Elements of power

These elements will be comprehensively divided into five categories. These are:

1. Natural Elements. Geography, natural resources, and population.
2. Scientific and Technological Elements. Technology and industrial capacity, agricultural capacity, and military strength.
3. Political Elements. Type of government, bureaucratic organization, efficiency, leadership wisdom, and quality of diplomacy.
4. Social and Ideological Elements. Ideologies, national morale, national character, social structure, and social cohesiveness.
5. External and Other Elements. Reputation and image, foreign support, international strategic position, and intelligence. 

The above elements are examined in detail below.

Natural Elements:

They are so-called because they are endowed by nature and not human-made. These elements are:

1. Geography:

Since time immemorial, the most stable element upon which a nation’s power depends is geography. Geographical factors such as climate, topography, location, and size influence the power potential. For example, climate acts as one of the determinants of the culture and economy of a country. If the climate is good, there would be a better work culture leading to more productivity.

Great powers of modern times have been situated in those regions blessed with a temperate climate. Topography plays an important role in defense of nations. Topographical features such as mountains, valleys, rivers may determine natural boundaries between nations and set limits to their natural expansion.

Mountains like the Himalayas, the Alps, and the Pyrenees and rivers like the Rhine, the Rio Grande, and Yale served as guards on the boundaries between nations. The Chinese aggression on India in 1962 shattered this belief and necessitated a rethinking of the question of whether topography is important as a natural guard or not. Location determines the extent of a country’s vulnerability to invasion. It is a major determinant of whether a country is a sea-power or a land-power.

The achievements of England and Japan on the seas have been due to their being islands. Land-locked countries like Austria, Hungary, Nepal, Bhutan, etc., are at a disadvantage compared to states having outlets to the sea.

States that are located far away from the fiction zones of power can pursue an independent or neutral policy in world affairs, but the same is not true with those close to the epicenter of world politics. Size is yet another natural and tangible factor of power though it is the most deceptive of power’s physical foundations.

A large territory, if hospitable and fertile, can accommodate more people and give more natural resources. In the past, the vast size of a state’s territory was of great help to its security. It was difficult for the enemy to win and occupy a large territory. But size matters very little nowadays. Japan, for instance, even though comparatively small, defeated China and Russia. Moreover, larger territories’ utility has also diminished due to the technological revolution and the invention of Inter Continental Ballistic Missiles.

A new discipline has emerged that enables us to understand the application of political geography to statecraft. It is known as Geopolitics. It is the study of geography as it may influence foreign policy and political phenomena.

2. Natural Resources:

Natural and quantifiable, and stable elements of power are natural resources that include raw materials, agricultural products like food and fiber, forests, minerals, waterfall, soil fertility, etc. It is evident that the possession of resources such as coal, iron, uranium, oil, rubber, bauxite, manganese, other ferrous and non-ferrous metals, non-metallic minerals, and natural gas is essential to industrial and defense production in nation-states. More recently, it has been proved that the availability of petroleum at reasonable prices is important to industrial nations’ good economic health. The contemporary prosperity of many Arab countries is due to the availability of plenty of oil there.

However, it may be said that the mere possession of natural resources does not automatically generate power. Their proper utilization through advanced technology is also essential. Secondly, the rigid raw material theory of international politics was prevalent, but its popularity is now on the decline.

The invention of synthetics and other new industrial processes, the development of synthetics, and the unexpectedly high capacity of embattled populations to endure chronic shortages have all served to liberate states from the more absolutes of the theory.10

Despite these limitations, natural resources and raw materials continue to-serve a nation in its economic and military development.

3. Population:

It seems a large population is an asset to the state. But it is not really so. For example, with the largest population globally, China is not as powerful as the United States and the Soviet Union are. On the other hand, Israel, Japan, and Germany are powerful despite their small population.

That is why the quality of the population is as important as its quantity. From a quantity three points of view, it is a tangible element whereas it is intangible qualitatively. Thus population can serve both as an asset and as a liability. If people are well-fed, educated, and properly trained, they are a great source of power.

But if they are ignorant, poor, and illiterate, they are a big burden on the state. Many qualities of population, such as unity, literacy, loyalty, character, and spirit of love, sacrifice, and duty, are crucial for making a country powerful, but they are difficult to measure. A good population serves as good military personnel, civilians, workers, producers, and consumers.

Workforce, according to Lerche and Said, is a more useful notion for purposes of national power. It is that part of the population available for broadly defined foreign policy objectives. All politically useless individuals and those needed simply to keep the society functional (such as food producers) must be subtracted from the gross total. The remaining is the workforce quotient that can contribute to the defense, the productive, administrative, diplomatic, and political strength of the state with proper direction, leadership, and administration.11

Scientific and Technological Elements:

As stated above, the industrial capacity, agricultural capacity, and military capacity of a nation depend on the one hand on the availability of natural resources and raw materials and, on the other hand, on scientific and technological development. Elements related to the scientific and technological advancement of a country are as follows:

1. Industrial Capacity:

Technology may be said to be a nation’s capacity to convert the endowed resources into actual power. It can be applied in the economic and industrial sphere, which means better machines and better and abundant products. No nation in the present world can become a great power unless it has the capacity to produce tremendous quantities of goods and services.

If a country does not have the technology, industry, and markets to efficiently process natural resources, it is reduced to the position of a weak raw material exporting state. On the contrary, a country with developed technology but without natural resources is greatly dependent on importing raw materials from other countries. For example, many Western countries, except the US, are critically dependent upon the Middle East oil supply.

They do not have any firm control over its supply and price fluctuations. It can be safely said that those countries which have both important raw materials and developed technologies for processing are fully developed and powerful countries.

Technology helps a nation have a stronger economy, stronger industrial base, stronger transport and communication system, stronger military, greater capacity to win the war, and influence nations during peace. Industrial capacity contributes towards the production Of weapons that are required for modern warfare.

It provides international rewards in the form of consumer goods and the shape of markets for foreign goods. It enables a nation to persuade other nations by providing technical and economic assistance in soft loans, aid, grants, etc. The industrial capacity of a nation thus is a great source of wealth and power.

2. Agricultural Capacity:

Agriculture is a crucial component of national power. It is more relevant for developing countries where agriculture tends to be the national economy’s major sector. In the words of Couloumbis and Wolfe, “This is also a tangible element of power. Countries that can feed themselves, especially over the course of a long war, will be relatively more powerful than countries that are not self-sufficient.”12

International trade of a developing country heavily depends upon agricultural products and products manufactured with agricultural content (e.g., jute, cloth, and sugar). These become goods for export, facilitating imports of machinery and raw material for the industrial sector. In India, agricultural products constitute about fifty percent of the total. Indian exports while goods manufactured with agricultural content constitute another twenty percent of the total exports, constituting nearly 70 percent of the total Indian exports.13

Thus India being an industrially less advanced country, relies greatly on agriculture and allied products. Agriculture contributes about 35 percent of the national income and provides livelihood to about three-fourth of the population. In 1950 India was faced with the food problem and suffered from agricultural backwardness.

For food, it depended On Western nations and particularly the US, which through PL 480 pressurized India off and on. But with the help of modern technology, India succeeded in Green Revolution and became self-sufficient in food. Its dependence on the US for food ended, and it became more self-confident in diplomatic activities. Scientific and technological methods can thus increase the agricultural capacity of a nation that further enhances a nation’s power.

3. Military Strength:

Scientific and technological development is the sustaining factor for the armed forces, without which the military strength cannot be dependable and self-reliant. Indigenous capacity to produce different kinds of modern and sophisticated weapons is necessary; otherwise, the nation cannot sustain prolonged warfare.

Consequently, notwithstanding their technological backwardness, many countries have acquired military strength by buying weapons from the advanced countries, which have contributed to their military might. In the beginning, most states increase their strength in this way and later on build up their technological capability for defense production and forces.

Military strength is relevant both in war and peace. No one can win a war without a strong military base. In peacetime, diplomacy is also significantly affected by the leverages that rivals wield due to their respective military might. Military strength involves two main things-armed forces and weapons. To analyze their role in national power, one has to consider their size and quantity, quality and technological sophistication, mobility and deployment, leadership, and morale.

The size and number of armed forces are of great importance. Even the age of space battles and push-button warfare has not undermined the general importance of numbers. Therefore, a country with large size of defense forces will always be relatively in a better position. Equally important is the weapons and equipment’s supplied to them. A state with a small armed force but armed with sophisticated weapons and quality equipment can easily defeat another state with a much larger armed force using old weapons. Thus the quality of the army and arms ammunition is also very crucial along with their quantity. The quality of forces depends on the training’s nature, physical endurance, and the troops’ morale. Next is the question of mobility and deployment. It stands for a state’s ability to deploy its armed might in locations inside and outside its territory.

The chief indicator of mobility is a state’s ability to transport and effectively support military Operations on land, sea, and air. Military leadership also plays a great role in the actual military Operations during a war. By their skill, military commanders can jolt a superior enemy and term the defeat of his side into victory.

The morale of forces, i.e., their willingness to sacrifice for the nation, is no less a factor contributing to military strength. The military alliances and bases also contribute to an important aspect of the military element.

A state with several such alliances and bases is potentially stronger. Lastly, the military component of national power is dependent upon the nation’s financial resources and its technological, industrial, and economic development.

Political Elements:

Political elements consist of government, bureaucratic efficiency, political leadership, and quality of diplomacy. All these are important parts of the political system of a state and contribute towards its power. These are discussed as follows:

1. Type of Government:

States formulate and conduct their foreign policy through their governments. If a government’s foreign policy is unified, specific, representative of the popular will, stable, and at the same time flexible, it can do wonders for the nation and its power position. The government also regulates social discipline based on the coordination of all efforts in its community. Good rapport between the government and people bring greater allegiance of people towards the country. Such allegiance is a prime factor in the development of national power.

It is not easy to say which type of government is the most powerful. The relationship between the type of government and national power has not been resolved since Aristotle’s times. There are various forms of government in the present world, such as communist, democratic, authoritarian, etc. Past international relations prove that both democratic and authoritarian types of governments have successfully regulated the behavior of other states, and, therefore, to that extent, both of them have been powerful nations. Authoritarian regimes can make swift and flexible foreign policy decisions as their decision-makers are few and relatively Unaccountable. But we should think whether quick decisions by unaccountable decision-makers are necessarily wise decisions.

The features of checks and balances of democratic governments subject decisions to greater scrutiny and presumably guard against whimsical and hasty decisions. The yardstick to measure a type of government’s superiority can be its efficiency to achieve set national goals and the ability to mobilize people’s support.

Democratic and constitutional government is based on a consensus of fundamentals; it is likely to operate with sustained popular support. In this way, it will be better positioned to impose greater discipline and persuade people to make sacrifices for achieving national objectives and national growth.

2. Bureaucratic Efficiency:

If the bureaucracy is impartial, honest, clean, and efficient, it will generate more power for a nation. Corruption and inefficiency will always cost a nation much both in peace and war. In peace, it will stall development and progress. In war, it will set at naught all coordinated efforts and prepare the ground for eventual capitulation.

Rich, well-armed, and even wisely governed countries cannot work effectively unless they have efficient bureaucracies to execute their policies. There are four views regarding the proper role, method of operation, and adequate functioning of bureaucracies.

• First, communist states believe in large-scale bureaucratization in politics and economic and social sectors. But by now, it has been realized that over bureaucratization in communist countries has proved counterproductive.
• Second, democratic, competitive countries seek to encourage private initiative and limit government bureaucracies’ role to defense, taxation, and other regulatory functions.
• Third, some argue for the complete detachment of politics from professional bureaucracies.
• Fourth, few people are interested in having political control over the bureaucracies, plug leaks, and ensure that political decisions are carried out faithfully by the professional bureaucrats.

Each of these theories has its own advantages and disadvantages; we do not intend to discuss them here. But it can be realized that to assess the exact impact of a given bureaucratic theory upon the power of a state is an uphill task.

3. Leadership:

Leadership is of great significance to any national power analysis because it is leadership that utilizes the national resources to build up power. The morale of the people also revolves around leadership. There can be no integrated technology sans leadership. It is important for many reasons.

• First, leadership utilizes the other national power components like geography, resources, population, industrial capacity, technology, etc. This does with the qualities that it possesses.
• Second, it coordinates other elements of national power.
• Third, it allocates resources between military and civilian programs.
• Fourth, it decides the nature of relations with other states and declares war and peace. Decisions and actions of leaders have a direct bearing on the power of the state.

Couloumbis and Wolfe rightly observe: Undoubtedly, greatness or incompetence, wisdom or irrationality, effectiveness, or impotence in leadership considerably affects the power that a country has. Leaders such as Napoleon, Hitler, Churchill, Roosevelt, Stalin, Mao, Gandhi, Kennedy, de Gaulle, Khrushchev, and Nixon have impacted world history.

An able leadership serves as a source of great inspiration to people. Such inspiration is crucial in the realization of national development programs and the assumption of initiative in foreign affairs.

4. Quality of Diplomacy:

Another significant component of national power is the quality of diplomacy. It embraces all the power resources of a nation to bear in such a way as to make the most of them, rattling. The saber here, offering rewards there, bringing forth arguments at another point timing actions and concessions in such a way as to persuade one’s enemies and allies to act as one wishes them to act of all the elements that play a role in gaining national power, the most important, though unstable and intangible, is the quality of diplomacy.

All other elements are like raw materials, and the state having them may be a potentially great power. However, it becomes an actual power when it follows an effective foreign policy towards this end through diplomacy. According to Morgenthau, “The conduct of a nation’s foreign affairs by its diplomats is for national power in peace what military strategy and tactics by its military leaders are for national power in war”

If morale is the soul of national power, then diplomacy is its brain.

In the 18th and 19th centuries, France and Britain were proud of their diplomatic skill. It was the art of diplomacy that gave Britain the relative consistency of power from Henry VIII to the First World War. During the inter-war period, the USA was politically powerful but played an insignificant part in world politics as her diplomacy was weak.

After the Second World War, the US pursued a great power policy, shouldered commensurate economic, military, and diplomatic responsibilities, and transformed the potential into actual. There are also some diplomats in third world countries who have earned a name for their negotiating ability.

New factors such as the rapid increase in the means of transport and communication, increasing appreciation of the importance of public opinion, and the practice of Open diplomacy have greatly affected the character of diplomacy and contributed towards its decline.

But it is not fully correct. Though it may have suffered a few setbacks yet high quality of diplomacy still plays an indispensable role in a nation’s power. It is the only peaceful alternative to protect and accomplish national interests. On the last one must remember that high-quality diplomacy must also possess the element of consistency.

Social and Ideological Elements:

The social environment of a nation influences its power making. These elements are concerned with society’s ideals, ideas, attitudes, sentiments, slogans, morale, character, social traditions, and customs. All these are parts of the social system and structure of a nation. These are explained as below:

1. Ideology:

• Ideology has remained a vital aspect of a nation’s power, especially in the twentieth century. An ideology is a body of ideas and beliefs concerning certain values and usually suggesting a certain political and economic order to accomplish these values. Richard Snyder and Hubert Wilson present a comprehensive definition of ideology.
• In their own words, it is a cluster of ideas about life, society, or government, which originate in most cases as consciously advocated or dogmatically asserted social, political, or religious slogans or battle cries, which become the characteristic beliefs or dogmas of a particular group, party or nationality 16
• Ideologies can be of different types-social, political, economic, religious, racial, and so on.
• Morgenthau has given three main types :
  1. Ideologies of the status quo.
  2. The ideology of imperialism.
  3. Ambiguous ideologies (e.g: self-determination).
• Other important ideologies of the twentieth century are liberalism, constitutionalism, Nazism, fascism, communism, socialism, nationalism, internationalism, etc.
• Experience reveals that ideologies have provided a tremendous philosophical, psychological, and moral power for the policies and programs mes of men in the past. They have gradually been a guiding force for policy goals and activities of nations. Often nations have utilized ideologies as a source of moral justification for the pursuit of their policy goals. As an element of national power, these can boost people’s morale.
• If it is followed by a majority of citizens or is indoctrinated into them, an ideology can act as a powerful factor making for unity and power. It can be used either to reconcile man to his conditions or to stimulate him to improve them. Ideology is thus a significant element strengthening the power-base of a state as also its foreign policy.
• Ideologies have their own merits as well as demerits. They give strength to worthy causes, unity to the nation, and a sense of common interest to peoples in many parts of the world. The objective of human brotherhood and world peace can be realized by ideological motivation.
• On the other hand, experience demonstrates a good part of the evils and miseries characterizing international relations is brought into existence by ideologies as initiators and determinants of a nation’s policies and efforts. Ideologies sometimes act as part of national egos and lead various nations into confrontation and wars. Different nations pursuing conflicting ideologies have tended to add to the modern world’s tensions, particularly before and after the Second World War. The task of peace-makers is generally made difficult by the opposing ideologies.
• The impact of ideology on international relations is fastly diminishing, especially after the advent of the Gorbachevian phenomenon and the subsequent collapse of communism in the Soviet Union and East Europe. It belongs to the past as the fire of ideology once burning in Europe seems to have been extinguished as new ideas and feelings are being accepted to suit the changing times.
• Ideology, in fact, is not the end for which the states resort to war, instead of an instrument for concealing the interests of the states. It is either used to attract people and gain their support or convince them of the state’s ideals’ superiority. In this sense, it is still relevant as an element of national power.

2. National Morale:

• National Morale and national character are the historical, psychological, sociological element of national power. These are unstable, intangible, and cannot be measured easily. Lerche and Said used this term “to describe the mass state of mind in action, with particular reference to the extent to which the society feels committed to the government’s policy “
• In Morgenthau’s words, “National morale is the degree of determination with which a nation supports the foreign policies of its government in peace or war. It permeates all activities of a nation, its agricultural and industrial production, and its military establishment and diplomatic service.
• In the form of public opinion, it provides an intangible factor without whose support no government, democratic or autocratic, can pursue its policies with full effectiveness if it can pursue them at all.”19
• Palmer and Perkins define it as a thing of the spirit made up of loyalty, courage, faith, and the impulse to preserve personality and dignity. It can make men and women work harder, sacrifice more, and fight harder.20 
• Mahendra Kumar observes that willingness to sacrifice is the core of the national morale of the armed forces and the people at large. In his own words, the total of men’s individual qualities in a nation in the form of their willingness to put the nation’s welfare above their own personal welfare.21 
• High national morale or willingness to sacrifice contributes to building national power in peacetime, in a national crisis, and wars. It directly impacts the vigor and human dynamics with which government mobilizes and utilizes the other tangible elements of power.
• National morale is significantly influenced by national character and the cultural background of the individuals. For instance, the German character can be said to impart efficiency and thoroughness to German soldiers’ morale. The Russian character provided doggedness and endurance to Russian soldiers’ morale, while the American character gave inventiveness and resourcefulness to the morale of American soldiers. An advanced nation’s morale is likely to be higher than the morale of a background nation due to the difference in cultural background.
• National morale is never permanent and static. It changes with time and conditions. Sometimes, there comes the point when it breaks. Generation and maintenance of morale often depend upon technological advances, the development of the means of transport and communication, the flow of information and ideas, the exposure of the people to them, etc. It can also be stimulated by the techniques of propaganda and the qualities of leadership.

3. National Character:

• National character is the trait of people towards all walks of national life. It is the outcome of the evolutionary process and the previous generations’ attitude, which is transmitted to the next generations. Each nation has a distinct character. It is also a product of a specific social environment.
• National character determines people’s attitude to international trends and events and the resolution with which they will back up foreign policy in peace or war. The national character consists of the intellectual and moral qualities of the people who leave their imprint on a nation’s foreign policy.
• Nicolson rightly observed national policy is colored and even governed by national character, and I would say that unless we understand that character, we cannot understand the policy.
• Thus, the people of a nation have some common traits and features with which the sociologists generally identify them. As we generally perceive Chinese in terms of cosmic unchangeability, of the Germans in terms of thoroughness and discipline of the Russians in terms of relentless persistence and tenacity, of the English in terms of undogmatic common sense of the Americans in terms of pragmatism and informality, of all Latins in terms of esthetic instinct and volatility and the Indians in terms of detachment on the verge of indifference.
• The relationship between national morale and character is positive e but, at the same time, ambiguous. Jointly, both demonstrate the national will to further the national cause in a particular situation or time. As an element of national power, national character is broader than morale. Their relationship can be summed up in Palmer and Perkins’s words: National character may be thought of as climate, morale as the weather.

4. Social System and Cohesiveness:

• This social element is also unstable, as well as intangible. If society is integrated and coordinated, it will be capable of a unified effort to consolidate its power further. On the other hand, if it is disintegrated and suffers from internal dissensions, it will dilute its power and prestige.

Lerche rightly observes:

“that social system is best for power purposes which is the most homogeneous and united behind the political leadership of the country and which embodies the minimum amount of stress and strain.”24

• A society stricken with communal tension, rural-urban tension, or dissatisfied minorities will have low morale and will adversely affect the nation’s power status. Many scholars believe that internally unified nations are strong, whereas divided ones are weak.
• The reasons for disunity or unity can vary from ethnic, linguistic, racial, and religious diversity all the way to economic, political, ideological, and foreign-inspired divisions. Some plausible indicators of disunity are terrorism, several political prisoners, riots, demonstrations, paralyzing strikes, media censorship, insurgency, and even civil war.
• The most recent example of this factor is the Soviet Union, a victim of internal tensions, disunity, and ethnic problems. All these factors have adversely affected its power position in the world. India, too has been riddled with communal tensions, terrorism, casteism, riots, strikes, violence for the last many years. That stood in its way to become a powerful nation.

5. Accidents:

• Sometimes accidents and unforeseen events also put spoke in the wheel of power. For instance, “the sudden death of a great leader, an earthquake, a famine, an epidemic of a dread disease such as the plague, a misunderstanding or a breakdown in communication during a crisis, and many other unforeseen events may deeply affect the power relationship of nation-states.
• Since accidents cannot be predicted in any other but aggregate statistical sense, they remain at the summit of the pyramid of intangibility.”
• African countries ravaged by drought and cyclone-prone Bangladesh cannot think of becoming powerful.

External Elements:

Most political scientists have stressed the internal factors discussed above, ignoring external elements completely. These external factors are in no way less significant than the internal ones in determining a nation’s power. Couloumbis and Wolfe,

Lerche and Said,

have discussed the same in their works.

1. Image and Reputation:

• If a state has a favorable image, its voice would be heard at the international level. For example, India under Nehru had a good image, albeit with its backwardness and military weakness. It enjoyed a good prestige-owing to Gandhian heritage, the policy of non-alignment, and Nehru’s dynamic leadership. Both the super-powers tried to befriend it. Many third world countries sought guidance on important international issues. After Nehru, there was some setback to this image.
• Similarly, the reputation of a state also matters. If some state has the reputation of being a good fighter, the rival would think hundred times before attacking it. Reputation acts as a deterrent and enables a state to achieve some power position. In various wars, Israel has subdued Arabs and won the reputation of a tough fighter. This reputation deters potential Arab invaders and is a strong diplomatic card for Israel vis-a-vis Arabs.

Couloumbis and Wolfe rightly say,

“Power, therefore, should be evaluated not only in terms of each country’s ability and willingness to use its capabilities when challenged but also in terms of its reputation for action in response to previous challenges”.29

2. Foreign Support and Dependency:

• Another element that is not being touched upon by scholars is foreign support and dependency. This factor comprises international connections such as alliances, foreign economic and military aid, leasing or granting strategic bases to the great powers, and participation in a regional and universal international organization and action.
• To overlook these aspects would leave us measuring Syria and Israel’s power, for example, without considering Soviet and American aid and commitments to these two countries. Too much support from outside render a country totally dependent.
• When this happens, the sovereignty and strategic flexibility of the dependent nation-state vis-a~vis its supporter become seriously limited in this way; foreign support and dependency remain crucial, although intangible element.

3. International Strategic Position:

• If the state apprehends great: and constant danger, it will naturally channelize its available power to defend its territory, leaving a limited role tor the world’s sin too. Any revision in a state’s assessment of the dangers it faces automatically affects its power in other spheres. An estimation that the threat has diminished enables the state for more free action elsewhere if the threat is colossal, adequate responsive action requires contraction of activity at other points.
• Lerche and Said aptly remarked, ” familiarly and paradoxically, the very objectives a state selects for itself, and the way it interprets the situation in which it must operate, have a major influence on its capability to achieve those objectives and to function in the situation. A state’s international strategic position is to a large measure determined by itself a state is, to a great extent, the architect of its own capability.” 30 

4. Intelligence:

• Intelligence in this context implies complete knowledge of the strength and weaknesses of external foes and friends. Different nations employ various secret agencies and spies to obtain this knowledge. Sherman Kent explains the idea is to produce “the kind of knowledge our states must possess regarding other states to assure itself that its cause will not suffer nor its undertakings fail because its statesmen and soldiers plan and act in ignorance.”
• This knowledge and information serve the purpose of power. Such information can be useful both in times of war and peace. In war, advanced information about the enemy’s strength and strategy greatly helps deal with the eventuality effectively.
• During peacetime, prior knowledge about the other party’s plus and minus points enables a country to extract maximum benefit to itself on the bargaining table. Keeping in view the significance of this element, different nations have their own network of intelligence agencies and spies such as the USA’s CIA, USSR’s KGB, and India’s RAW.