Impact Of Clausewitz's Theories On First World War Essay

Length: 4 pages Sources: 15 Subject: Drama - World Type: Essay Paper: #14301200 Related Topics: World Peace, Michael Jordan, Revolutionary War, World Wars
Excerpt from Essay :

¶ … Clausewitz and World War I

The role of various theories and concepts in the First World War has been an issue of considerable concern that has attracted various studies in attempts to understand their influence in the various battles related to the war. In addition to the various concepts behind the war, Clausewitz theories of war have come under increased scrutiny with regards to their influence on World War I. The scrutiny has led to assertions that the protracted and bloody stalemate of the First World War was largely because of the decision by the then leaders to stubbornly rely on the theories of Clausewitz. These assertions have generated various arguments and counter-arguments based on an overall outlook and analysis of the actual causes of World War I. Proponents of this idea continue to assert that these theories largely influence military strategies while opponents state that the theories had very minimal impact on the bloody stalemate.

Clausewitz's during the First World War

Carl von Clausewitz was a Prussian soldier and intellectual who came from a middle-class social background and acted as a practical field soldier. Clausewitz's involvement as a practical field is evident in his widespread combat experience against Revolutionary and Napoleonic France armies.

His fame is largely attributed to the significance and impact of his book regarding the theory of warfare and strategy despite the varying interpretations and misinterpretations associated with the book. Clausewitz's theories of warfare and strategy have attracted considerable interest from scientists, historians, political analysts, military strategists, and business thinkers. Actually, most of the discussions of military strategy have always involved analyzing Clausewitz theories of warfare and strategy.

While various sophisticated military thinkers during the World War I continued to discuss Clausewitz's theories, they relatively had minimal time for theoretical meditation.

Arguments Regarding Clausewitz's Influence

As previously mentioned, the theories of Clausewitz have been considered as one of the most influential factors in the World War One with regards to their role in the protracted battle and bloody stalemate. While there have been several assertions to demonstrate that these theories were largely influential in the war, there have been counter-arguments to show otherwise. One of these counter-arguments is the fact military strategists during this war had little theoretical meditation, which implies that the theories did not have any influence on the war. Actually, the interpretation of Clausewitz theories has been very difficult because of the dialectical approach he utilized and the many contradictions.

Secondly, the influence of Clausewitz's theories on World War One has been rejected on the premise that the battle contributed to the virtual eclipse of Jomini. Actually, Clausewitz purposely rejected to develop a strategic jargon in a manner that makes Jomini's impact an easy thing to detect. Third, the influence of Clausewitz's theories has been opposed on the basis that it is chronologically ridiculous to propose that he can help interpret the war since he died 73 years before the beginning of the conflict.

Fifth, the opponents have argued that these theories are irrelevant because Clausewitz's main theoretical insights do not have any interpretive strength in relation to the war. They also state that World War I did not have any strategic ideas or concepts on both sides of the frontlines of the battlefield.

One of the concepts of Clausewitz's theories of warfare and strategy is that there is a link between war and politics. He argued that war is basically an extension of politics, which implies that every act of violence must have political objectives.

Clausewitz's stated that war can never be separated from politics and the military must remain secondary to political authorities.

However, opponents argue that politics did not play any role in the conduct of World War I in a way that is worth mentioning. These opponents state that the war was largely a gruesome cultural anomaly. In some situations opponents of Clausewitz's claims have argued that the origins of the war were mysterious and cannot be attributed to political objective or military subordination to political objectives.

Counter-arguments in Support of Clausewitz's Influence

The argument that military strategists had no theoretical meditation to an extent that Clausewitz's theories...

...

In his analysis, Liddell Hart examined the root cause of the bloody stalemate and concluded that the eventual responsibility for the battle was with Clausewitz. This is primarily because Clausewitz's wrongheaded theories or concepts about warfare and strategy had been passionately adopted by European armies.

For instance, the failure of the German army in the war could be directly attributed to the army's close following of the theories Clausewitz. Therefore, it would be better to assume that Europe would have probably not engaged in the First World War if Clausewitz did not introduce his theories of warfare and strategy.

The argument that Clausewitz theories of warfare and strategy did not play a role in the First World War because the bloody stalemate was as a result of a gruesome cultural anomaly rather than politics is wrong. The role of politics in the First World War cannot be underestimated because most of the battles in this war were fueled by political differences between state actors. Clausewitz developed and introduced his theories because of his experience in combat battles in the Revolutionary and Napoleonic France armies, which were characterized by political differences. The theories clearly demonstrated or stereotyped the image of German-European relations through which he was writing from the angle of a weak country.

The link between politics and the First World War was further demonstrated by Thucydides who examined the role of human conflict in war. The human conflict is partly attributed to politics, which was the fundamental nature of the First World War.

Political influence in the First World War is further demonstrated when German generals planned to attack France first before shifting eastward toward Russia.

The other aspects of politics in the First World War emerging from these theories were their profound impact on Nazi Germany and American foreign policy as well as military strategies.

The other demonstration of the role of the theories of Clausewitz on the First World War is largely evident in the failure of the German Army. In the midst of the First World War, one of Germany's new strategies of warfare under the leadership of General Erich Ludendorff involved the use of all theories of Clausewitz.

These theories enabled the German army to consider balanced military opinions that promoted varying political considerations and solutions. This contributed to military preparations that disconnected the army from political objectives but also forced them into political directions or objectives that were not particularly for its best interests. In general, as a result of applying the theories of Clausewitz, Germany failed in predicting the result of various wars including World War I.

In conclusion, the idea that the prolonged and bloody stalemate of the First World War was largely because leaders during that period strongly stuck to the theories of Clausewitz is proven by various factors that occurred during the war. While this assertion has been opposed and rejected by various people, it is quite clear that there are numerous evidences that prove the use of these theories in the war. Unlike the claims by opponents, the theories of Clausewitz contributed to the failure of the German army and the clear link between politics and the conflict rather than a cultural gruesome anomaly.

Bibliography

Bassford, Christopher. Clausewitz in English: The Reception of Clausewitz in Britain and America, 1815-1945. Madison Avenue, NY: Oxford University Press, Inc., 1994

Clausewitz. Frequently Asked Questions About Clausewitz. Accessed January 28, 2015.

http://www.clausewitz.com/FAQs.htm

Clemens, Walter C. Dynamics of International Relations: Conflict and Mutual Gain in an Era of Global Independence. Lanham, MD: Rowan & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2004

Davidson, Kenneth L. "Clausewitz and the Indirect Approach… Misreading the Leader."

Airpower Journal, 88 (1988).

Enge, Joseph. Why the Rejection of Clausewitz, Moltke the Elder, and Bismarck Led to Germany's Disaster and Defeat in World War I. Enge Translations. accessed January 28, 2015. http://www.engetranslations.ee/documents/GermanyWWI_001.pdf

Farley, Robert M. Grounded: The Case for Abolishing the United States Air Force. Lexington,

Kentucky: University of Press Kentucky, 2014.

Handel, Michael I. Clausewitz and Modern Strategy. Oxford: Frank Cass and Company Limited,

2005.

Klinger, Janeen. The Social Science of Carl von Clausewitz. Strategic Studies Institute. accessed

January 28, 2015. http://strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/parameters/Articles/06spring/klinger.pdf

Lindell, Jordan. "Clausewitz: War, Peace and Politics." E-International Relations Students.

accessed January 28, 2015. http://www.e-ir.info/2009/11/26/clausewitz-war-peace-and-politics/

Mearsheimer, John J. Liddell Hart and the Weight of History. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University,

1988.

Melton, Stephen L. The Clausewitz Delusion. Minneapolis, MN: Zenith Imprint, 2009.

Murray, Williamson. "Thucydides Theorist of War." Naval War College Review, 66, no.4 (2013).

Pommerin, Reiner. Clausewitz Goes Global: Carl Von Clausewitz in the 21st Century:

Commemorating the 50th Anniversary of the Clausewitz Society. Germany: Books on Demand, 2011.

Strachan, Hew. "Clausewitz and the First World War." The Journal of Military History, 75

(2011).

Waldman, Thomas. "Shadows of…

Sources Used in Documents:

Jordan Lindell, "Clausewitz: War, Peace and Politics," E-international Relations Students, accessed January 28, 2015, http://www.e-ir.info/2009/11/26/clausewitz-war-peace-and-politics/

Joseph Enge, "Why the Rejection of Clausewitz, Moltke the Elder, and Bismarck Led to Germany's Disaster and Defeat in World War I," Enge Translations, accessed January 28, 2015, http://www.engetranslations.ee/documents/GermanyWWI_001.pdf

Stephen L. Melton, The Clausewitz Delusion, (Minneapolis, MN: Zenith Imprint) 2009:14


Cite this Document:

"Impact Of Clausewitz's Theories On First World War" (2015, January 28) Retrieved January 20, 2022, from
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/impact-of-clausewitz-theories-on-first-world-2148084

"Impact Of Clausewitz's Theories On First World War" 28 January 2015. Web.20 January. 2022. <
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/impact-of-clausewitz-theories-on-first-world-2148084>

"Impact Of Clausewitz's Theories On First World War", 28 January 2015, Accessed.20 January. 2022,
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/impact-of-clausewitz-theories-on-first-world-2148084

Related Documents
Clausewitz The Future of the Air Power
Words: 1412 Length: 5 Pages Topic: Military Paper #: 29434498

Introduction Major wars have almost always resulted in nations and enemies trying to come up with new strategies and weapons to perform even better next time. This phenomenon has made it interesting to try and predict how future wars will be fought. Many military and conflict scholars have written theories that have attempted to predict how future wars will be fought. Perhaps the most renowned among them is Carl von Clausewitz.

Hagerman's the American Civil War
Words: 913 Length: 3 Pages Topic: Military Paper #: 88383789

Such developments were the product of new types of social organization brought about by the late industrial age. High commands developed new types of organization as individual commanders became less of a factor and teams of staff became more important working together. While still informal, good staff work became more and more important in and of itself. As Hagerman points out, it was not really von Clausewitz, but Henri Jomini

Theory According to Your View
Words: 2190 Length: 8 Pages Topic: Military Paper #: 70258648

S. involvement in World War II. Is it possible to have a general theory of war? Perhaps the most well-known "theory" of war is articulated in Matthew 24:6: "You will hear of wars and rumors of wars. . . . Such things must happen" (New International Version 1984). Therefore, although it is possible to have a general theory of war, any such theory will be limited in its ability to explain the

Antoine Jominis Thoughts on Statecraft, War and Sustainability
Words: 2177 Length: 7 Pages Topic: War Paper #: 38341735

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

Jomini Is Considered As Being
Words: 1892 Length: 5 Pages Topic: Military Paper #: 23290623

As it has been said by David Chandler, "the airy Kantian generalization of Clausewitz has held on for quite some time now." Another reason can be the fact that in a world that seems to have freed itself from the fundamental ideological conflicts and in a period in which there are some who seriously think and hope that the history has come to an end, the strife-driven world view

Changing Paradigm in International Policing:
Words: 8998 Length: 33 Pages Topic: Military Paper #: 87743756

The lack of action over Rwanda should be the defining scandal of the presidency Bill Clinton. Yet in the slew of articles on the Clinton years that followed Clinton's departure from power, there was barely a mention of the genocide." The UN, pressured by the British and the U.S., and others, refused to use the word "genocide" during the event, or afterward when it issued its official statement of condemnation