Is war-fighting unidimensional (the clash of the big battalions) or multi-dimensional (morale, will, economics)?
Clausewitz (1838) wrote a lot about “the battle,” but never considered “the battle” as sufficient unto itself in bringing an enemy to acceptance of defeat and surrender of will to assert its moral goals.
Similarly, Sun Tzu (544–496 BC) had pointed out the high value-added of understanding and then disabling an enemy’s strategy.
Consider how the Ukrainians have fought the Russians to a standstill and are now capable of carrying “the battle” deep in the Russian homeland. That’s tenacity and innovation at work. Turns out the Ukrainians had some high “cards” that Donald Trump overlooked.
What are the Iranians fighting for?
What is Donald Trump fighting for?
What do Iran’s neighbors need and want to advance their futures?
Clausewitz most famously wrote that war is an extension of politics by other means. So, in war, politics must never be discounted. In Iran, maybe regime change needs to come before “the battle” can win the war?
What is the role of alliances?
A Caux Round Table perspective on war would start from setting moral standards and rules of right and wrong in going to war and in fighting and killing others. Just war theory, the Hague and Geneva Conventions, 1928 Kellogg-Briand Pact outlawing war; the United Nations compact among sovereign nations, etc.
Please join us at 9:00 am (CDT) on Tuesday, June 2, for a Zoom round table on what should be the lessons learned, so far, from the Israeli/U.S. attack on Iran.
To register, please email jed@cauxroundtable.net.
Event will last about an hour.