How Did Sun Tzu And Clauseewitz Approach The Art Of War

Sun Tzu and Clausewitz approach the “Art of War” from very different perspectives and levels of detail. However, it is clear that both theorists recognize that war in practice is not a black and white affair. Sun Tzu states, “In the art of war there are no fixed rules.” Both theorists structure their works in such a manner as to require the reader to view them as they should view war. First, from the strategic point of view (i.e., the theory of war) and then from the tactical aspect (i.e., the practice of war), it forces the reader to engage in a critical analysis that is required of any successful battlefield commander. An example of this was Clausewitz’s statement that “… once the expenditure of efforts exceeds the value of the political

“Our method is the ideal method; therefore you should adapt our philosophies and mirror our methods.” This is a powerful object, even though the desire to resist change is a formidable force, the drive to convert others to follow your example is an unrelenting force. Beliefs and ideals are hardwired into society’s inhabitants, each believing that their methods are supreme to all others. “Nothing is more important in life than finding the right standpoint for seeing and judging events and then adhering to it.” It is no surprise that when those ideals are threatened, there will be a powerful and often explosive reaction giving the army, the people and the administration the extra vigor to prolong the war beyond its logical conclusion. Likewise, if an administration fails to properly understand and account for the opposition’s will to fight for their beliefs it can alter the power dynamic, leaving the administration’s ability to assign value and quantify the acceptable risk and sacrifices severely

However, as Sun Tzu has said that it is imperative that an enclosing force leave an opening to show the surrounded troops there is a way out, so that they will not be determined to fight to the death. This sentiment could not be more accurate when it comes to the emotional element of human nature. This element can present itself in countless ways and its unpredictable nature can be either a great asset or an extreme liability. Clausewitz, without detailed examination, mentions it throughout his book under various titles “human nature, nature of the masses, passions of the combatants…ect” but no matter which banner you choose the principle remains the same, people are unpredictable. As such it is impossible to determine with any degree of certainty what their contribution to the outcome of the war will be. “One and the same political object may produce totally different effects upon different people, or even upon the same people at different times; … the result may be very different according as these masses are animated with a spirit which will infuse vigor into the action or otherwise. … War may produce an effect quite disproportionate—in fact, a perfect explosion.” If the combatants are equally skilled in the “art of war”, it is more problematic to assume that one side will be able to outwit the other and win. Due to this universal