Running Head: National Security ✓ Solved

Running Head National Securitynational Security 6national Securitys

Carl Von Clausewitz is amongst the prominent figures among the military theorists and practitioners who studied war. The book, “On War” demonstrates his ability to give an in-depth historical analysis and conclusion on conflicts that he was engaged in. As a philosopher, he also reflected on all aspects of war. Therefore, Clausewitz provides an understanding of the current military and political leadership by providing important insights that can help in understanding twenty-first-century warfare. Even though Clausewitz has discussed the nature of war, he also provides an analytical tool that can be used in understanding warfare chaos.

Thesis statement: current military leadership is required to comprehend the nature of war that they are engaged in so as to develop plans that are logical with the desire of the political end state. Clausewitz discusses the nature of war, providing the strategies and tactics effective for armed forces. Clausewitz aimed to capture objective knowledge by providing an observation that applies to all wars. The theory he presented is an organized corpus of observations as a relationship between cause and effect. Even though Clausewitz states that his work “On War” fails to contain a theoretical system, it offers only material for one.

The work is based on an in-depth study of military history, most especially in the Napoleonic wars. Clausewitz served in the Napoleonic wars itself hence acquired most of the knowledge about war. As compared to other works such as that of Sun Tzu, Clausewitz provides examples that are illustrative and detailed. He used a dialectical method of reasoning hence providing a critical examination of the truth of opinion using the dialogue of polarities and contradictory views. Clausewitz's work was influenced by the German philosopher Emmanuel Kant.

With this foundation, Clausewitz examines the relationship between opposites such as theory and practice, attack and defense, and genius and method among others. Therefore, this is an indication that Clausewitz provides an in-depth analysis, understanding, and strategies that can be used. War is involved with a lot of uncertainty. His understanding of war as a human activity helped him form a basis of his ideas on human factors like rational political calculations, insufficient or inaccurate intelligence, and the ability to make use among others. This indicates that the thinking of Clausewitz on war is influenced by the intrastate of wars during his time.

It is evident that he is somehow interested in small wars. This is due to the relationship between the relative strengths of opponents and their strategy and tactics. Even with the lack of tactical strengths, strategic effects can still be achieved through limited actions. As compared to other works, such as that of Sun Tzu, Clausewitz provided a foundation of modern thinking on asymmetric warfare. His work analyzes the relationship between stronger and weaker adversaries and the advantages of defense over attack.

Therefore, his work provides an understanding of how to wear down an enemy by using the war duration to cause gradual exhaustion of the enemy’s physical and moral resistance. This strategy discussed by Clausewitz can be applied in many situations and cases. For instance, it can also be applied where there is a weak endeavor to resist the strong. Even though Clausewitz's work proved to be educative and adaptable leadership capable of creative thinking, technology today has reduced some of Clausewitz’s tactics obsolete. However, his work can still be used in inspiring the military and providing political strategies and analysis.

Clausewitz provides the importance of strategy. A strategy is involved with choice-making on how the limited resources will be concentrated to achieve a competitive advantage. Clausewitz states that a strategist is required to identify the decisive point and concentrate everything on it. Clausewitz focuses on the means to an end. However, as compared to other works such as that of Sun Tzu, it focuses on the end.

For instance, Clausewitz states that destruction and occupation are some of the methods that can be used in achieving victory through force. Sun Tzu examines the methods that can be used in acquiring victory. The methods that Sun Tzu examines are one with more flexibility, creativity, and foresight. Therefore, Clausewitz does not advocate that victory can be achieved without fighting. War can be in the context of the continuation of policy or politics.

Clausewitz states that the conscious conduct of war such as strategy should be a continuation of rational calculation and policy. He also discusses that war originates and exists in the presence of chaos, the unpredictable realm of politics. As compared to other military theorists and practitioners who studied war, Clausewitz does not discuss a resort to war as a pursuit of unrealizable policies but rather points out that war happens during political conflicts which may result in organized violence.

On War by Clausewitz has integrated military concerns (such as political, strategic, operational, tactical, analytical, historical, and pedagogical) within a socio-political framework. In the body of theories, Clausewitz is the only one that is close to successfully interrelating a wide range of military concerns. Clausewitz describes war from a different standpoint. The first is war in the ideal. War can be said to be an ideal in cases where it is a wholly isolated act, has a single or set of simultaneous decisive acts, and when a decision achieved is complete and perfect.

He discusses war as an instrument of policy. War is considered a political instrument. Therefore, Clausewitz provides crucial ideas necessary in war. It puts more emphasis on the difference between the physical and moral aspects of war. The moral aspects of war as described by Clausewitz concern different factors such as attitudes, character traits, and spirits of everyone involved in the conflict, leaders, and the state among others. He also argues that many military theorists tend to ignore moral forces even though they are more important than physical forces.

The main focus of Clausewitz is on moral forces such as boldness and genius. Therefore, this indicates that war is a political extension of open violence to force one’s will. Clausewitz has received criticism and provides three misunderstandings. The first misunderstanding is the relation between politics and war, which is considered a descriptive factual nature and not normative. The criticism is the reflection and understanding of how war and its elements are considered and not how it is.

The second misunderstanding is on the relationship between war and politics and how it is understood as the military being subordinate to their political leaders. Clausewitz points out that war is political in nature and fails to have logic regardless of whether it is the political or military body to define strategic aims and political purposes. The last misunderstanding is the definition of politics which is described as actor-neutral and seen as a formal theoretical concept of politics and not determination through stately power and security interests and structures.

Clausewitz’s work is an understanding of the complexities of war. It contains a set of ideas and convictions revolving around whether the nature of war has changed or ways in which war manifests. However, from Clausewitz’s work, it is evident that the nature of war has not changed but the manifestations of war have. His work can still be used even with the new and changing forms of war. The work can be used in discussing and uncovering the complexities of modern armed conflicts.

References

• Holmes, A. (2010). Carl von Clausewitz’s On War: A modern-day interpretation of a strategy classic. Infinite Ideas.
• Schuurman, B. (2010). Clausewitz and the "new wars" scholars. Parameters, 40(1), 89.
• Waldman, T. (2016). War, Clausewitz and the Trinity. Routledge.