The Full Wiki

Carl von Clausewitz: Wikis

Advertisements
  
  

Note: Many of our articles have direct quotes from sources you can cite, within the Wikipedia article! This article doesn't yet, but we're working on it! See more info or our list of citable articles.

Encyclopedia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Carl Philipp Gottlieb von Clausewitz
June 1, 1780(1780-06-01) – November 16, 1831 (aged 51)
Clausewitz.jpg
Carl von Clausewitz in Prussian service, painting by Karl Wilhelm Wach
Place of birth Burg bei Magdeburg, Prussia
Allegiance Kingdom of Prussia Prussia (1792-1808, 1815-1831)
Russia Russian Empire (1812-1815)
Years of service 1792–1831
Rank Major-General
Unit Russian-German Legion
III Corps
Commands held Kriegsakademie
Battles/wars Siege of Mainz
Napoleonic Wars

Carl Philipp Gottlieb von Clausewitz (pronounced /ˈklaʊzəvɪts/; July 1, 1780[1] – November 16, 1831) was a Prussian soldier, military historian and military theorist. He is most notable for his military treatise Vom Kriege, translated into English as On War.

Contents

Life and times

Clausewitz, an author of contemporary military strategy, was born in Burg bei Magdeburg, Kingdom of Prussia, to a lower middle-class family. His grandfather, the son of a Lutheran Pastor, had been a professor of theology. Clausewitz's father was once a lieutenant in the Prussian army and held a minor post in the Prussian internal revenue service. Carl was the fourth and youngest son. He entered the Prussian military service at the age of twelve years as a Lance-Corporal, eventually attaining the rank of Major-General.[2]

Clausewitz served in the Rhine Campaigns (1793–1794) e.g. the Siege of Mainz, when the Prussian army invaded France during the French Revolution, and later served in the Napoleonic Wars from 1806 to 1815. Clausewitz entered the Kriegsakademie in Berlin (also cited variously as "The German War School," the "Military Academy in Berlin," and the "Prussian Military Academy") in 1801 (age 21 years), studied the writings of the philosopher Immanuel Kant, and won the regard of General Gerhard von Scharnhorst, the future first chief of staff of the new Prussian Army (appointed 1809). Clausewitz, along with Hermann von Boyen (1771–1848) and Karl von Grolman (1777–1843), were Scharnhorst's primary allies in his efforts to reform the Prussian army between 1807 and 1814.

Both Clausewitz and Hermann von Boyen served during the Jena Campaign. Clausewitz, serving as Aide-de-Camp to Prince August, was captured in October 1806 when Napoleon invaded Prussia and defeated the massed Prussian-Saxon army commanded by Karl Wilhelm Ferdinand, Duke of Brunswick (who was mortally wounded), in twin battles at Jena and Auerstedt (see Battle of Jena-Auerstedt) on October 14, 1806. Carl von Clausewitz, at the age of twenty-six years, became one of the 25,000 prisoners captured that day as the Prussian army disintegrated.

Clausewitz was held prisoner in France from 1807 to 1808. Returning to Prussia, he assisted in the reform of the Prussian army and state. He also married the socially prominent Countess Marie von Brühl and socialized with Berlin's literary and intellectual elites. Opposed to Prussia's enforced alliance to Napoleon, he left the Prussian army and subsequently served in the Russian army from 1812 to 1813 during the Russian Campaign. Like many Prussian officers living in Russia, he joined the Russian-German Legion in 1813. In the service of the Russian Empire, Clausewitz helped negotiate the Convention of Tauroggen (1812), which prepared the way for the coalition of Prussia, Russia, and the United Kingdom that ultimately defeated Napoleon I of France and his allies.

In 1815, the Russo-German Legion was integrated into the Prussian Army and Clausewitz thus re-entered Prussian service. He was soon appointed chief of staff to Johann von Thielmann's III Corps. In that capacity, he served at the Battle of Ligny and the Battle of Wavre during the Waterloo Campaign in 1815. The Prussians were defeated at Ligny (south of Mont-Saint-Jean and the village of Waterloo) by an army led personally by Napoleon, but Napoleon's failure to actually destroy the Prussian forces led to his eventual defeat a few days later at the Battle of Waterloo when the Prussian forces arrived on his right flank late in the afternoon and joined the Anglo-Dutch forces pressing Napoleon's front. At Wavre, Thielmann's corps, greatly outnumbered, prevented Marshall Grouchy from reinforcing Napoleon with his corps.

Clausewitz was promoted to Major-General in 1818 and appointed director of the Kriegsakademie, where he served until 1830. In the latter year, the outbreak of several revolutions around Europe and a crisis in Poland appeared to presage another major European war. Clausewitz was appointed chief-of-staff to the only army Prussia was able to mobilize, which was sent to the Polish border. He subsequently died in a cholera outbreak in 1831. His widow was left to publish his magnum opus on the philosophy of war posthumously, in 1832 - a book he had started working on in 1816 but had not completed. [3]

Although Carl von Clausewitz participated in many military campaigns, he was primarily a military theorist interested in the examination of war. He wrote a careful, systematic, philosophical examination of war in all its aspects, as he saw it and taught it. The result was his principal work, On War, the West's premier work on the philosophy of war. His examination was so carefully considered that it was only partially completed by the time of his death. Clausewitz sought to revise the text, in 1827 and just before his death, to include more material on counter-insurgency and forms of war other than between states, but these revisions were never included in the published document. [4]

Other soldiers before this time had written treatises on various military subjects, but none undertook a great philosophical examination of war on the scale of Clausewitz's and Tolstoy's, both of which were inspired by the events of the Napoleonic Era.

Clausewitz's work is still studied today, demonstrating its continued relevance. Lynn Montross writing on that topic in War Through the Ages said; "This outcome...may be explained by the fact that Jomini produced a system of war, Clausewitz a philosophy. The one has been outdated by new weapons, the other still influences the strategy behind those weapons."

Clausewitz introduced systematic philosophical contemplation into Western military thinking, with powerful implications not only for historical and analytical writing but for practical policy, military instruction, and operational planning.

Principal ideas

A young Carl von Clausewitz.

Vom Kriege (On War) is a long and intricate investigation of Clausewitz's observations based on his own experience in the Wars of the French Revolution and the Napoleonic Wars and on considerable historical research into those wars and others. It is shaped not only by purely military and political considerations but by Clausewitz's strong interests in art, science, and education.

Some of the key ideas discussed in On War include:

  • the dialectical approach to military analysis
  • the methods of "critical analysis"
  • the nature of the balance-of-power mechanism
  • the relationship between political objectives and military objectives in war
  • the asymmetrical relationship between attack and defense
  • the nature of "military genius" (involving matters of personality and character, beyond intellect)
  • the "fascinating trinity" (wunderliche Dreifaltigkeit) of war
  • philosophical distinctions between "absolute" or "ideal war," and "real war"
  • in "real war," the distinctive poles of a) limited war and b) war to "render the enemy helpless"
  • "war" belongs fundamentally to the social realm—rather than to the realms of art or science
  • "strategy" belongs primarily to the realm of art
  • "tactics" belongs primarily to the realm of science
  • the importance of "moral forces" (more than simply "morale") as opposed to quantifiable physical elements
  • the "military virtues" of professional armies (which do not necessarily trump the rather different virtues of other kinds of fighting forces)
  • conversely, the very real effects of a superiority in numbers and "mass"
  • the essential unpredictability of war
  • the "fog" of war[5]
  • "friction"
  • strategic and operational "centers of gravity"[6]
  • the "culminating point of the offensive"
  • the "culminating point of victory"

Clausewitz used a dialectical method to construct his argument, leading to frequent modern misinterpretation. As described by Christopher Bassford, professor of strategy at the National War College of the United States:

One of the main sources of confusion about Clausewitz's approach lies in his dialectical method of presentation. For example, Clausewitz's famous line that "War is a mere continuation of politics by other means," ("Der Krieg ist eine bloße Fortsetzung der Politik mit anderen Mitteln") while accurate as far as it goes, was not intended as a statement of fact. It is the antithesis in a dialectical argument whose thesis is the point—made earlier in the analysis—that "war is nothing but a duel [or wrestling match, a better translation of the German Zweikampf] on a larger scale." His synthesis, which resolves the deficiencies of these two bold statements, says that war is neither "nothing but" an act of brute force nor "merely" a rational act of politics or policy. This synthesis lies in his "fascinating trinity" [wunderliche Dreifaltigkeit]: a dynamic, inherently unstable interaction of the forces of violent emotion, chance, and rational calculation.
[1]

Another example of this confusion is the idea that Clausewitz was a proponent of total war as used in the Third Reich's propaganda in the 1940s. He did not coin the phrase as an ideological ideal—indeed, Clausewitz does not use the term "total war" at all. Rather, he discussed "absolute war" or "ideal war" as the purely logical result of the forces underlying a "pure," Platonic "ideal" of war. In what Clausewitz called a "logical fantasy," war cannot be waged in a limited way: the rules of competition will force participants to use all means at their disposal to achieve victory. But in the real world, such rigid logic is unrealistic and dangerous. As a practical matter, the military objectives in real war that support one's political objectives generally fall into two broad types: "war to achieve limited aims" and war to "disarm” the enemy—i.e., “to render [him] politically helpless or militarily impotent." Thus the complete defeat of one's enemies may be neither necessary, desirable, nor even possible.

In modern times the reconstruction and hermeneutics of Clausewitzian theory has been a matter of some dispute. One prominent analysis was that of Panagiotis Kondylis, a Greek-German writer and philosopher who opposed the popular views on Clausewitz of Raymond Aron (in Penser la Guerre, Clausewitz) and other liberal writers. One of his most notable works on the subject was titled Theory of War and first published in German, later translated into Greek by Kondylis himself. In this very influential book, Kondylis opposes Raymond Aron's liberal perception of Clausewitzian theory. According to Aron, in Penser La Guerre, Clausewitz, Clausewitz was one of the very first writers condemning the militarism of the military staff and its war-proneness (based on Clausewitz's argument that "war is a continuation of politics by other means"). Kondylis claims that this is a reconstruction not coherent with Clausewitzian thought. He claims that Clausewitz was morally indifferent to war and that his advice regarding politics' dominance over the conduct of war has nothing to do with pacifistic ideas—but then, very few writers have accused Clausewitz of pacifism. For Clausewitz, war is just a means to the eternal quest for power, of raison d'État in an anarchic and unsafe world. Other notable writers who have studied Clausewitz's texts and translated them into English are the war specialists Peter Paret (Princeton University) and Sir Michael Howard, and the philosopher, musician, and game theorist Anatol Rapoport. Sir Michael edited the widely used Penguin edition of On War and has produced comparative studies of Clausewitz and other theorists, such as Tolstoi. Bernard Brodie's A Guide to the Reading of "On War", in the 1976 Princeton translation, expressed his own interpretations of the Prussian's theories and provided students with an influential synopsis of this vital work.

Influence

Despite his death just prior to completing On War, Clausewitz' ideas have been widely influential in military theory. Later Prussian and German generals such as Helmuth Graf von Moltke were clearly influenced by Clausewitz: Moltke's notable statement that "No campaign plan survives first contact with the enemy" is a classic reflection of Clausewitz's insistence on the roles of chance, friction, "fog," and uncertainty in war. The idea that actual war includes "friction" which deranges, to a greater or lesser degree, all prior arrangements, has become common currency in other fields as well (e.g., business strategy, sports).

Some claim that nuclear proliferation makes Clausewitzian concepts obsolescent after a period—i.e., the 20th century—in which they dominated the world.[7] John E. Sheppard, Jr., argues that, by developing nuclear weapons, state-based conventional armies simultaneously both perfected their original purpose (to destroy a mirror image of themselves) and made themselves obsolete. No two nuclear powers have ever used their nuclear weapons against each other, instead using conventional means or proxy wars to settle disputes. If, hypothetically, such a conflict did in fact occur, presumably both combatants would be effectively annihilated. Therefore, the beginning of the 21st century has found many instances of state armies attempting to suppress terrorism, bloody feuds, raids and other intra/supra-state conflict while using conventional weaponry.

Others, however, argue that the essentials of Clausewitz's theoretical approach remain valid, but that our thinking must adjust to changed realities. Knowing that "war is an expression of politics" does us no good unless we have a valid definition of "politics" and an understanding of how it is reflected in a specific situation. The latter may well turn on religious passions, private interests and armies, etc. While many commentators are quick to dismiss Clausewitz's political context as obsolete, it seems worthwhile to note that the states of the twentieth century were very different from Clausewitz's Prussia, and yet the World Wars are generally seen as "Clausewitzian warfare"; similarly, North and South Vietnam, and the United States as well, were quite unlike 18th century European states, yet it was the war in Indochina that brought the importance of Clausewitzian theory forcefully home to American thinkers. The idea that states cannot suppress rebellions or terrorism in a nuclear-armed world does not bear up well in the light of experience: Just as some rebellions and revolutions succeeded and some failed before 1945, some rebellions and revolutions have succeeded and some have failed in the years since. Insurgencies were successfully suppressed in the Philippines, Yemen, and Malaysia—just a few of many examples. Successful revolutions may destroy some states, but the revolutionaries simply establish new and stronger states—e.g., China, Vietnam, Iran—which seem to be quite capable of handling threats of renewed insurgency.

The real problem in determining Clausewitz's continuing relevance lies not with his own theoretical approach, which has stood up well over nearly two centuries of intense military and political change. Rather, the problem lies in the way that thinkers with more immediate concerns have adapted Clausewitzian theory to their own narrowly defined eras. When times change, people familiar only with Clausewitz's most recent interpreters, rather than with the original works, assume that the passing of cavalry, or Communism, or the USSR's Strategic Rocket Forces, means that Clausewitz is passé. Yet we always seem to be comfortable describing the age of warfare just past as "Clausewitzian"—even though Clausewitz never saw a machinegun, a tank, a Viet Cong, or a nuclear weapon.

The phrase fog of war derives from Clausewitz's stress on how confused warfare can seem while one is immersed within it.[8] The term center of gravity, used in a specifically military context, derives from Clausewitz's usage (which he took from Newtonian Mechanics). In the simplified and often confused form in which it appears in official US military doctrine, "Center of Gravity" refers to the basis of an opponent's power (at either the operational, strategic, or political level).

Name

Clausewitz's Christian name is sometimes given in non-German sources as Carl Philipp Gottlieb, Carl Maria, or misspelled Karl due to reliance on mistaken source material, conflations with his wife's name, Marie, or mistaken assumptions about German orthography. Carl Philipp Gottfried appears on Clausewitz's tombstone and is thus most likely to be the correct version. The tombstone reads:

Hier ruht in Gott
Carl Philipp Gottfried von Clausewitz
koenigl. General-Major u. Inspecteur der Artillerie
geboren 1 Juni 1780
gestorben 16 Nov 1831

Which translates as:

Here rests with God
Carl Philipp Gottfried von Clausewitz
In the royal service, Major General and Inspector of the Artillery
Born June 1, 1780
Died November 16, 1831

There is no single "correct" spelling for German names before the early 19th century. Vital records were kept by pastors in their parish records. Different pastors used different spellings and commonly ignored how their predecessor may have spelled the same name. The name of the same individual can be found spelt differently in the same parish record, for example, if a pastor registered his birth and a different one his marriage and/or his death. It appears that pastors recorded names as they heard them and spelled them as they believed they should be spelled. Pastors treated persons of importance or high status such as nobility or civil or military officials more deferentially. For the names of such persons it can make sense to distinguish between such spellings as "Carl" or "Karl" even then. The situation changed radically in the Napoleonic era when French civil servants introduced greater discipline in keeping vital records in German lands. Spellings of family and given names were "frozen" in whatever state they happened to be in then. It was, however, not unusual for brothers who made their homes in different parishes to have their family names spelled differently. Such variations endure to this day and confound amateur genealogists who are not familiar with the fluidity of German spellings before the Napoleonic reforms. While spellings of names were fluid when Clausewitz was born, they had become firm by the time of his death. That is why it makes sense to accept the spelling of his name as recorded on his tombstone which, presumably, agrees with the vital records of his death.

Cultural references

  • In the film Crimson Tide, the naval officers of the nuclear submarine have a discussion about the meaning of the quote "War is a continuation of politics by other means." The executive officer (played by Denzel Washington) contends that the captain (played by Gene Hackman) has taken a too simplistic reading of Clausewitz, perhaps ignoring the dialectic style, as described in the main article.
  • In That Hideous Strength, by C. S. Lewis, Lord Feverstone (Dick Devine) defends rudely cutting off another professor by saying "[...] but then I take the Clauswitz view. Total war is the most humane in the long run."
  • In Ian Fleming's novel Moonraker, James Bond reflects that he has achieved Clausewitz's first principle in securing his base, though this base is a relationship for intelligence purposes and not a military installation.
  • In Lawrence of Arabia (1962), General Allenby (Jack Hawkins) contends to T. E. Lawrence (Peter O'Toole) that "I fight like Clausewitz, you fight like Saxe." To which Lawrence replies, "We should do very well indeed, shouldn't we?"
  • In Sam Peckinpah's Cross of Iron (1977), Feldwebel Steiner (James Coburn) has an ironic conversation in the trenches between hostilities with the advancing Red Army with his comrade, Cpl. Schnurrbart, in which they refer to German philosophers and their views on war. Cpl. Schnurrbart: " ...and von Clausewitz said, 'war is a continuation of state policy by other means.'" "Yes," Steiner says, overlooking the trenches, " ...by other means."
  • In the Horatio Hornblower novel, The Commodore by C. S. Forester, the protagonist meets von Clausewitz during the events surrounding the defence of Riga.
  • In the film Lions for Lambs, during a military briefing in Afghanistan Lt. Col. Falco (played by Peter Berg) says: "Remember your von Clausewitz: 'Never engage the same enemy for too long or he will ...'", "adapt to your tactics", completes another soldier.[9]
  • Bob Dylan mentions Clausewitz on pages 41 and 45 of his Chronicles: Volume 1, saying he had "a morbid fascination with this stuff," that "Clausewitz in some ways is a prophet" and reading Clausewitz can make you "take your own thoughts a little less seriously." Dylan says that Vom Kriege was one of the books he looked through among those he found in his friend's personal library as a young man playing at the Gaslight club in Greenwich Village.
  • In the Ethan Stark series by John G. Hemry, Clausewitz is often quoted by Private Mendoza and his father Lieutenant Mendoza to explain events that unfold during the series.
  • In the 2009 film Law Abiding Citizen, Clausewitz is frequently quoted by Clyde Shelton, the main character played by Gerard Butler.

See also

Notes

Regarding personal names: in German, von is a preposition which approximately means of or from and usually denotes some sort of nobility. It is part of the family name or territorial designation, not a first or middle name.

  1. ^ Christopher Bassford. (2002). Clausewitz and his Works. Clausewitz.com. Accessed 2007-06-30.
  2. ^ "Full copy of On War". http://www.clausewitz.com/readings/OnWar1873/TOC.htm. 
  3. ^ Smith, Rupert, The Utility of Force, Penguin Books, 2006, page 57
  4. ^ Smith, Rupert, The Utility of Force, Penguin Books, 2006, page 57
  5. ^ von Clausewitz, Carl. "On War". Project Gutenberg. pp. Chapter II Section 24. http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1946/1946-h/1946-h.htm. Retrieved 2009-09-25. "Lastly, the great uncertainty of all data in War is a peculiar difficulty, because all action must, to a certain extent, be planned in a mere twilight, which in addition not unfrequently—like the effect of a fog or moonshine—gives to things exaggerated dimensions and an unnatural appearance"
  6. ^ von Clausewitz, Carl. "On War". Project Gutenberg. pp. CHAPTER IX. http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1946/1946-h/1946-h.htm. Retrieved 2009-09-25. 
  7. ^ Sheppard, John E., Jr. (September 1990). "On War: Is Clausewitz Still Relevant?". Parameters 20 (3): 85–99. 
  8. ^ Berkun, Scott (2005). The Art of Project Management. Beijing: OŔeilly. ISBN 0-596-00786-8. 
  9. ^ "Lions for Lambs script (retrieved 14/06/09)". http://www.130q.com/show.php?tid=2110. 

References

  • Bassford, Christopher. Clausewitz in English: The Reception of Clausewitz in Britain and America, 1815-1945. New York: Oxford University Press, 1994. Full text on-line here.
  • Clausewitz, Carl Von (1976, rev.1984). On War. edited and translated by Michael Howard and Peter Paret.. Princeton: Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-05657-9. 
  • Clausewitz, Carl von. Col. J. J. Graham, translator. Vom Kriege. On War — Volume 1, Project Gutenberg eBook.
  • Gerhard Muhm, German Tactics in the Italian Campaign , http://www.larchivio.org/xoom/gerhardmuhm2.htm
  • Gerhard Muhm, La tattica tedesca nella campagna d'Italia, in Linea gotica avamposto dei Balcani, a cura di Amedeo Montemaggi - Edizioni Civitas, Roma 1993
  • Paret, Peter. Clausewitz and the State: The Man, His Theories, and His Times. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1976.
  • Rogers, Clifford J. "Clausewitz, Genius, and the Rules", The Journal of Military History, Vol. 66, No. 4. (2002), pp. 1167–1176.
  • Rothfels, Hans “Clausewitz” pages 93–113 from The Makers of Modern Strategy edited by Edward Mead Earle, Gordon A. Craig & Felix Gilbert, Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1943.
  • Edward J. Villacres and Christopher Bassford, “Reclaiming the Clausewitzian Trinity,” Parameters, Autumn 95, pp. 9–19, http://www.clausewitz.com/readings/Bassford/Trinity/TRININTR.htm
  • John Keegan, A History of Warfare (London: Hutchinson, 1993)

External links

Advertisements

Quotes

Up to date as of January 14, 2010

From Wikiquote

War is very simple, but in War the simplest things become very difficult.

Carl von Clausewitz (1 June 1780 - 16 November 1831) was a Prussian general and influential military theorist. He is most famous for his military treatise Vom Kriege, translated into English as On War.

Contents

Sourced

On War (1832)

Full text online

Book 1

  • War therefore is an act of violence to compel our opponent to fulfill our will.
    • Chapter 1, paragraph 2
  • Intelligence alone is not courage, we often see that the most intelligent people are irresolute. Since in the rush of events a man is governed by feelings rather than by thought, the intellect needs to arouse the quality of courage, which then supports and sustains it in action.
    • Chapter 3
  • We repeat again: strength of character does not consist solely in having powerful feelings, but in maintaining one’s balance in spite of them. Even with the violence of emotion, judgment and principle must still function like a ship’s compass, which records the slightest variations however rough the sea.
    • Chapter 3
  • Action in war is like movement in a resistant element. Just as the simplest and most natural of movements, walking, cannot easily be performed in water, so in war it is difficult for normal efforts to achieve even moderate results.
  • Kind-hearted people might of course think there was some ingenious way to disarm or defeat the enemy without too much bloodshed, and might imagine this is the true goal of the art of war. Pleasant as it sounds, it is a fallacy that must be exposed: war is such a dangerous business that the mistakes which come from kindness are the very worst.
  • The invention of gunpowder and the constant improvement of firearms are enough in themselves to show that the advance of civilization has done nothing practical to alter or deflect the impulse to destroy the enemy, which is central to the very idea of war.
  • The worst of all conditions in which a belligerent can find himself is to be utterly defenseless.
  • Men are always more inclined to pitch their estimate of the enemy's strength too high than too low, such is human nature.
  • ...only the element of chance is needed to make war a gamble, and that element is never absent.
  • ...in the whole range of human activities, war most closely resembles a game of cards.
  • Although our intellect always longs for clarity and certainty, our nature often finds uncertainty fascinating.
  • With uncertainty in one scale, courage and self-confidence should be thrown into the other to correct the balance. The greater they are, the greater the margin that can be left for accidents.
  • ...the side that feels the lesser urge for peace will naturally get the better bargain.
  • Blind aggressiveness would destroy the attack itself, not the defense.
  • Our discussion has shown that while in war many different roads can lead to the goal, to the attainment of the political object, fighting is the only possible means.
  • Any complex activity, if it is to be carried on with any degree of virtuosity, calls for appropriate gifts of intellect and temperament. If they are outstanding and reveal themselves in exceptional achievements, their possessor is called a 'genius'.
  • If the mind is to emerge unscathed from this relentless struggle with the unforeseen, two qualities are indispensable: first, an intellect that, even in the darkest hour, retains some glimmerings of the inner light which leads to truth; and second, the courage to follow this faint light wherever it may lead.
  • ...the role of determination is to limit the agonies of doubt and the perils of hesitation when the motives for action are inadequate.
  • Of all the passions that inspire a man in a battle, none, we have to admit, is so powerful and so constant as the longing for honor and reknown.
  • Obstinacy is a fault of temperament. Stubbornness and intolerance of contradiction result from a special kind of egotism, which elevates above everything else the pleasure of its autonomous intellect, to which others must bow.
  • ...self-reliance is the best defence against the pressures of the moment.
  • Everything in war is simple, but the simplest thing is difficult.

Book 2

  • Architects and painters know precisely what they are about as long as they deal with material phenomena. ... But when they come to the aesthetics of their work, when they aim at a particular effect on the mind or on the senses, the rules dissolve into nothing but vague ideas.
  • Modern wars are seldom fought without hatred between nations; this serves more or less as a substitute for hatred between individuals.
  • ...soldierly simplicity of character that has always represented the military at its best. In the higher ranks it is different. The higher a man is placed, the broader his point of view. Different interests and a wide variety of passions, good and bad, will arise on all sides. Envy and generosity, pride and humility, wrath and compassion - all may appear as effective forces in this great drama.
  • ...talent and genius operate outside the rules, and theory conflicts with practice.
  • The more physical the activity, the less the difficulties will be. The more the activity becomes intellectual and turns into motives which exercise a determining influence on the commander's will, the more the difficulties will increase.
  • Great things alone can make a great mind, and petty things will make a petty mind unless a man rejects them as completely alien.
  • Knowledge in war is very simple, being concerned with so few subjects, and only with their final results at that. But this does not make its application easy.
  • ...an intellectual instinct which extracts the essence from the phenomena of life, as a bee sucks honey from a flower. In addition to study and reflections, life itself serves as a source.
  • Knowledge must be so absorbed into the mind that it ceases to exist in a separate, objective way." "...in 1797 the secret of the effectiveness of resisting to the last had not yet been discovered.
  • ...it is better to go on striking in the same direction than to move one's forces this way and that.
  • There are times when the utmost daring is the height of wisdom.
  • Thus it has come about that our theoretical and critical literature, instead of giving plain, straightforward arguments in which the author at least always knows what he is saying and the reader what he is reading, is crammed with jargon, ending at obscure crossroads where the author loses its readers. Sometimes these books are even worse: they are just hollow shells. The author himself no longer knows just what he is thinking and soothes himself with obscure ideas which would not satisfy him if expressed in plain speech.
  • Anyone who feels the urge to undertake such a task must dedicate himself for his labors as he would prepare for a pilgrimage to distant lands. He must spare no time or effort, fear no earthly power or rank, and rise above his own vanity or false modesty in order to tell, in accordance with the expression of the Code Napoléon, the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
  • Essentally combat is an expression of hostile feelings. But in the large-scale combat that we call war hostile feelings often have become merely hostile intentions. At any rate, there are usually no hostile feelings between individuals. Yet such emotions can never be completely absent from war. Modern wars are seldom fought without hatred between nations; this serves as a more or less substitute for the hatred between individuals. Even when there is no natural hatred and no animosity to start with, the fighting itself will stir up hostile feelings: violence committed on superior orders will stir up the desire for revenge and retaliation against the perpetrator rather than against the powers that ordered the action. It is only human (or animal, if you like), but it is a fact.

Book 3

  • A prince or general can best demonstrate his genius by managing a campaign exactly to suit his objectives and his resources, doing neither too much nor too little.
  • What we should admire is the acute fulfillment of the unspoken assumptions, the smooth harmony of the whole activity, which only become evident in the final success.
  • Where execution is dominant, as it is in the individual events of a war whether great or small, then intellectual factors are reduced to a minimum.
  • If we do not learn to regard a war, and the separate campaigns of which it is composed, as a chain of linked engagements each leading to the next, but instead succumb to the idea that the capture of certain geographical points or the seizure of undefended provinces are of value in themselves, we are liable to regard them as windfall profits. In so doing, and in ignoring the fact that they are links in a continuous chain of events, we also ignore the possibility that their possession may later lead to definite disadvantages.
  • ...in war, the advantages and disadvantages of a single action could only be determined by the final balance.
  • The moral elements are among the most important in war. They constitute the spirit that permeates war as a whole, and at an early stage they establish a close affinity with the will that moves and leads a whole mass of force, practically merging with it, since the will is itself a moral quantity. Unfortunately they will not yield to academic wisdom. They cannot be classified or counted. They have to be seen or felt. ... It is paltry philosophy if in the old-fashioned way one lays down rules and principles in total disregard of moral values. As soon as these appear one regards them as exceptions, which gives them a certain scientific status, and thus makes them into rules. Or again one may appeal to genius, which is above all rules; which amounts to admitting that rules are not only made for idiots, but are idiotic in themselves.
    • Ch 3 : Moral Factors, as translated by Michael Howard and Peter Paret.
  • The commander's talents are given greatest scope in rough hilly country. Mountains allow him too little real command over his scattered units and he is unable to control them all; in open country, control is a simple matter and does not test his ability to the fullest.
  • Boldness will be at a disadvantage only in an encounter with deliberate caution, which may be considered bold in its own right, and is certainly just as powerful and effective; but such cases are rare.
  • Timidity is the root of prudence in the majority of men.
  • Boldness governed by superior intellect is the mark of a hero.
  • ...as man under pressure tends to give in to physical and intellectual weakness, only great strength of will can lead to the objective.
  • Beauty cannot be defined by abscissas and ordinates; neither are circles and ellipses created by their geometrical formulas.
  • If a segment of one's force is located where it is not sufficiently busy with the enemy, or if the troops are on the march - that is, idle - while the enemy is fighting, then these forces are being managed uneconomically. In this sense they are being wasted, which is even worse than using them inappropriately.
  • ...any move made in a state of tension will be of more important, and will have more results, than it would have made in a state of eqilibrium. In times of maximum tension this importance will rise to an infinite degree.
  • The state of crisis is the real war; the equilibrium is nothing but its reflex.

Book 5

  • All war presupposes human weakness and seeks to exploit it.

Book 6

  • If defense is the stronger form of war, yet has a negative object, it follows that it should be used only so long as weakness compels, and be abandoned as soon as we are strong enough to pursue a positive object.
    • Chapter 1
  • Surprise becomes effective when we suddenly face the enemy at one point with far more troops than he expected. This type of numerical superiority is quite distinct from numerical superiority in general: it is the most powerful medium in the art of war.
    • Chapter 2
  • Phillipsburg was the name of one those badly drawn fortresses resembling a fool with his nose too close to the wall.
    • Chapter 11
  • A general who allows himself to be decisively defeated in an extended mountain position deserves to be court-martialled.
    • Chapter 17
  • ...only a fraction of book learning will seep into practical life anyhow; and the more foolish the theory, the less of it.
    • Chapter 23

External links

Wikipedia
Wikipedia has an article about:

Study guide

Up to date as of January 14, 2010

From Wikiversity

Carl von Clausewitz
(July 1, 1780 – November 16, 1831)

Part of the Strategic Studies curriculum

Contents

Online Reading Material

Wikimedia Articles

Primary Texts

  • Clausewitz, Carl von. Col. J. J. Graham, translator. Vom Kriege. On War, Complete eBook posted on Clausewitz Homepage.
  • Clausewitz, Carl von., Ed. & Translated by Peter Paret & Daniel Moran, Two Letters on Strategy. Ft. Leavenworth: Combat Studies Institute, U.S. Army Command and General Staff College, 1984 (Also available in PDF format).
  • Bassford, Christopher. Clausewitz in English: The Reception of Clausewitz in Britain and America, 1815-1945. New York: Oxford University Press, 1994. Full text on-line here.

Commentaries and Articles

  • The Clausewitz Homepage (http://www.clausewitz.com) - Excellent website maintained by Pr. Christopher Bassford of the National War College. Contains texts from & on C. von Clausewitz, exhaustive bibliographies on Clausewitz in english, german, french...
  • Gerhard Muhm , "German Tactics in the Italian Campaign", (tr. from "La tattica tedesca nella campagna d'Italia", in Linea gotica avamposto dei Balcani, a cura di Amedeo Montemaggi. Roma: Edizioni Civitas, 1993) http://www.larchivio.org/xoom/gerhardmuhm2.htm

Biographical Works

Offline Reading Material

Primary Texts

  • Clausewitz, Carl Von, tr. Graham, JJ (2004) On War (New York: Barnes and Noble) ISBN 0-7607-5597-3 - Oldest English translation
  • Clausewitz, Carl Von, edited and translated by Michael Howard and Peter Paret. On War, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1976, rev.1984, ISBN 0-691-05657-9 - Modern translation

For a note on the differences in the translations, see this topic's discussion page.

Commentaries and Articles

  • Aron, Raymond, translated by Christine Booker and Norman Stone, Clausewitz: Philosopher of War. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1983.
  • Handel, Michael I. (ed.), Clausewitz and Modern Strategy. London: Frank Cass, 1986. ISBN 0-7146-4053-0
  • Handel, Michael I., Masters of War. Classical Strategic Thought. London: Routledge, 2001 (third ed.; 1992, 1996). ISBN 071468132-6
  • Heuser, Beatrice, Reading Clausewitz. London: Pimlico, 2002. ISBN 0-7126-6484-X
  • Nooy, Gert de, The Clausewitzian Dictum and The Future of Western Military Strategy. The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 1997. ISBN 90-411-0455-0
  • Paret, Peter. Clausewitz and the State: The Man, His Theories, and His Times. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1976.
  • Rothfels, Hans “Clausewitz” pages 93-113 from The Makers of Modern Strategy edited by Edward Mead Earle, Gordon A. Craig & Felix Gilbert, Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1943.
  • Smith, Hugh, On Clausewitz: A Study of Military and Political Ideas. London: Palgrave, 2005. ISBN 1-4039-3587-4

Biographical Works

  • Parkinson, Roger. Clausewitz: A Biography. New York: Stein and Day, 1971.

Simple English

Carl Philipp Gottlieb von Clausewitz
July 1, 1780November 16, 1831
[[File:]]
Carl von Clausewitz in Prussian service, painting by Karl Wilhelm Wach
Place of birth Burg bei Magdeburg, Prussia
Allegiance Prussia
Years of service 1792–1831
Rank Major-General

Karl Philipp Gottlieb von Clausewitz (IPA: [ˈklaʊzəvɪts]) (July 1, 1780[1]November 16, 1831) was a Prussian soldier who wrote about war and the military. He wrote the book On War, in which he said that "War is the continuation of politics by other means."

Contents

On War

In his book, On War, Clausewitz wrote how to win a war, how to build an army, and what war is. He did not think war was an art or a science. Instead, war was about people, money, and land.

References

  1. Christopher Bassford. (2002). Clausewitz and his Works. Clausewitz.com. Accessed 2007-06-31.

See Also

Other websites

Wikisource has original works written by or about:

Advertisements






Got something to say? Make a comment.
Your name
Your email address
Message