The Mongol Empire fostered an important system of maritime trade and global relations, a legacy that many Naval Officers will have experience with during their career. Also notable was their accomplishments and innovations that I will later discuss. As future officers, we can learn a lot from the formation and legacy of the Mongol Empire in terms of foreign relations, freedom of knowledge, religion, and culture, as well as effective organizational structures.

Foreign relations may possibly be one of the most important capabilities the Navy has, and so it was too for the Mongols. Because of their complex trade and postal systems, the Mongols valued their connections with Europe and other groups or nations in and around their area. This gave the Mongols access to goods they would otherwise never have; more importantly, however, it gave them connections in terms of new technologies and ideas similar to militaries in today’s world. As a Naval Officer it can be useful to remember the importance of foreign relations and open trade as well as their respective wide spread origins.

The Mongols were also well ahead of their time in freedom of knowledge, religion and free practice of native culture. Specifically, they made advances in science and technologies and allowed free practice of religion throughout their empire. Moreover, conquered groups were free to continue living their way and practicing their culture. Similarly, all Naval Officers must hold a bachelor’s degree showing an interesting parallel of the importance knowledge, science, and technology in today’s world just as the Mongols favored many years ago. Moreso, the respect for religion and culture can be described as a historic precursor to the ideals that the United States and its Navy embody.

Chinggis Khan favored organization in his military. In order to carry out complex tactics and maneuvers, he divided his army into ten people units, hundred people units, thousand people units, and ten thousand people units. He recognized the importance of out strategizing the enemy, and therefore, his organization aided in his success. Furthermore, the Mongols carried an important sense of camaraderie, “Men who are sworn brothers share on life. They do not abandon each other but become protectors of that life” (Onon – Urgunge,  199). Ultimately, the degree of this organization is resembled in today’s Navy and military in general.

There are many reasons to understand the origins of the Mongols; however, foreign relations, freedom of knowledge, religion, and culture, as well as effective organizational structures. These three principles were carried out extensively by the ancient Mongols and still apply in today’s modern war-fighting world.

~Brandon Gore

Word Count: 427

Onon, Urgunge, The secret history of the Mongols: the life and times of Chinggis Khan (London: Routledge, 2011), pp. 247-53.

The Mongol Empire unexpectedly spread into Asia and Europe rapidly. Even when many thought of the Mongols as brutal, they still surprisingly succeeded. ISIS is one of the groups that many people think of today that could be similar to the Mongols. They spread quickly and brought in many people in order to fight for them while they tried to conquer regions in the middle east.

One reason the the Mongols were able to expand quickly was purely because of their advanced warfare. They used the idea of fake defeats where they would retreat so that the enemy would believe that they won and return later in surprise. Furthermore, they used horses and advanced archery to defeat their enemy. ISIS had a similar way of developing specific tactics for their mission. Specifically, they primarily hide in cities and communities so that they blend with locals, making it much harder for the enemy to accurately identify them. Moreover, David Ignatius points out that ISIS had an important social media presence which is important to their tactics. They create interesting and persuasive (to some) content that draws in those on the edge of their message. This use of technology was identical to the Mongols who took advantage of roads for trade and furthered science and engineering for society and war.

Obviously, one of the most important aspects to the Mongols and ISIS is religion. ISIS promotes religious violence and punishes those who do not agree with their interpretations of Islam. However, ISIS was surprisingly more relaxed on specific religious doctrines than Al-Qaeda was, effectively helping them recruit more people. This can be closely related to Genghis Khan’s views of freedom of religion. Many regard him as a ruthless leader in his later years; however, during his military conquests he tolerated all religions which appealed to many.

One reason that attributed to the success of the Mongols and ISIS was their lack of caring about borders and tolerance for other groups. Specifically, the Mongols reached outside of their empire for trade and other resources. When they conquered territories they were adaptable in that they allowed the continuance of specific group’s culture, customs, traditions, and organization. Similarly, ISIS often paired with non-Islamic groups from other regions for  propaganda and political maneuvers that supported their mission of persuasion, terror, and war making.

They way the Mongol Empire and ISIS are thought about is almost similar in a way. Typically, the Mongols are remembered as barbarians under a harsh ruler. Although true, the Mongols also did positive and inspiring things for themselves and others. However, ISIS is thought of in a similar to more radical way. They are barbarians, terrorists, animals, and this is true, certainly coupled with no recollection of doing good.

Brandon Gore

Word Count: 457

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/10/how-isis-started-syria-iraq/412042/

https://www.21global.ucsb.edu/global-e/october-2017/mongol-hordes-khmer-rouge-and-islamic-state-non-modern-conceptions-space-and

The fight for citizenship for slaves and metics in the Athenian assemblies has a closely linked struggle to the children fighting for citizenship in the United States through the Deferred Action for Childhood (DACA) program. Although one should not over generalize and identify children that are living in the United States illegally as slaves (as in ancient Greece), we can still make a close comparison between the citizenship struggles of the two.

In ancient Athens, metics and slaves were not considered citizens. There was controversy over this fact through Athens’ existence; however, no matter how much legislation was presented, metics and slaves remained non citizens due to their nature. Metics were non-Athenians who found living in Athens more appealing than their own hometowns. Likewise, slaves were property of their owners and were not given citizenship rights. “This was not the treatment that we deserved at the city’s hands… when we showed ourselves men of orderly life, and performed every duty laid upon us; when we had made not a single enemy, but had ransomed many Athenians from the foe” (Lysias 12.20). This quote refers to the struggle that slaves and metics felt. After proving themselves, in war as rowers and civilized counter parts of Athenian citizens, they were still struggling for citizenship. Even though metics and slaves may have functioned much like legitimate Athenian citizens, they were never classified as such because of the fixed definition of an Athenian citizen: one coming from two Athenian parents.

In the United States, children of immigrants have a similar story to metics and slaves in Athens. Dreamers are not necessarily brought to the United States because of the appeal as metics are brought to Athens; however, as a result of their parents or guardians, they are brought to the United States illegally most likely in hopes of a better future. This is a program that provided amnesty to children that came to the United States under the age of 16. In 2016, DACA  faced major opposition from President Trump, much like the metics and slaves did in ancient Athens. President Trump argued (Schallhorn).

Both illegally immigrated children, metics, and slaves have similar issues regarding citizenship among their nation. As a result of predetermined traits, these groups of people have been denied citizenship due to the very definition of what it means to be an American or Athenian. The debates we had in class opened my eyes to the dedication and work that slaves and metics put into the namesake of Athens. Whether they contributed to the Athenian economy or served in wars, they were an integral part of the Athenian society. This is also typical of most illegal immigrants. They want to work, raise a family, and contribute to American society just as everyone else does.

Word count: 463

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/what-is-daca-and-what-does-the-trump-administration-want-to-do-with-it

In ancient times, a tyrant was one who was ruling from an authority that was non hereditary. In the typical sense, this means that tyrants are not always bad, which is contradictory to the biased examples given by pro democratic literature in the Archaic period and in an article describing President Trump. An article by Eliot Cohen unequivocally compares President Donald Trump to a modern tyrant: a cruel or oppressive ruler. The author is not correctly using the word ‘tyrant’ as he connects the dislike of Trump with the word and is not careful to distinguish the post-rise of democracy and pre-democratic views towards it.

In the sense of the pre-archaic period, the comparison is not as bad as it sounds. However, the basis of Cohen’s article relies on the fact that tyrants are usually considered bad by today’s post-democratic standards. This is evident when he states that “tyrants are always abandoned by their followers” and “a tyrant is unloved.” Furthermore, Cohen compares Trump’s commonly perceived sense of selfishness and bad behavior to that of Mussolini – a “monumental tyrant.” This is not true. Many tyrants in Athenian states restored order and preserved constitutional forms of government that increased unity. A great example of this is Peisistratus of Athens. Specifically, Peisistratus improved water supply, lowered crime, created a road system and systematized the market place. Aristotle described the reign of Peisistratus as the “golden age” of the Athenian state. Typically, the reign of ancient tyrants did not last long as criticism grew, popularity dropped, and all the while democracy started to take hold. The author takes advantage of this fact and states that Trump will be abandoned. Cohen gives no real examples as to how Trump could be compared to a corrupt tyrant besides his attitudes towards the press, minorities and even his self absorption in his own endeavours. Although this is common among classically defined tyrants with the addition of sexual deviance, violence, and greed, it still does not warrant the accusation that all tyrants of ancient times possessed these traits proven by leaders such as Peisistratus.

The article goes on to expand on the command and disadvantages corrupt tyrants have towards their people, “those he commands move only in command, nothing in love.” Although this is true to some extent during a presidency, I do not agree that this alone classifies Trump as a tyrant. Some may disagree, but there still exists a large majority of Americans that will support Trump in love of the way he leads.

All in all, Cohen is expanding on the modern definition of a tyrant that evolved during the pro democratic period: a cruel or oppressive ruler. I would argue that the author is not correctly using the word ‘tyrant’ as he connects the dislike of Trump with the word and is not careful to distinguish the post-rise of democracy and pre-democratic views towards it. In the typical Ancient context, Cohen’s use of ‘tyrant’ would certainly not fit the literal definition that the pre-archaic period describes. However, those that criticized rulers in the post-rise of democracy would certainly agree with the use that Cohen articulates purely based on their bias. Even so, his use would not align with the original definition of the word tyrant.

Brandon Gore

Word count: 542

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/08/the-end-of-trumps-reign/568480/