Quote:
Originally Posted by shek
To get the discussion in the forum going, I'll start with a discussion/poll on which art of war philosopher is more relevant to the current operational environment? Clausewitz? Sun Tzu? Neither? Why or why not?
|
Sir,
Based on the choices available, I voted for Sun Tzu.
On your immediate question of relevance, I think that Sun Tzu's stressing of the political dimension of conflict as well as the importance of information makes his work eminently useful in the current security climate.
Furthermore, I think that the large number of commentaries on Sun Tzu's "Art of War" by various authors in various ages at various locations makes the study of that book in conjunction with the later commentaries a more useful package to both the strategist and the policy maker than Clausewitz.
Too, anybody can read Sun Tzu and "get it" with a little study of history and some sincere reflection. Clausewitz, OTOH, can be a beast to the uninitiated or otherwise faint of heart.
In general, I think that Clausewitz got it backwards: diplomacy is war continued by other means, not the reverse.
In the grand scheme of things, it would seem that war is the lower, baser human state with regards to human conflict and interaction, not the higher.
I feel that Zraver has some very valid insights into the matter and Troung is being very helpful by pointing people in the direction of Jomini.
Regards,
William