Philanthropists may easily imagine there is a skillful method of disarming and overcoming an enemy without causing great bloodshed, and that this is the proper tendency of the art of war. However plausible this may appear, still it is an error which must be extirpated; for in such dangerous things as war, the errors which proceed from benevolence are the worst.
-Carl von Clausewitz, On War
I have been reading Clausewitz lately with renewed vigor, though placing "Clausewitz" and "vigor" in the same sentence smacks of incongruency, I know. Part of my fascination with the Prussian does not lie in the substance of his theories, though they certainly have their merits as time has proven, but in his analytical, almost mathematical, rigor with which he approaches the subject. I find his ability to so acutely analyze the theory and nature of war, a topic that, in my opinion, does not lend itself well to acute, non-emotional analysis, fascinating. He covers all the counter arguments and summarily dismisses the opinion of the combat illiterate through the sheer density of the analysis. Like Kant's Critique of Pure Reason, the uninitiated are not invited to the table, not due to some intellectual haughtiness, but due to unfamiliarity with the complex topic under discussion.
In other words, you had better bring a lot to the table if you are going to tackle this military magnum opus.
And here I get to my point.
War's inevitability demands its study, not just by the professionals tasked with our defense, but also by non-military members of the republic those professionals are protecting. After all, it is the individual citizen's judgment (or lack thereof in some cases), which determines the leadership of our republic. Additionally, it is the will of the republic writ large that will ultimately determine success or failure in times of war. Dwindling public support for an act of war is more likely if the process of and reason for that war is not understood. Counterinsurgency operations are a prime example. A substantial investment in time and resources is necessary for a successful counterinsurgency campaign. Western, and particularly American, culture no longer tolerates this fact. But that does not negate the veracity of it. A fact is a fact. One chooses to ignore facts at their own peril.
At this point in history, the West has a peculiar sense of superiority. We feel we are enlightened. That the ugly side of humanity is beneath us and behind us. We, through our utmost industry, civility, and intelligence, can design a social system under which war will no longer exist. A system where global peace will bathe the world in the soft light of brotherly love. A system amenable to all, based on the universal human desire of freedom. A global enlightenment is just around the corner if we can just set the conditions for its manifestation.
The depth and breadth of this intellectual dishonesty is astonishing and, quite frankly, frightening. To ignore history is to repeat it. War is an unfortunate and horrific fact of life. If it can be avoided through a mutually beneficial settlement between opponents, it should be. But do not close your eyes and try to wish it away through some aggrandized idealistic vision of how the world should be. The world is what it is. War is a part of it, therefore preparation for it and, at times, execution of it is essential. Once war becomes manifest, it is time to put away childish idealism and engage without hesitation in cold realism. To not do so shows unforgivable cowardice and outright stupidity.
In London, Islamic radicalism has shown, once again, that it is bent on the destruction of the world as we know it. We must now put away childish idealism. Compromise will solve nothing when faced with the fanatical. No quarter should be offered. You cannot reason with the unreasonable. To think you can exhibits that fatally flawed combination of arrogance and benevolence of which Clausewitz speaks.
And that is cold realism.
3 comments:
Americans have the luxury of believing that the world does not run on violence. Most Americans are innocent-- so innocent that they cannot see it much as a fish doesn't know it's wet. I don't mean innocent positively here. I mean it as naive.
But what choice to we have? Our economy is so strong precisely because the bulk of our population doesn't have to worry about violence. Whenever violence forces it's way into our lives, we treat it as an aberation as if it wasn't the natural order of things.
America goes through the world like a beautiful woman. A beautiful woman thinks the world is a pleasant place because people buy her things, she is constantly catered too and coddled. She doesn't learn the reality of the situation until she is no longer beautiful. You cannot convince her otherwise before that time.
Our feelings towards violence are distinctly Spinozan- meaning that we do not understand it until we believe it. And an American has no reason to see the world as it is.
Until now.
People often say that the world changed on 9/11. That's garbage. Nothing changed except our perception. It's not a matter of Left versus Right. It's childish vs. mature; inexperienced vs. inexperienced and irresponsible and responsible.
I made a few changes...let me know what you think.
Unfortunately, no body is seeing the menace we face. To many people are blinded by their hatred for Bush. You know just as well as I do that as long as you stay focused on only one target, you open yourself up to ambush.
Yeah, I totally agree with you. Not sure of the changes you made but work is strong, cogent and compelling. I'm always astounded by folks who claim authority in the matters of conflict when they haven't even been in a fight, much less serve as professional warriors. This absurdity would be laughable if it wasn't so potentially deadly.
Post a Comment