget or being canceled in the process of building it. In general, there are common reasons that are usually found for project failures, these are a few reasons: lack of user involvement, incorrect planning or lack of planning, incomplete requirements, lack of resources, incorrect estimations. According to the 1994 Standish CHAOS statement there are top 10 factors found in successful projects. These factors are listed in Table below Project success factors Project Success Factors % of Responses User Involvement 15.9% Executive Management Support 13.9% Clear Statement of Requirements 13.0% Proper Planning 9.6% Realistic Expectations 8.2% Smaller Project Milestones 7.7% Competent Staff 7.2% Ownership 5.3% Clear Vision and Objectives 2.9% Hard-Working, Focused Staff 2.4% Some factors that contributed to project will be discussed below: – User Involvement • One of the key to success in a project is user involvement, without the user’s involvement, it may cause of failure to the entire project. Even if the project was delivered on time, and on budget, a project has a high rate of failing if the project does not meet user’s needs. -Executive Management Support • This influences the process and progress of a Project and lack of executive input can put a project at a severe disadvantage. -Clear Statement of Requirements -Proper Planning • Proper planning is one of the most important parts of developing a project, having improper planning of the project may cause a severe disadvantage to the project and result to a failure. -Realistic Expectations • Expectations of the project development outcome must be rational. If expectations in developing a project are not accurate, it may cause to a failure in building the project itself. -Smaller Project Milestones • One of the things to be needed for a complete success of a project is completing smaller project millstones, the small details of a project should not be disregarded for it may result to a minor failure. If these smaller milestones are not being achieved, it may cause a major problem in the completion of the project. -Competent Staff • Staff members play the biggest role in a project development, without the proper knowledge or skill of a staff member may cause a poor outcome to a development of a project. Staff members should be proper trained and have the proper experience before getting involved with the task that they will be handling during the project development. -Ownership -Clear Vision and Objectives -Hard working • Every staff of person that is involved in a project development must be passionate and responsible in achieving objectives. Uncommitted staff members may cause a improper outcome in the building process First of all Figure out what business you are in, and then mind your own business. Figure out what business you are in. Make sure your business is viable. Select projects that are good for your business. Understand the business value in your project and watch for changes. Be diligent in your chosen business, learning and applying best practices. Define what is inside and outside your area of responsibility. 50% of project management is simply paying attention. Understand the customer’s requirements and put them under version control. Thoroughly understand and document the customer’s requirements, obtain customer agreement in writing, and put requirements documents under version identification and change control. Requirements management is the leading success factor for systems development projects. Prepare a reasonable plan. Prepare a plan that defines the scope, schedule, cost, and approach for a reasonable project. Involve task owners in developing plans and estimates, to ensure feasibility and buy-in. If your plan is just barely possible at the outset, you do not have a reasonable plan. Use a work breakdown structure to provide coherence and completeness to minimize unplanned work. Build a good team with clear ownership. Get good people and trust them. Establish clear ownership of well-defined tasks; ensure they have tools and training needed; and provide timely feedback. Track against a staffing plan. Emphasize open communications. Create an environment in which team dynamics can gel. Move misfits out. Lead the team. Track project status and give it wide visibility. Track progress and conduct frequent reviews. Provide wide visibility and communications of team progress, assumptions, and issues. Conduct methodical reviews of management and technical topics to help manage customer expectations, improve quality, and identify problems before they get out of hand. Trust your indicators. This is part of paying attention. Use Baseline Controls. Establish baselines for the product using configuration management and for the project using cost and schedule baseline tracking. Manage changes deliberately. Use measurements to baseline problem areas and then track progress quantitatively towards solutions. Write Important Stuff Down, Share it, and Save it. If it hasn’t been written down, it didn’t happen. Document requirements, plans, procedures, and evolving designs. Documenting thoughts allows them to evolve and improve. Without documentation it is impossible to have baseline controls, reliable communications, or a repeatable process. Record all important agreements and decisions, along with supporting rationale, as they may resurface later. If it hasn’t been tested, it doesn’t work. If this isn’t absolutely true, it is certainly a good working assumption for project work. Develop test cases early to help with understanding and verification of the requirements. Use early testing to verify critical items and reduce technical risks. Testing is a profession; take it seriously. Ensure Customer Satisfaction. Keep the customer’s real needs and requirements continuously in view. Undetected changes in customer requirements or not focusing the project on the customer’s business needs are sure paths to project failure. Plan early for adequate customer support products. Be relentlessly pro-active. Take initiative and be relentlessly proactive in applying these principles and identifying and solving problems as they arise. Project problems usually get worse over time. Periodically address project risks and confront them openly. Attack problems, and leave no stone unturned. Fight any tendency to freeze into day-to-day tasks, like a deer caught in the headlights.

Philippines Insurrection And The Vietnam War History Essay

The Philippines Insurrection and the Vietnam War are two notable counterinsurgency campaigns in U.S. military history. The former was a resounding success, while the latter was one of America’s humiliating failures. The two campaigns have many similarities and some striking differences. Both offer some valuable insights into the conduct of counterinsurgency warfare in the context of the contemporary Global War on Terrorism. Counterinsurgency: the Philippines Insurrection and the Vietnam War. The contemporary Global War on Terrorism, which today, is raging on several fronts, including Afghanistan and Iraq, is undoubtedly not a conventional war but unequivocal guerilla warfare, which can be combated only through counterinsurgency tactics. In the military history of the United States, two counterinsurgency campaigns stand out for their contrasting results: the Philippines Insurrection and the Vietnam War. While the former was a triumph for America, the latter remains one of humiliating defeat, which still rankles in U.S. consciousness. A study of the conduct, similarities and differences between the Philippines Insurrection and the Vietnam War shows that several valuable lessons can be learned which are relevant to the Global War on Terror. During the Spanish – American War of 1898, American warships and troops supported the Filipinos in their struggle for freedom from Spanish colonialism. The Filipinos had succeeded in confining the Spaniards to Manila, when the Americans appeared on the scene, landing on the outskirts of the city. As ostensible allies of the Filipinos, the U.S. accepted the surrender of the Spaniards and occupied Manila. However, after the defeat of Spain, under the Treaty of Paris, the U.S. gave Spain $20 million to secure possession of the Philippines, denying the Filipinos independence. President McKinley’s ‘Benevolent Assimilation Proclamation’ formally announced the Philippines status as an American colony. Hostilities broke out between the U.S. and the Filipinos in February 1899, leading to the Philippines Insurrection, or the Philippine – American War (1899 – 1902). The military superiority of the U.S. army ensured the defeat of the Filipino army in conventional warfare by the end of the year. The Filipinos then formed into guerilla units and the war continued as ambushes, massacres and retaliatory killings until July 1902, when President Roosevelt officially declared the end of the war, although sporadic fighting continued for a decade. The Philippines achieved independence in 1946 (Bautista, 2005). The Vietnam War, or the Second Indochina War (1954 – 1975), was the offshoot of an earlier conflict against French colonialism. Vietnam overthrew France’s colonial rule in July 1954, with the decisive victory at Dien Bien Phu. Under the subsequent Geneva Peace Accords, Vietnam was pressurized by China and the Soviet Union to accept the temporary partition of the country at the seventeenth parallel, with the understanding that reunification would follow the general election scheduled for 1956. However, the U.S., under President Eisenhower, with military, economic and political aid, propped up the new Republic of Vietnam in the South, as a bulwark against the Communist North. In 1957, Ngo Dinh Diem, who became the President with U.S. aid, initiated hostilities against North Vietnam and against the dissidents, including communists, in the South. The National Liberation Front brought together the communists and all Vietnamese aspiring for reunification and engaged in active warfare against the forces of Diem. After Diem’s overthrow and death by a military coup in 1963, tacitly supported by the U.S., and President Kennedy’s assassination, President Lyndon Johnson sanctioned the active entry of U.S. troops on the Vietnamese battlefield. The NLF, supported by North Vietnam, resorted to guerilla warfare. The ‘Tet Offensive’ of 1968 was a turning point: although the U.S. forces broke the combined offensive of the NLF and North Vietnam, the scale of the offensive was a tactical failure for the Americans. President Nixon used his ‘Vietnamization’ plan to reduce the presence of U.S. troops, with the Vietnamese bearing the brunt of fighting. Finally, the Saigon government, led by President Nguyen van Thieu, was pressurized into signing the Paris Peace Agreement of January 1973 and America withdrew from the war. The conflict between North Vietnam and the now isolated South continued until April 1975, when communist forces overran Saigon (Brigham, n.d.). When we compare the Philippines Insurrection and the Vietnam War, several striking similarities emerge. The roots of both conflicts did not directly involve America. The former was a Spanish – Philippine struggle and the latter a Vietnamese – French conflict. In both cases, the U.S. entered the fray deliberately in order to widen its’ sphere of influence and further its’ military and economic interests: obstructing Germany in the Philippines and China in Vietnam. In both cases, the U.S. had initially supported its’ future adversaries. The U.S. allied with the Filipinos in their struggle against Spain, supplied them with guns and ammunition and arranged the return of Emilio Aguinaldo, the exiled leader of the Katipunan movement for independence. America then reneged on its’ trust, secretly parleyed with Spain, and colonized the Philippines. In Vietnam, Ho Chi Minh was helped by the U.S. Office of Strategic Service to continue the struggle of indigenous resistance groups against the French, before America turned against him after World War II. Approval from Congress for the declaration of war was obtained by false representations of events. In the Philippines Insurrection, the fuse for the commencement of hostilities was lit by an American sentry, W.W. Grayson, who shot and killed a Filipino soldier while on night patrol. However, U.S. reports portrayed the Filipinos as the instigators of hostilities. In Vietnam, reported attacks on U.S. warships in the Gulf of Tonkin, which did not actually occur, were used to secure a Congress resolution for war against North Vietnam. Both conflicts quickly moved from conventional warfare to guerilla campaigns that made every town and village a battlefield. The tactics employed in both cases were characterized by brutality and the indiscriminate killing of civilians. In the Philippines, in retaliation for the uprising in Balangiga, Samar, which resulted in 48 American casualties, General Smith annihilated one third of the population of Samar with the orders, “I want no prisoners. I wish you to kill and burn” (Bautista, 2005). Concentration camps existed and torture was used to obtain information and confessions. In Vietnam, the toxic ‘Agent Orange’ was used to devastate forests and U.S. troops massacred about 208 civilians in the hamlet of My Lai in 1968. In both the Philippines and Vietnam, the vast majority of the peasants supported the insurgents and the U.S. soldiers in both cases were faced with a moral dilemma regarding the rightness of their positions. Differences in the two conflicts were largely on the nature of public opinion in the U.S. Despite the opposition of the anti-imperialist lobby, the Philippines Insurrection was supported by the public and President McKinley was reelected by a large margin. On the other hand, the Vietnam War witnessed a rising tide of anti-war protests and the downfall of President Johnson. While America’s entry into both wars was mainly due to the strategic importance of the two countries, the Philippines Insurrection was motivated by imperialism while the Vietnam War was founded on nebulous, anti-communist ideology. In the Philippines, the Americans were direct governors, while in Vietnam, they played an advisory role. The Philippines Insurrection has been termed “one of the most successful counterinsurgencies waged by a Western army in modern times” (Donnelly and Serchuk, 2003). This success can be attributed to three major factors. First, the Americans were well trained, numerically superior, with technologically advanced weapons and supported by the warships anchored off the coast of Manila. In contrast, the Filipinos lacked training and were poorly equipped: they carried some rifles but the majority wielded spears, lances and ‘bolos’ – big knives. The lack of unity among the Filipino generals was the second major cause for America’s success. Personal feuds and jockeying for political power led to the marginalization of leaders such as Apolinario Mabini and the killing of able militarists like Antonio Luna and undermined the insurgency. Emilio Aguinaldo, with his facile capitulation, first to exile by the Spaniards and then to surrender to the Americans, was not a leader of moral stature or determination. Finally, the insurgency was dispersed among the towns and villages around Luzon, with no unified command. This enabled the U.S. to localize and effectively wipe out the insurgents on a case by case basis and divert troops to problematic areas, once each area had been cleared and the locals persuaded into cooperation. When we analyze the American failure in Vietnam, three major factors stand out. Firstly, the Viet Cong, supported on all fronts by a North Vietnam backed by China and the Soviet Union, was an ideologically motivated, disciplined and well armed force, further bolstered by the loyalty of the local populace. Secondly, the Diem regime, propped up by America, resorted to repressive measures which alienated the locals, particularly the Buddhist clergy and the peasants. This further undermined the U.S. position. Finally, the draft and the mounting number of American casualties inflamed U.S. public opinion and influenced the elections: the gathering anti-war protests made retreat the only viable option for the American government. In the present context of the Global War on Terrorism, several valuable lessons can be learned from the U.S. involvement in the Philippines Insurrection and the Vietnam War. The foremost is that American public opinion must be in favor of U.S. involvement in the conflict. Only with public approval can the U.S. shoulder the escalating costs in human casualties and monetary expenditure that counterinsurgency, with its’ protracted timeframe, inevitably entails. A stable local government, which has the support of the local populace, is an essential condition for success against insurgents. The motivation for the conflict must be valid, tangible and proven (Olbermann, 2006). Counterinsurgency calls for the deployment of ground forces that equal or exceed those used in conventional warfare. It is lost or won at the grass-roots level. The best approach is to devolve command and encourage innovative military leadership, adapted to prevailing conditions, at the local level. Acquaintance with the locals leads to the gathering of reliable intelligence. As local cadres and supporters are co-opted into military and civil government and given economic and political incentives for cooperation, the insurgents’ home bases will be eroded. Long term commitment is a precondition for success (Donnelly and Serchuk, 2003). In fighting the Global War on Terror, it must be borne in mind that fighting an ideology or a mind – set, such as communism in Vietnam, is infinitely more difficult than targeting boundaries or a nation, as in the Philippines. Democracy, Communism and Terrorism are all intangible motives. As Jeanne Kirkpatrick said in 1979, “Vietnam — taught us that the U.S. could not serve as the worlds’ policeman — (and) the danger of trying to be the worlds’ midwife to democracy when the birth is scheduled to take place under conditions of guerilla war” (, web site. n.d.). In this global war, perhaps the most valuable lesson to be applied is that from the Vietnam War: “The first principle of anti-guerilla warfare is to provide the people with a genuinely better form of life than the enemy offers” (McCormick, 2006). Familiarization with the local culture and the elimination of perceived injustice by the U.S. troops or the U.S. supported regime, are steps towards the winning of the hearts of the locals. This, coupled with public support and resolve, are the prerequisites for rooting out any insurgency.

Essay Writing at Online Custom Essay

5.0 rating based on 10,001 ratings

Rated 4.9/5
10001 review

Review This Service