Nuance and Totality

By Dave Anderson:



War is politics by other means. That is Clauswitz boiled down to a clause, and it is a useful framework for strategic thought. If war is politics, then there are multiple possible outcomes including a mutual decision to arrive at a no decision because continuation of a war is bad politics to all interested and relevant decision making parties.

For example the War of 1812 trickled out into a negoatiated settlement at Ghent because the British were tired of fighting in a tertiary theatre where the Duke of Wellington estimated that he would need an army that was as large as the redcoat contingent at Waterloo to defeat and hold the Americas. The United States had failed to conquer Canada and its commerce was being choked by the British blockade and littoral operations. Neither side was able to achieve a knock-out blow so both sides agreed to call it quits and make minor adjustments to the pre-war status quo. The war ended without victory for either nation.


The same could be said of the Korean War once the US/UN expanded its objective set from containment and local counterattack to roll-back that prompted the Chinese counter-invasion. Neither side won, but the war ended as the costs were higher than the benefits for both sides and all relevant veto players.



And that is not an uncommon end to wars --- neither victory nor defeat is gained as the opponents are able to mutually deny the achievement of the primary strategic objectives at a worthwhile costs. However negoatiating an end to a war where the benefits are outweighed by the political costs requires nuance, and that is verbotan in certain segments of the American political discourse.





Threatswatch argues that there is only total victory or total defeat:

So you wouldn't last long at the bar with blunt Special Forces operators and Marines wholly unimpressed with nuance. There are greater tragedies in life. But from the relative safety of your own chair, pay attention. Because whether you speak the language of Nuance or No Bull, the inescapable fact remains: Wars Don't End, They Are Won Or Lost.

All right, we have stupid machismo, and anti-intellectualism with a complete disregard for history. Par for the course, but plenty of wars end without total victory or total defeat as war is a political decision that seeks to accomplish certain objectives at a �reasonable� price where �reasonable� is broadly defined and includes economic and non-economic costs. Total victory is expensive and seldom worth the price unless the threat is exisential. Nuance should be our friend.