Strategies of Clausewitz & Sun Tzu Research Paper

It would not be an exaggeration to suggest that the history of the mankind features a considerable number of armed conflicts. Therefore, it is logical to assume that the art of war is something that is closely connected to the development of the humanity. Several prominent thinkers wrote seminal works regarding this. One of them is Sun Tzu, a Chinese general who lived in the sixth century Before Common Era, and another is Carl von Clausewitz. While both expressed their interest in military strategy, the two have completely different views on the role of strategy and policy when it comes to war.

Views of Clausewitz

Carl von Clausewitz may have stated his views about policy and warfare somewhat ambiguously. He wrote that “policy will permeate all military operations” while he also said that “the political aim is not a tyrant” and policy does not determine “the posting of guards” and “will not extend its influence to operational details”[1]. These expressions might seem contradictory, but a proper analysis will reveal that they work a unified framework. So, first of all, Clausewitz states the supreme role of policy when it comes to military operation. By saying that, he implies that each military operation is performed in order to achieve a specific goal that was set by the political course.

Later, he writes that policy is not a tyrant and many believe that this is where he contradicts himself. While this indeed may be so at first glance, a careful examination of the situation will reveal that Clausewitz chose his words in such a way that would depict the true nature of the supreme position of policy. Thus, he specifically insists that policy is not a tyrant which means that it does not exercise full power over every aspect of it and it can adapt to various condition rather than ensuring that it has an upper hand in every situation.

Furthermore, Clausewitz also mentions several examples of situations where policy does not influence military operations. First of all, he mentions “posting of guards”. This example was designed to show that there are certain down-to-earth aspects of military operations that have nothing to do with policy. Indeed, it is clear that posting of guards does not reflect any political agenda. That is why the policy has no influence whatsoever on it. However, given the fact that posting of guards is a part of military operations in general, this leads to a logical conclusion that the scope of influence of policy is not universal.

In addition to that, Clausewitz states that various operational details are not affected by policy other. This means that there are certain tactical elements that are so detailed that they are not related to the overarching strategy and, therefore, will not be influenced by it. In spite of the fact that success in each battle contributes to the success of the entire campaign, Clausewitz suggests that it would not be correct to assume that every operational detail is affected by the policy.

Clausewitz versus Sun Tzu

Similarities

To begin with, it may be essential to point out that the two military strategists have several similarities in their perspective on warfare. Thus, both Clausewitz and Sun Tzu insist that in order to be successful at war, one should develop a general understanding of the situation and not be driven by the short-term victories, but have a long-term perspective of the conflict[2]. This means that these two prominent men believe that in order to win, one has to have a plan that one will follow to ensure victory.

Another significant similarity between them lies in the fact that both Clausewitz and Sun Tzu acknowledge that warfare has to advance the interest of the state. It is worth mentioning that it is relatively recently that the humanity stopped viewing war as a kind of diplomacy. One of the most prominent changes that the United Nations brought lies in the fact that it prohibited the use of force as a way to influence other nations. Nevertheless, during the time when Clausewitz and Sun Tzu were alive, the war was seen as yet another way of political interaction. That is why it is logical that they would view it as a logical continuation of politics.

Differences

Nevertheless, there are serious differences between the two generals that need to be revealed. First of all, Sun Tzu believes that strategy is in the heart of victory. He insists that every battle can be won if a general carefully examines all the factors that are associated with it[3]. That is why it is essential to make sure that one’s military operations are aligned with the strategy and advance it. As a result, Sun Tzu encouraged the generals to develop their strategy rather than their actual forces since it would allow them to win numerous battles.

As it has already been mentioned, Clausewitz puts a greater emphasis on policy rather than on strategy. It is not that he did not consider the latter to be important; it is just that he believed that policy played an exceptional role and was more essential than strategy[4]. This difference can be explained by the act that at the time when Clausewitz was alive, the political world was much more developed if compared to the times of Sun Tzu. That is why there is no wonder in the fact that he paid more attention to this aspect and even made it an essential element of his military theory.

The next difference lies in the way in which each of the strategists tried to ensure his victory. For Sun Tzu, the best way to win was to outmatch the opponent in everything[5]. That is why he insisted that a good general should make the most out of every situation. In addition to that, he believed that by doing so, a general could avoid taking a lot of damage and, therefore save the resources. The idea was that battles can be found without fighting as soon as the opponent understands that there is no chance to win.

Clausewitz supported a completely different point o view. He believed that since fighting was an inevitable part of an armed conflict, it was necessary to ensure that one’s forces would outnumber and outgun those of the opponents[6]. The idea was that if there is no way to avoid violence, it would be logical to ensure that one’s forces are stronger. That is why he did not try to minimize the damage taken: as long as the opponent is hurt more, damage should be regarded as a part of the war that cannot be avoided.

Counter-Argument

It is possible that some might argue that there is no big difference between the two strategists after all. To begin with, they both strive to achieve victory and avoid losing. Given that they lived in different historical periods, it is logical that they would use different approaches. However, the ultimate goal that they were trying to achieve is victory and the way that they chose does not matter as long as it ensures the upper hand. That is why any difference between the two is superficial.

In addition to that, some may also claim that that Clausewitz was equally talented and smart as Sun Tzu in that sense that the former did not simply rely on brute force per se. Indeed, he advocated the need for a large army; however, armies are not created overnight. In other words, he implied that it is essential to achieve a proper social order in order to ensure that the society is able to produce men so that they can fight. That is why he was equally concerned with the strategic development as Sun Tzu was. As a result, both wanted to avoid taking damage in the end.

Counter-Argument Refutation

In spite of the fact that the line of reasoning mentioned above may be convincing, there is a significant logical flaw that needs to be acknowledged. While both Sun Tzu and Clausewitz are military strategists, it is logical that they would try to design ways to win. However, it is their dramatic difference in how they would achieve victory is what makes them different from each other. Therefore, one should note that both advocated almost mutually exclusive approaches and cannot be seen as two people who approach the same issue from the same perspective.

Conclusion

Having examined all the points that were mentioned in the paragraphs above, one is able to come to the following conclusion: there is no contradiction in the way in which Clausewitz views the role of strategy in the military operations since he acknowledges that some details are out of the strategy. As for the way in which his views can be compared to the views of Sun Tzu, it is crucial to keep in mind that both have similarities, but the differences are also great. That is why it would be fair to suggest that they have a different approach to military operations.

Bibliography

Clausewitz, Carl von. On War. Michael Howard and Peter Paret, eds. and trans. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1989.

Sun Tzu. The Art of War. Samuel B. Griffith, trans. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1980.


[1]Clausewitz, Carl von. On War. Michael Howard and Peter Paret, eds. and trans. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1989), p. 27.

[2]Sun Tzu. The Art of War. Samuel B. Griffith, trans. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1980), p. 32.

[3]Sun Tzu. The Art of War. Samuel B. Griffith, trans. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1980), p. 18.

[4]Clausewitz, Carl von. On War. Michael Howard and Peter Paret, eds. and trans. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1989), p. 6.

[5]Sun Tzu. The Art of War. Samuel B. Griffith, trans. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1980), p. 36.

[6]Clausewitz, Carl von. On War. Michael Howard and Peter Paret, eds. and trans. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1989), p. 4.

The terms offer and acceptance. (2016, May 17). Retrieved from

[Accessed: March 28, 2024]

"The terms offer and acceptance." freeessays.club, 17 May 2016.

[Accessed: March 28, 2024]

freeessays.club (2016) The terms offer and acceptance [Online].
Available at:

[Accessed: March 28, 2024]

"The terms offer and acceptance." freeessays.club, 17 May 2016

[Accessed: March 28, 2024]

"The terms offer and acceptance." freeessays.club, 17 May 2016

[Accessed: March 28, 2024]

"The terms offer and acceptance." freeessays.club, 17 May 2016

[Accessed: March 28, 2024]

"The terms offer and acceptance." freeessays.club, 17 May 2016

[Accessed: March 28, 2024]
close
Haven't found the right essay?
Get an expert to write you the one you need!
print

Professional writers and researchers

quotes

Sources and citation are provided

clock

3 hour delivery

person