Conflicting Objectives- As seen in 'The Bridge on River Kwai'

"Be happy in your work" -General Yamashita

A statement made by Colonel Saito while explaining the British war prisoners how should they must go about their slave duties of building the urgent and quite significant Bridge on the eponymous River Kwai-  a movie which seamlessly merges the elements of war with a flummoxing tale of human morality.

Directed by David Lean, the film shapes up from a prison camp where the allied soldiers from World War II are kept prisoners by the Japanese army. Led by the ruthless Colonel Saito, he is charged to make a bridge on river Kwai with a stiff deadline using the prison captives as slave labour which mostly comprises of British soldiers under the command of charismatic Colonel Nicholson. Every man in his company obeys his order despite knowing the harsh consequences. And General Saito is vexed beyond comprehension due to it. By the end the Colonel Nicholson becomes so obsessed with making the bridge that he forgets who he is and what is his purpose and so does his men.

At the same time, when british captive soldiers are tirelessly helping the Japanese build a bridge at the best of the tier ability because they think it gives their life purpose, the forces at home are hatching a plan of their own to destroy the bridge.

Now we come to our problem of two parties- The british soldiers and the captive british soldiers, with essentially the same purpose and motive but under different circumstances are somehow forced to work against each other.

Now this conflict is depicted in the movie in two different scenarios.

• ·         Firstly, when the prisoners knew where their true objective lies and that is in impeding the Japanese. So initially they worked in disorganized parties which were somehow against each other and the work wouldn't have ever gotten completed but in this case, that's a good thing.
• 
  
• ·         Secondly, when the Colonel realized that in order to keep morale and discipline maintained in the company, he must make sure that his soldiers do the duty assigned to them diligently. Now from a manager's point of view, that is the right decision but keeping in mind the long term objective, this might hurt them as they are afterall not on Japan's side. Prisoners infact! Yet they start doing the task of building the bridge assigned to them to the best of their ability and actually end up helping the enemy.

Now at the same time, the allies know that the Japanese are building a bridge to complete the pathway so are naturally inclined to destroy that bridge. A bridge, they do not know, made by their own soldiers.

At the end Colonel Nicholson gets so much attached to the bridge that he is ready to fight british troops sent to blast away the now complete bridge.

What happens next is quite interesting but I'm gonna leave that part out because it may not be so relevant to this article and also to encourage the readers to watch the movie instead.

But we must focus and understand on a crucial point here- Was Colonel Nicholson right in doing the task at hand, the best he could, with no judgement how it will affect the long term interests of the party he represents (UK) or should he have done the task halfheartedly?

This raises a striking dilemma. Some of us are in the habit of just doing each and every task assigned to us in the best possible manner without once giving any thought to the consequences. Because most of us think what role do we have in the implications and should just stick to what we do best, for what our superiors rely on us for. Nicholson was following objective set by Saito which was his duty as he was a war prisoner. But making a bridge better than anyone was his own initiative. He even took his sick and wounded to work again.

I totally understand the sentiment behind either doing something right or not doing it at all. But in such extreme and unfortunate cases, such as one depicted in the movie, one must question his actions often.

Another extreme example would be Adolf Eichmann, one of the major Nazi organizers of the holocaust. At his trial, he claimed he was just following orders and making plans to kill as many Jews as he could because that's what his job required and he tried to make sure how it can be done best.

The eventual destruction of the bridge by his own country's soldiers was not only an eye opener for him but a crucial tactic for the audience to understand afterall how wrong the whole dedicated construction was in its entirety.

Thus, when given a task which requires your brain and skills, which also makes you feel worth your while on this earth, should still be approached with caution and due consideration to the implications. Hence, before committing your heart, make sure it's in the right place.

 (Colonel realizing the grave error in his steadfastness)