On War, Statecraft and Sustainability As Clark (2008) points out, sustainability has been defined by the World Commission on Environment and Development as the capability of meeting “the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (p. 3). Sustainability is related to the need recognized by nations to conserve finite resources so that they are not depleted for the next generation. Intertwined with environmental sustainability are economic and social goals, as indicated by Kates, Parris and Leiserowitz (2005). Commonly included as some of the social goals in a sustainable culture are equality/equitability and a high quality of public health.

However, because conflicts arise between peoples over the use of resources, war breaks out not infrequently. War is typically defined as “armed conflict” and stands as a “direct opposition to sustainability” because nothing tends to deplete resources faster than war (Clark, 2008, p. 3). As Jones (2015) war is the inevitable outcome of nations willing to use force to achieve their objectives, which are invariably control or domination of a region, resource or route.

Statecraft is the management or art of conducting the affairs of state. Rhetoric, agenda; social, political and economical platforms; use of diplomacy, use of military, and use of resources—all of this plays a part in the effective demonstration of statecraft. Stillman (2003) notes that statecraft can be informed by deep, cultural ideals and values that administrative bodies within the state personify or subsume and display in their administrative output. Statecraft, in other words, tends to reflect some aspect of the underlying philosophy of a society.

Jomini and Contemporary Times

Antoine Jomini was a Swiss general who served in the Swiss, French and Russian armies at the end of the 18th century and first half of the 19th century. He studied the Napoleonic art of warfare. Jomini’s writings were highly articulate, thoughtful and engaging, and they were used to educate generations of soldiers and leaders at places like the West Point, the famous U.S. Military Academy. Some of

Jomini, like Clausewitz, believed in the strategy of uniting or connecting battles (Bassford, 1993). By linking individual or independent contests, a better understanding of “where and when to fight to realize the purposes of war” (Kelly & Brennan, 2009, p. 12). Jomini likewise believed in a strong connection between politics and war—i.e., in the relationship between statecraft and war. Jomini believed that in war, force should be minimal so as not to deplete one’s own resources. Pressure could be applied in creative ways, including through the intentional use of statecraft, to get the enemy to submit (Nomura, 2012). For this reason, Jomini did not believe that war was an exact science but rather a fluid and dynamic art.

In contemporary times, the concept of war has expanded. Total war, as seen in the U.S. Civil War, WWII, and in today’s proxy wars in the Middle East, is an example of how Jomini’s ideas have had less impact. Jomini stressed, for example, the idea of having “interior lines of communication” (Jones, 1985, p. 21)—but technology made this concept somewhat obsolete. The telegraph and railroad allowed messages and lines to strengthen beyond what Jomini had envisioned. However, his ideas were still influential in terms of minimizing/maximizing force so as to avoid casualties.

War, statecraft and...

Blockades were established as part of the Anaconda Plan (Office of the Historian, 2018). The North blockaded southern ports so that the Rebels could not import or export materials to sustain their war effort. Lincoln wanted to crush the South by starving them into submission. This idea would have been thoroughly met with approval by Jomini as the Plan did not call for a great deal of expenditure of force or risk too many casualties—yet it was highly effective in achieving the aims of war as far as the North was concerned.
The Anaconda Plan in the American Civil War to Starve and Crush the South

Retrieved from https://history.state.gov/milestones/1861-1865/blockade

In WWII, the Allies applied the same idea in their war against the Axis: Germany was blockaded and Japan’s cities were bombed even though they played no logistical part in the country’s war aims. The idea was to annihilate the country’s morale—just as Sherman had done in the American Civil War during his March to the Sea, laying waste to everything in his path. As Smith (1997) notes, Sherman’s thoughts on total war were supported by his understanding of Jomini.

War, statecraft and sustainability intersect in the concept of total war in that forces are used to subdue the enemy (sustainable warcraft which attacks the sustainability of a society) while the state applies political pressure to surrender, as the Allies did to the Axis powers in Japan. In the Middle East of today, statecraft is used to support the proxy wars in Syria, as the West aims at regime change there and in Iran by supporting rebels and protests and arming and training insurrectionists while also applying economic sanctions so that the countries opposed by the West are essentially cut off from being sustainable. Psychological warfare was developed in WWII to a high degree thanks to C. D. Jackson who was in charge of the Psych Warfare division of the U.S. (Spartacus, 2018).

Table Comparing Theorists.

Jomini

Clausewitz

Mahan

Sherman

Jackson

War

Should by fluid with battles connected

Continuation of policy through other means

Adopted Jomini’s strategies for naval warfare

Total war, destroy the enemy’s ability to have a sustainable existence

Pscyh warfare is more compelling than military force

Statecraft

Is connected to war; political pressure can be applied

The root of war

Apply the principle of surprise

Politics are secondary to the use of total destruction of enemy’s infrastructure

Politics is pivotal in psych warfare strategy

Sustainability

Economy of force is Key to success; deplete the enemy’s access to this

Economy of force

Economy of force

Crush the enemy’s access to this

More sustainable long-term

Nigeria

Boko Haram is a continuous threat to peace in Northern Nigeria. Forbes (2018) notes that “military efforts to prevent further Boko Haram attacks in the coming months are hugely challenged by the sheer size of the territory in which the group operates and its continued ability to launch attacks.” Yet, problems of corruption and faithlessness…