HOW RELEVANT CARL VON CLAUSEWITZ STRATEGY FOR THE FUTURE OF

STRATEGIC STUDIES
BY: MUHAMMAD AZRUL AMRI BIN IBRAHIM

 INTRODUCTION
 CARL VON CLAUSEWITZ AND ON WAR
 CLAUSEWITZ STRATEGIES
 RELEVANCE OF CLAUSEWITZ THEORY TO CONTEMPORARY CONFLICT
 THE FUTUTRE OF STATEGIC STUDIES
 CONCLUSION

INTRODUCTION

Strategy in warfare, we can say as the science or art consist all aspects of the military, economic,
political and other resources of the country in other to achieve their objects of war. The term
strategy comes from the Greek word which is strategos, an elected general in ancient Athens.
(A.Cohen, 2017)1. The strategoi is actually mainly about military leaders with the combination
of political and military authority, which is we can say as the fundamentals of strategy. Strategic
thinkers said that strategy is all about the ends and means. However, this terms have been used
far beyond war such as business, theory of games, political campaigning and other activities.
However, it remains rooted in war because in the field of armed conflicts that strategy assumes
its most complex forms.

In the military concepts, theoreticians distinguish three types of military activity. The first
activity is tactics which is means by techniques for employing forces in an engagement. The
second activity is operations, which is the used of engagements in parallel or in sequences for
larger purposes or in other words called campaign planning. The third activity is the one that I
want to emphasize which is strategy. Strategy is the broad comprehensive harmonizing of
operations with political purposes. Sometimes it is also known as grand strategy which
encompasses the coordination of all state policy including economic and diplomatic tools of
statecraft, to pursue some national or coalitional interests.

Planning a strategy is very rarely confined to a single strategist. It needs the contributions
of committees and working groups in terms of modern times nowadays. Even in the ancient
times the war council was a perennial resort of the anxious commanders. Strategy is often
portrayed as the interaction of ends, ways and means which is a useful formulation. Strategy
describes the way in which the available means will be employed to achieve the ends of policy.
Non-strategist people will think that strategy is all about war. Truthfully, the word strategy is

1
A. Cohen, Eliot; Encyclopedia Britannica (2017)
used in variety of contexts. There are business strategies, financial strategies, coaching strategies,
and research strategies. (Owens, 2007)2. Over the few decades, the concept of strategy has been
applied to various of organizations.

The development of strategies in the organizations were based on their mission or goals,
vision for the future, and an understanding of the organization’s place in the future. However, the
central application of the concept of strategy is still basically on the defense planning. History
makes it clear that the development of a coherent strategy is absolutely essential to national
security in times of both war and peace. In the absence of a coherent strategy, nonstrategic
factors, such as bureaucratic and organizational imperatives, will fill the void to the detriment of
national security.

CARL VON CLAUSEWITZ AND ON WAR

Carl Phillip Gottlieb Von Clausewitz who were born on June 1, 1780 in Prussia and died
on Nov 16, 1831 was a Prussian general and a military thinker. His best work was Vom Kriege or
popularly called On War (1832) which has become one of the most respected classics on military
strategy. Clausewitz was enlisted in the Prussian army in the year 1792 and few years later he
took part in the First Coalition campaign against the Revolutionary France. In the year 1801 he
gained admission into the Institute for Young Officers in Berlin which is the place where he start
thinking about wars.3

Through the coming peace and treaty in Prussia, Clausewitz had increasingly
concentrated on his intellectual interests. He has been writing on war and his theory since his
days in the Military Academy. His unfinished work, together with his historical studies, was
posthumously published by his widow. Clausewitz started to have serious doubts about total war
as the legitimate sole type of war in the year 1827. He came to the conclusion that there were in
fact two types of war, total or absolute war and limited war, and that it was, above all, political
aims and requirements that imposed themselves on war and dictated its intensity. 4

Clausewitz also become famous with his dictum which is “War is a continuation of state
policy with the admixture of other means.” This curious development of Clausewitz’s work has
had a profound effect on the reception of his ideas.

2
Owens Mackubin Thomas; Strategic and Strategic Way of Thinking
3
Carl von Clausewitz, On War (Princeton University Press, 1976)
4
Michael Howard, Clausewitz (New York: Oxford University Press, 1983)
CLAUSEWITZ STRATEGIES

All of the strategies and theories that were written by Carl Von Clausewitz consists in the eight
version of his On War books. These were eight of his books
I. On the Nature of War
II. On the Theory of War
III. On Strategy in General
IV. The Engagement
V. Military Forces
VI. Defense
VII. The Attack
VIII. War plans

From all of the principles that was inspired by Clausewitz, these are the four principles that is
important in terms of winning a war.
 General Principles for Defense
 General Principles for Offense
 Principles Governing the Use of Troops
 Principles for the Use of Terrain

Although his books were written nearly two centuries ago, Clausewitz’s classic guide to
military strategy is still being essential reading for modern business strategists nowadays.
Frequently, strategy was misunderstood and misapplied. More than any other business discipline,
it suffers from confusion and over complication. The essence of strategy is basically simple and
in it lies its power. People will keep questioning on why do we need strategy? This question
actually has been answered by Clausewitz. Strategy is the important response to the inescapable
reality of limited resources. Strategy is about making choices on how we will concentrate our
limited resources to achieve competitive advantage.

“The talent of the strategist is to identify the decisive point and to concentrate everything on
it, removing forces from secondary fronts and ignoring lesser objectives”.
(Carl von Clausewitz 1832)

Here, Clausewitz has given us the definition of strategy. To excel at strategy, we must
first understand what it is. The word “identify” give the meaning of good strategy always starts
with a situation analysis which create a deep understanding of the competitive environment and
our own realities. Clausewitz definition gives us the theoretical structure for thinking and acting
strategically.
 “Tactics are the use of armed forces in a particular battle, while strategy is the doctrine
of the use of individual battles for the purposes of war.”
(Carl von Clausewitz 1832)

Strategy and planning are two different things. Basically, strategy is about picking up the
right battles and tactics is on how you successfully executing those battles. Strategy is concerned
with define the overall purpose and priorities. It shows how individual battles fit and why do
they fought. Planning is also important. Don’t create strategy with plan, execute it with plan. For
example, your budget should be the financial expression of your strategy, not vice versa. The
right sequence is strategy first, planning afterwards. 5

“Simplicity in planning fosters energy in execution. Strong determination in carrying

through a simple idea is the surest route to success. The winning simplicity we seek, the
simplicity of genius, is the result of intense mental engagement.”
(Carl von Clausewitz 1832)

Strategy should be make into the most simplest language possible so that everyone
included can follow it easily. Complexity paralyzes. Simplicity empowers. No document of
strategy should be longer than 10 pages. Leaders must be able to clarify the strategy in a
compelling message such as using examples, pictures, and metaphors that will provide a spurs to
the action.
“Some generals consider only unilateral action, whereas war consists of a continuous
interaction of opposites … no strategy ever survives the first engagement with the
enemy.”
(Carl von Clausewitz 1832)

Competition is interactive, never static. Competitive neglect is the most common

mistakes that makes among strategists. We always susceptible to the false mental image that our
competitors are standing still and we are the only one moving. Making choices means by seeing
the world through the eyes of our competitors. What would their most likely countermoves be?
We can plot this out by role playing.

“War is a trial of moral and physical forces by means of the latter. . . In the last analysis
it is at moral, not physical strength that all military action is directed … Moral factors,
then, are the ultimate determinants in war.”
(Carl von Clausewitz 1832)

Morale is an important thing. As we know war is of course involves very much of

physical force. It is a blood sport. Clausewitz also emphasize the importance of moral factors.

5
Willie Pietersen, Von Clausewitz on War: Six Lessons for the Modern Strategist (Feb 12, 2016)
Clausewitz said that once you have destroyed your enemy’s spirit or will to fight, that’s mean
you have won the war. He notes that the armies that prevail most often are those that have the
full-hearted support of their citizens back home. When that encouragement is lacking, self-doubt
sets in and motivation is undermined.

“We need a philosophy of strategy that contains the seeds of its constant rejuvenation —
 a way to chart strategy in an unstable environment.”
(Carl von Clausewitz 1832)

Strategy requires a dynamic process. Every organization create their future through the
strategies that they pursue. We must have shared the process inspired by the right thinking. An
organization’s survival depends on the mastery of a dynamic process for generating ongoing
renewal. “Strategy, like any other discipline in the modern world, requires constant learning,
unlearning, and relearning.” (Alvin Toffler,1984)6

RELEVANCE OF CLAUSEWITZ THEORY TO CONTEMPORARY CONFLICT

Carl von Clausewitz has been acknowledge and studied by various of scholars since he is
one of the few truly great writers on war. Much of his concepts and ideas have received much
attention in recent years and continue to remain relevant. Furthermore, few of it also often used
in today’s doctrines and for civil-military educational processes. Some of Clausewitz strategy
still have contributions in contemporary thought and still relevant for today’s strategists.

Clausewitz has applied a scientific and methodological approach to analyze war in

various aspects. One of his famous conclusion is that “War is merely the continuation of policy
by other means.” The essence of this theory was what Clausewitz description of the vertical
continuum of war which is policy and strategy tactics. According to this, Clausewitz explains
that “War in itself does not suspend political intercourse… War cannot be divorced from
political life…”.7 This observation accurately captures the key aspect of war which is its
subordination to politics. His teaching on the relationship between war and politics can be
concluded with the summary of “Theory will have fulfilled its main task when it is used to
analyze the constituent elements of war…”

Clausewitz sees war as the completely friend of the policy. He explains that the political
object which is the original motive for the war will determine both of the military objective to be
reached and the amount of efforts it requires. In Clausewitz view, “war is thus an act of force to
compel our enemy to do our will.”8 We can say that this definition is still relevant today with the

6
Alvin Toffler, Future Shock, (Sep 1, 1984)
7
Carl von Clausewitz, On War (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1989),75.
8
Ibid.,87
current conflict including all kind of asymmetric threats. For example, the threats of terrorism,
organized crime, drug cartels and so on. Clausewitz describes war as “a clash between major
interests, which is resolved by bloodshed.”9 That is the only way it differs from other conflicts.
These give us a clear understanding of the difference between war and conflicts. Particularly,
today’s contemporary environments are more towards asymmetric threats. However, the only
difference of today’s warfare and during Clausewitz’s time only lies in the non-kinetic aspect of
contemporary warfare which namely as information warfare.

The technological development that enables instant messaging over different information
platforms, have a vital role to play in winning the wars by winning the hearts and minds. As well
as the contemporary world and the future, Clausewitz theories of war provide the scientific laws
through which one can understand the nature of war. For him, war is not an activity governed by
scientific laws, but it rather a clash of wills and moral forces. A successful commander was not
the one who create or knew he rules of the game, but he is the one who create them through his
genius. This is the theory and philosophy of Clausewitz that give his work timeless value.

Besides, Clausewitz is important today because of his efforts to grasp the intrinsic nature
of war. He extremely address the important of morality in war. Clausewitz say that “the moral
factor is the most fluid element of all, and therefore spreads most easily to affect everything
else.”10 Moreover, warfare is “Trinitarian”. Simply put, it is about people, armed forces and
government. Among these aspects, people is the most sensitive in terms of supporting war. No
war can be conducted successfully without the public support. However, it must be emphasized
today that the success of the “trinity” depends on the international support to the governments.

Referring to Clausewitz, the meaning of strategy in modern times still implies the use of
engagement, but with much more attention paid to other domains than in the past. Strategy is
more about delineating how those elements of statement of goals, objectives, or purpose are to be
achieved in order for the mission to be accomplished. Strategy is about the ends and means in
achieving them. Losing at the tactical level of warfare does not mean losing the war while losing
at the strategic level means that the war is about to be lost if either the strategy, key officers or
both are not to be changed. Although we live in the 21st century where technologically
completely different from Clausewitz’s time, his fundamentals definitions are still valid.

In conclusion, Clausewitz’s strategy provides a conceptual link between ends and means
during peacetime and during war and his theory of war is still relevant to contemporary
strategists.

9
Ibid.,605
10
Ibid.,149
THE FUTURE OF STRATEGIC STUDIES

The conduct of warfare over the last 60 years has undergone dramatic transformation that
driven by factors within the operational and strategic environment. The advancement in
computer sciences, medical, information technology, and other innovations in the application of
communication are currently affecting nearly every aspect of the social, political and military
environments. Strategy is a discipline of thought as well as a practical art. In the modern world,
a good strategist must understand something about development of economics and
bioengineering, as well as precision guidance and also computer programming.

The new challenge that emerged to the strategic studies from a more traditional source is
the transformation of technological dynamics. As we know that starting in the 20th century is the
beginning with the advent of nuclear weapons, this actually supposed to transform the nature of
strategy from seeking to win the wars to seeking to avoid wars. The argument that nuclear
weapons will make the war obsolete between nuclear powers remain a relatively powerful
argument.

Furthermore, strategic studies also had to face the challenges posed by the revolution of
military affairs (RMA) and the subsequent defense transformation that were being undergo by
some states.11 Either in the network centric warfare or the new concepts of effect based
operations. The RMA theory seems to suggest the war that we have traditionally understood is
being transformed. This will make the Clausewitzian notion of strategy increasingly obsolete.

Other of the challenges faced by strategic studies is the one posed by the terrorism.
Terrorism has certainly maintained its position as the top tune of the day. Here comes the
argument that terrorism is a new threat and it cannot be measure with the traditional security.
Traditionally, military thinking has been revolved around the problem of victory and of how to
achieve it. In the traditional security, it is possible to think of how to defeat the enemy, because
the enemy can be found, fixed and finished. The mindset is predisposed towards offensive
action, and this applies even to the fight of the guerilla warfare. This is because the guerilla at
some point has to assume the offensive against its opponent. However, the so-called war on
terror that were started by the United States cannot be premised on this mindset.

The war on terror can be likened to police action against crime. This is because the police
forces do not seek to gain victory unless if it was an organized crime. The success of the police
forces is measured in terms of the no activity by the criminals and the low rates of criminal’s
activities. The mindset is therefore not about seeking the victory, but it is about avoiding the
catastrophe. This is the mindset change that has to be made in the strategy of the military in order
to deal with the terrorism. The other major challenge is that the one posed by the technological

11
Gray, Colin S. 1999. Modern Strategy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
dynamics. However, this one is more easy to dealt with. Gray has argued that the political world
had not altered strategic questions, they were more prior to the bombing of the Hiroshima and
Nagasaki. “All nuclear weapons did was to make policy makers more cautious in their inter-state
dealings with each other.” (Gray,1988)12 In other words, whether there is nuclear weapons or just
conventional warfare, the strategy will remain the same essence. There is no sense that the
technological change will affect the strategic studies.

CONCLUSION

The strategic studies still remain as relevant today as ever before. The specific security
problems face by the states change necessarily through times, however, the fundamentals of
strategy always remain constant. Strategy has always been about finding the right prescription to
the specific problems at hand. Clausewitz thoughts and writings never mean to be used as
prescriptive approaches to warfare. Therefore, much of his theory remains applicable to the
nature and conduct of warfare in the 21st century. Contemporary theorists such as Rupert Smith,
John Keegan and Philip Meilinger have discounted Clausewitz and his theories of war. However,
Carl von Clausewitz’s definition of war is still consistent with the frameworks that were
discussed previously and is very applicable in today’s strategic environment.

Article written by Nizar Abdel-Kader (Clausewitz and His Treatise On War and Its Relevance to
the 21st Century) in www.lebarmy.gov.lb

12
Gray, Colin S. 1988. The Geopolitics of Superpower. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky.