In the long history of the world, small countries have often faced an awkward position because of their limited national strength. In particular, those small countries that are surrounded by big powers are often only equipped with decorations, and relying on big countries has become their way of survival. Mongolia, sandwiched between Russia and China, is strategically the most difficult. What is the significance of Mongolia's choice to build a large army despite its difficult situation?
Mongolia's strategic position is arguably the most awkward in the face of great changes in world history. Surrounded by two superpowers, Russia and China, Mongolia's diplomacy and expansion are greatly restricted. Although this makes Mongolia face great difficulties in international interactions, it also protects Mongolia from the security problems common to many small countries from a security perspective. In modern society, no country dares to venture through the territory of Russia and China to attack Mongolia. This undoubtedly provided Mongolia with a strong security guarantee, allowing it to be almost free from the threat of war.
However, unlike some other small countries that have chosen not to have a small number of troops to reduce the economic burden and maintain symbols, Mongolia has insisted on building a large army in the country, with a total number of more than 50,000 men. Not only was this military deployment a huge financial burden, but during World War II, Mongolia maintained an army of 100,000 troops, which became a central cause of its chronic poverty. Why, then, did Mongolia build such a huge army?We might as well interpret it from the following three aspects.
The Oath of Vanity: The Symbolism of a Huge Army.
First of all, Mongolia has always considered itself the successor of the ancient Mongol Empire, a descendant of Genghis Khan, and the inheritor of the Great Mongol Empire. In order to preserve this face and vanity, Mongolia chose to build a large army, not only to show its strong intentions, but also to enable it to send peacekeeping troops, and even to demonstrate the presence of Mongolian troops in Afghanistan and other places.
Weak in the South, Guarding Itself: Deep Considerations for the Layout of Military Forces.
Second, Mongolia still has its main military presence in the south, suggesting that there is still a sense of vanity in the country, and a desire to defend against potential threats through a large military force. In the historical process of Mongolia's independence, its own meanness and luck elements cannot be ignored. During the Soviet era, Mongolia was always worried about being annexed again and returning to its ancient state, so maintaining a strong military presence in the south can be seen as a response and prevention to its own historical background.
The Vanity of Leaders: The Core of Military Statehood.
Finally, as a complete country, Mongolia's leaders need to maintain a vast military system to satisfy their vanity, in addition to commanding the army, navy, and air force when building the country's image. This kind of thinking became the core of the Mongolian state. ** As the commander-in-chief of the three armed services, he needs to command not only a modern army, but also a large logistics system to meet the needs of his authority and vanity.
Conclusion: The truth behind the huge army.
Overall, the core motivation for Mongolia to build a large army was mainly due to vanity and weakness. Although in modern warfare, large armies do not necessarily provide substantial security, the military power of Russia and China far exceeds the defense forces of Mongolia. For Mongolia, however, the sheer size of the army was not only a symbol of military might, but also an expression of external oaths, internal precautions, and the vanity of leaders. In the real world, the size of the military of a small country may not only be for the needs of actual war, but also carry the historical glory of the country and the personal honor of its leader.
The article profoundly reveals the reasons behind Mongolia's large army, and through a comprehensive analysis of history, geography, and international relations, the reader has a clearer understanding of the military decisions of this small country. In reviewing this article, I think it can be expanded from the following aspects.
First of all, the article is well-structured and progressive, so that the reader can gradually understand the reasons for the creation of the Mongolian army. Starting from the embarrassing position of the small country, the uniqueness of Mongolia's strategic location is introduced, which lays the foundation for subsequent analysis. Through the interpretation of the three aspects of the huge army, namely the oath of vanity, the prevention of the south of the heart, and the vanity of the leader, the article presents a multi-angle analysis for the reader, making the view more comprehensive.
Secondly, the in-depth analysis of vanity and vanity is impressive. Vanity, as an important element in national construction, is not only the maintenance of external image, but also the continuation of one's own history, culture and tradition. As the successor of the ancient Mongol Empire, Mongolia demonstrated its powerful symbolic power with a large army, which was both a sign of self-confidence and a tribute to history. At the same time, the article points out that the reason for Mongolia's weakness in the south is not unrelated to its historical meanness and luck, which makes the deployment of the army not only for vanity, but also for deep-seated historical and cultural factors.
Moreover, the article takes a deep look at the vanity of leaders. Through the argument that the commander-in-chief of the three armed forces needs to have a large military system, the article reveals the importance of leaders in the construction of the national image. This vanity is manifested both as a personal recognition of the leader and as a support for the authority of the state. Nowhere is this more evident than in today's international politics, where leaders demonstrate their national strength through the size and strength of their armies in order to maintain their position in the international community.
Overall, through in-depth analysis and nuanced interpretation, this article presents readers with the complex psychology and decision-making process of how a small country can maintain its image and interests through a large military in a complex international landscape. This method of in-depth analysis makes the article more convincing and enlightening, and has certain reference value for understanding international politics and military strategy.
Disclaimer: The above content information is ** on the Internet, and the author of this article does not intend to target or insinuate any real country, political system, organization, race, or individual. The above content does not mean that the author of this article agrees with the laws, rules, opinions, behaviors in the article and is responsible for the authenticity of the relevant information. The author of this article is not responsible for any issues arising from the above or related issues, and does not assume any direct or indirect legal liability.
If the content of the article involves the content of the work, copyright**, infringement, rumors or other issues, please contact us to delete it. Finally, if you have any different thoughts about this event, please leave a message in the comment area to discuss!