International Security and Peace BULIKO DESIRE MAWA I38009 International Security and Peace Prof. Jaechun Kim GRADUATE SCHOOL OF INTERNATIONAL STUDIES SOGANG UNIVERSITY

VON CLAUSEWITZ & SUN TZU PRESENTATION QUESTION What are the similarities and differences between Clausewitz and Sun Tzu? Which perspective do you think is more valid to make sense of contemporary security issues? “Know the enemy and know yourself; in a hundred battles you will never be in peril.” Sun Tzu

SUN TZU 400-320 BCE Sun Tzu was a Chinese general, military strategist, and philosopher who lived in ancient China (400–320 BCE). Served under the king of Wu, King Helü. He witnessed warring states in China. His victories at wars inspired him to write “The Art of War”, His book continue to influence the West and East military strategist He defined war as a matter of vital importance to the state.

SUN TZU IDEA’S War should be intrusive, provide victory without destruction- win without fighting. Best way to win a war is to attack the enemy’s strategy and disrupt his alliances. It is less effective to engage the enemy army. Engaging the enemy’s army militarily, leads to bloodshed, costly and destruction. The worst strategy is to attack cities, since they are heavily defended and can cause an impatient army to fail, retreat and thus lose the war.

SUN TZU IDEA’S He emphasized the importance of situation awareness on both sides before going into war. “if you know your enemy and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle.” Sun Tzu believed that commanders need to understand their enemies’ strengths and weaknesses including their own. Championed the bloodless victory through skills. “One hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the most skillful. Seizing the enemy without fighting is the most skillful.”

CARL VON CLAUSEWITZ Prussian officer born in 1780s. Saw real battles as early as 13 yrs old. Died in 1831 at the rank of a general; his book On War was completed in 1832. Sun Tzu, lived decades before Clausewitz

CLAUSEWITZ DESCRIPTION OF WAR Defined war as a continuation of policy (politics) by other means. War is like a wrestling match “An act of force to compel our enemy to do our will.” But it is not unilateral. It is a contest between two independent wills.

EXAMPLE -EXTENSION OF POLITICAL The Idea of Clausewitz. There is relationship between Politics and War . National Political Aims are Paramount. ☞ Historical Examples Korean War and US involvement 1950. Vietnam War and US involvement. Persian Gulf War ☞Political Factors Influencing President Bush Snr. ☞ Political Factors Influencing President Hussein. War a continuation of politics, by other means.

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN CLAUSEWITZ AND SUN TZU Both Clausewitz and Sun Tzu have different views on victory Sun Tzu: Victory is possible without fighting- attack enemy’s strategy and disrupt his alliances. ☞Moreover, best generals do not need to fight, because they understand their enemies and their own strengths. Clausewitz: Those who think that it is possible, and desirable, to disarm an enemy without bloodshed commit a serious error. ☞To win a war, you must destroy enemy target, the side that pursues its objective forcefully win.

Clausewitz believed that not all events can be predicted, some unexpected event may occur during a war. Sun Tzu claims that victory can be predicted based on a number of characteristics of both sides. Clausewitz main idea is to attack enemy’s centre of gravity so that the entire enemy system collapse-main base, arms, troops and allied forces.

Differences their ideas Sun Tzu believed that commanders had to understand not only their enemies’ strengths and weaknesses but also their own. ☞Commanders who underestimate their own abilities do not engage when they can be victorious. Commanders who overestimate their abilities attack foolishly and suffer defeat. ClauseWitz: objective in all acts of warfare is to place the enemy in a worse situation through violence than he would be placed in through submission to our will.

SIMILARITIES Both agrees that preservation of nation is important. Both emphasizes on the role of intelligence. ☞Clausewitz believes that intelligence and use of spy’s is vital to strategize and formulate war plans. ☞ Sun Tzu (intelligence) and understanding the enemy before engaging in war significantly important. Both their idea’s is about wining war #Enemies. Both believed that within warring camps there are objectives and a political goal of the war. Both of them believes that morale is a key element for solders victory in war.

Both believe that every war should end in a short period of time. ☞If a war takes longer, it not only affect the soldiers morale, but the home front as well. Both agree on the importance of resources, and whoever has the most will ultimately win.

WHICH PERSPECTIVE IS MORE VALID? Warfare has changed greatly over the years, but much of their ideas are relevant in contemporary security issues. Both perspectives make sense; depending on situations. Some situations require force as suggested by Clausewitz, while some do not therefor requires Sun Tzu ideas. However, I agree most with Clausewitz.

CASES US-Vietnam war Why do you think the US lost to Vietnam a small power? Poor knowledge of Vietnam- Poor intelligence “Sun Tzu urges that a commander must be able to understand a battle before he gets out there” Role of intelligence. How do we defeat terrorism? Talk to them? How, or destroy their targets?

Conclusion Carl and Sun have differences, but not opposite thinkers In war, the end game is to win against your enemy. Nature of war has changed, smaller insurgent and terrorist, WMD, new warfare strategizes have to change. Interestingly, because of the rise in technological realm and changes in warfare, contemporary issues more reflect Sun Tzu’s style of rationale. The future of global conflict will side with the one with the best ideas, not necessarily the strongest power. Case of US loss in Vietnam

END QUESTIONS

Discussion Questions If South Korea and North Korea went to war, and South Korea chose to fight using Sun Tzu style, what would happen? Which is ultimately more significant: destroying an enemy’s forces, or breaking an enemy’s will? In your view, why is combat so central to warfare, in Clausewitz’ view than Sun Tzu? In fighting terrorism, which theory would you apply?