Clausewitz tells us that war is an instrument of policy, that war is policy by other means. He doesn't discuss the justifications for war; to him, war is about achieving a political aim. He does not debate the morality of the political aim, nor the morality of using war to achieve that aim. War is a tool; we use the right tool at the right time to get the job done.
Sun-Tzu, however, talks about the impact that going to war has on the public. He advises not to go to war unless absolutely necessary, citing the resources needed and thus the burden on the people that war brings. He advocates winning without fighting. Implicitly, he is saying that war is not good, that the wise ruler should not go to war; instead, he uses other methods to achieve his aims. But he does not outlaw war, because war is sometimes needed, and in those cases, he advocates a swift victory.
Could this provide some insight into our cultural views on war? Could it be that the West uses force to force their wills on others, while the Chinese uses force to awe others into submission? One uses force to achieve aims and objectives that are easy to understand, to grasp, while the other seems to be using force more at the psychological level than the physcial. Something to think about and expand on when I have the time.
Sun-Tzu, however, talks about the impact that going to war has on the public. He advises not to go to war unless absolutely necessary, citing the resources needed and thus the burden on the people that war brings. He advocates winning without fighting. Implicitly, he is saying that war is not good, that the wise ruler should not go to war; instead, he uses other methods to achieve his aims. But he does not outlaw war, because war is sometimes needed, and in those cases, he advocates a swift victory.
Could this provide some insight into our cultural views on war? Could it be that the West uses force to force their wills on others, while the Chinese uses force to awe others into submission? One uses force to achieve aims and objectives that are easy to understand, to grasp, while the other seems to be using force more at the psychological level than the physcial. Something to think about and expand on when I have the time.
1 comment:
Our study recently on SunZi and Clausewitz has developed several discussion on their similarity and differences. My thoughts are that SunZi assumes that war is a tool for the state and its results may not be the best. Capturing a city whole is the best scenario for him.
In contrast, Clausewitz states it out there that "war is merely the continuation of policy by other means." He goes on to talk about the trinity factors of war.
Both great thinker have their valid points and you may be right about the cultural implications on their followers and how they conduct themselves in the political arena.
Post a Comment