Section 1 - The political dimension of war: from inter-state conflicts to transnational issues

To what extent do the forms of conflict emerging since the end of the 20th century challenge the model of “classic” war theorised by Clausewitz?

#1. War as 'a continuation of politics by other means' (Clausewitz): from the Seven Years' War to wars in the 20th century

#A. Focus on Clausewitz

#a) Inspiration and works

A Prussian military officer and veteran of the Napoleonic Wars, Clausewitz was both an actor in and a witness to the conflicts of his time. After 1815, he sought to understand why war had escalated to such levels and why French armies had been so effective.

He constructed his theoretical model of war as a means to comprehend what war is, and its evolution, from the limited conflicts of the 18th century to the unleashed wars of the early 19th century. His work On War, published posthumously in 1832 in 8 volumes, achieved worldwide influence, becoming essential reading for figures like Lenin, Mao, and Hitler, and allegedly inspiring the total wars of the 20th century.

#b) Characteristics of the 'classic' war

In “classic” warfare, conflicts typically involve inter-state engagements and the utilisation of regular armies representing a State, employing conventional methods rather than resorting to terrorism.

According to Clausewitz, war is seen as an extension of politics, serving as a means to achieve certain political objectives rather than an end in itself. The primary aim is political in nature, aimed at defeating the opponent to impose one's own terms.

Clausewitz's exploration delves into the nature of “real” warfare, characterised by its limitations, and contemplates the potential transformation into “absolute” war under certain circumstances that push conflicts to their extremes.

• Limited, or “real” war: The concept of limited or “real” war has been prevalent since the mid-17th century, characterised by its function as a continuation of politics through other means. In this paradigm:
  1. War is regarded as a political instrument rather than an end in itself.
  2. The conduct of war is subject to political directives, with the sovereign imposing their will upon the military.
  3. Military means are constrained by political objectives, aligning with specific goals.
  4. Professional army is involved
  5. The purpose of war is peace, deemed necessary when victory appears too costly or unlikely.
• Escalation to extremes: The escalation to extremes is driven by the passions of the people, which often stem from ideologies propagated through propaganda, such as nationalism or communism, etc. Additionally, the will of the leader, who may also hold the position of head of State, plays a significant role in this escalation.
• Unlimited or “absolute war”: It aims at completely annihilating the enemy by any means possible. The key characteristics are:
  1. Ideological cause: combat driven by ideals and the desire to eliminate opposing ideologies.
  2. Sovereign leadership: the head of State assumes the role of war leader.
  3. Unlimited military means: complete commitment of all available forces, including numerous combatants and increasingly lethal weaponry.
  4. Volunteer or conscripted army: recruitment from among volunteers or through conscription of citizens.
  5. Goal of war: total annihilation of the enemy rather than seeking peace, leading to prolonged and costly conflicts.

#B. The Seven Years' War (1756-1763): a limited war?

To what extent does the Seven Years' War correspond to Clausewitz's model of “real/limited” war?

#a) Brief presentation of the war

The Seven Years' War, often regarded as the first “world war,” unfolded predominantly across Europe and European colonies, including America, Senegal, and India.

It pitted two opposing coalitions against each other: the United Kingdom, Prussia, and their allies, representing progressive monarchies characterised by parliamentary or enlightened governance, faced off against France, Spain, Austria, Russia, and their allies, which comprised absolute monarchies. Prior to this conflict, France and Austria had been adversaries. This was an inter-state war with far-reaching global geopolitical ramifications.

The war's toll was staggering: 800,000 soldiers and 600,000 civilians perished. It marked a turning point, consolidating the United Kingdom's ascent to global dominance while significantly weakening France, which lost the majority of its colonies, notably in North America, leading to the demise of French Canada and Louisiana. In Europe, Prussia emerged as the predominant power in the German regions, eclipsing Austria's influence.

#b) A 'real' war or an 'absolute' war?

THE REAL/LIMITED WAR	SEVEN YEARS' WAR
Political cause: war is a political tool, not a goal	Political causes: Absolute monarchies vs. enlightened monarchies. Political ambitions: hopes of conquests in Europe and in the colonies (struggle between the French and British powers for the colonies of North America)
War is subject to politicians: the Sovereign imposes his will on the military	The sovereigns oversaw the conflict. Ex: King Frederick II of Prussia decided on war or peace
Limited military means for limited objectives	The goal was not the annihilation of the enemy, but its discouragement. Ex: Frederick II often engaged half of the enemy armies' personnel
Professional army	Yes, mercenaries
Peace is the aim of war and is necessary when victory appears too costly or unlikely	Peace through negotiation, requested by belligerents who had not really lost but who considered the continuation of the conflict too costly. Ex: Prussia achieved its goal of conquering Saxony

Thus, this war effectively became a means for the victors to achieve their political goals. Nevertheless, there are signs that may indicate the emergence of “absolute” war.

THE ABSOLUTE WAR	SEVEN YEARS' WAR
Ideological cause: fighting for ideals and the will to destroy the opposing adversary (overthrowing the political regime, massacre of civilians)	Very deadly war: 800,000 soldiers and 600,000 civilians killed. Deportation of ¾ of the Acadians who refused the authority of the British
The Sovereign is the war leader	King Frederick II of Prussia (1712-1786) was present on the battlefields.
Unlimited military means: total engagement of all forces (high number of combatants, increasingly deadly weapons)	The British had colossal means to ensure mastery of the seas. With a blockade, they aimed to prevent French colonists, lacking reinforcements, from being able to continue the fight. Engagement of the colonies
Volunteer army or conscripted citizens (conscription)	No
The purpose of the war is the annihilation of the enemy, not peace	Annihilated the French colonial power, a seven-year war and not operations in a few months.

The war is regarded as a means to an end rather than an end in itself, driven by political causes and with military authority subservient to political authority. It concluded upon achieving the political objective.

However, it also marked the initial steps towards absolute war: the imposition of the adversary's surrender by any means, reflecting the United Kingdom's efforts to dismantle the French colonial empire. Additionally, it involved the imposition of the victor's authority over civilian populations, as seen in the deportation of the Acadians.

#C. The Napoleonic Wars (1803-1815): 'absolute' wars?

Clausewitz wrote extensively in reaction to the Napoleonic Wars, of which he was a veteran, seeking to understand the mechanisms of these conflicts to enable Prussia to defeat France in the future. For him, the Napoleonic Wars represented a turning point in the model of warfare. What aspects of the Napoleonic Wars inspired Clausewitz's concept of “absolute war”?

The Napoleonic Wars took place from 1792 to 1815, during which France was at war with the European powers, which were organised into seven successive coalitions.

#a) Factors of the 'escalation to the extremes'

ESCALATION	NAPOLEONIC WARS
"Passions of the people", ideologies propagated through propaganda channels (nationalism, communism, etc.)	It was not the State waging war, but rather the "Nation taking up arms" fighting for the defense of revolutionary gains. It was an ideological war driven by popular passion. Citizen-soldiers were the protagonists, replacing the mercenaries. Similarly, national sentiment spread in reaction to the French occupier. Spanish and Germanic populations rose up. Popular passion surpassed politics
The will of the head of the State, the general	The war leader was the head of State: Napoleon himself directed military operations. Napoleon aimed to expand his vision of Europe and annihilated other regimes.

However, the Napoleonic Wars pursued specific political objectives:

• Serving as an instrument for the survival of the French State (defensive wars in the initial phase).
• A desire to extend a political model (imposing constitutions on defeated countries).

#b) Assessment of the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars

Did the Napoleonic Wars correspond to Clausewitz's concept of "absolute" war? They indeed aimed to completely annihilate the enemy by any means necessary.

This included an ideological cause, seeking to preserve the gains of the Revolution and spread them throughout Europe, particularly ideals of freedom and equality. Additionally, these wars witnessed the assertion of national sentiment, with citizens passionately engaged in the fight, as evidenced by conscription and uprisings of conquered peoples.

Introducing new concepts, these conflicts embraced mass warfare, exemplified by the Grand Army with up to 650,000 men, and total war, resulting in over 1 million deaths in the Revolutionary Wars and 2 million deaths in the Napoleonic Wars. Furthermore, the use of guerrilla tactics, in the Peninsular War with Spain in 1808, involved harassing the enemy through ambushes and clandestine groups blending into the local population. The origin of the term “guerrilla” stems from this form of warfare against the French.

#D. Wars in the 19th and 20th century: 'absolute' wars?

There were few conflicts in the 19th century in Europe (as the Congress of Vienna in 1815 established a balance of power). However, conflicts shifted elsewhere in the world:

• The US Civil War (1861-1865) resulted in 600,000 deaths over 4 years.
• Under the reign of Queen Victoria (1837-1911), the United Kingdom engaged in 63 colonial wars. These conflicts used the lessons learned from the Napoleonic era: conscription (mass warfare) and advancements in weaponry and transportation (industrial warfare). This trend marked a progression towards extremes.

The wars in the 20th century need to be assessed.

ABSOLUTE WAR	WW1	WW2	COLD WAR
Ideological cause: a desire to annihilate the enemy who opposes the ideology (overthrowing the political regime, massacre of civilians).	Yes: propaganda depicted the enemy as a beast (a 'mad brute'). Genocide of the Armenians by the Turks (1.5 million deaths). Overall, 18 million deaths, including 8 million civilians. No: motivations were not solely ideological. There were also political motives (such as the conquest of territories like Alsace).	Yes: it was an ideological battle. Fascism and Nazism against liberal democracy and communism. There was intense propaganda. WW2 led to the genocide of Jews (6 million) and Romani people (200,000).	Yes: it was an ideological battle, capitalism against communism. No: there was no explicit desire to destroy the enemy, instead relying on nuclear deterrence and the concept of "mutually assured destruction. » Peripheral conflicts occurred (e.g., in Korea and Vietnam).
Head of the State as the war leader	No: professional war with military leaders, controlled by politicians. For example, in 1917, French President Poincaré opposed General Nivelle and replaced him with Pétain.	Yes: leaders are war leaders. Hitler and Stalin. Conquered territories are subjected to a "military government" by the SS.	No: professional war with military leaders, controlled by politicians. For example, McArthur was sacked by Truman during the Korean War.
Unlimited military means: high amount of fighters, increasingly deadly weapons	Yes: unlimited war. Engagement of the entire society and economic activity. Mass warfare: unprecedented number of soldiers, 60 million.	Yes: unlimited war. Engagement of the entire society and economic activity. Mass warfare: unprecedented number of soldiers, 87 million.	Yes: nuclear deterrence. No: no direct conflict.
Volunteer army or conscription	Yes: conscription and volunteering in the USA	Yes: conscription and volunteering (French fascists fighting for Hitler)	Yes: conscription during the Vietnam War. No: use of irregular groups (Viet Cong for the USSR) and guerrillas.
Goal of the war: total annihilation of the enemy, not peace. Absolute war or not?	Yes: first example of total war, absolute war according to Clausewitz model. Annihilation Germany through the Treaty of Versailles (a professional army is prohibited by military terms).	Yes: ideological war and annihilation war, in which civilians were the primary victims. 70 million deaths, including 50 million civilians. Atomic bombs were used to annihilate Japan.	No: indirect ideological war

#2. From Al-Qaeda to Daesh, Clausewitz model and the irregular warfare

#A. Irregular warfare

The term "irregular warfare" has become crucial today, because the majority of wars are now limitless and without borders:

• New actors emerge, unconventional and not belonging to a regular army maintained by a State.
• New logic prevail, involving the use of unconventional weapons such as terrorism and suicide bombings.
• New levels of conflict arise, with intra-state wars in which actors are supported by other external actors, whether conventional or unconventional. For example, the situation in Syria.
• New conflict factors:
  • Nationalism. Example: wars between Serbian, Croatian, and Bosnian communities in former Yugoslavia in the 1990s. Nationalism is the desire and assertion of people to have their own State when they do not have one. Within an existing State, it involves exalting a nation in all its forms (State, language, culture, religion, traditions...) in contrast to other populations.
  • Socio-economic situations. Example: extreme poverty and inequalities leading to modern piracy in Asia and Africa, drug cartels in Latin America, etc.
  • Ideology and religion: emergence of Islamism in the 1970s. Islamism is an ideology that uses Islam for political action. Today, this movement encompasses the most radical currents of Islam, seeking to make Islam not just a religion but a political ideology through the strict application of Sharia law (laws derived from the Quran dating back to the 7th century), and the establishment of Islamic states in opposition to Western "modernity."

#B. Al-Qaeda and Daesh

Terrorism is a form of political and ideological violence targeting civilians, carried out for its psychological impact, to instill fear (attacks, hostage-taking, etc.). It is a means and not exclusive to any particular ideology, people, or region.

There are terrorist groups with political goals, such as nationalists seeking independence, for the IRA in Ireland, or ETA in the Basque Country. Islamist terrorism and jihadism emerged in the late 20th century.

	AL-QAEDA (SINCE 1988)	DAESH (SINCE 2006)
ORIGINS	Islamist terrorist organization founded in 1988, in Afghanistan, by Osama bin Laden (died in 2011)	DAESH (Arabic acronym for the "Islamic State") is an Islamist terrorist organisation founded in 2006, in Iraq, by Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi (died in 2019). Group stemming from Al-Qaeda, but ruptured in 2013 (currently rivals).
GOALS	Global Jihad, by combating: "The near enemy" (States in the Middle East, like Saudi Arabia, Egypt...), "The far enemy" (USA and Europe, the West).	Establish a transnational Islamic State. A territory in the Middle East (Iraq, Syria) was proclaimed caliphate in 2014. Al-Baghdadi was caliph until his death. It attracted numerous international Jihad candidates.
TRAITS	Internationalisation in the 2000s: creation of regional groups. For example, AQMI (Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb), a transnational actor.	Policy of terror: massacre, enslavement of non-Muslim populations like the Yazidis, beheadings of prisoners, stoning of women...
SUCCESSFUL ACTIONS	9/11 2001 attacks in the USA	Mastery of communication: media coverage of horror on social networks. The Islamic State was a terrorist organisation that operated between 2014 and 2019. During its existence, it attracted support from other Islamist terrorist groups worldwide, including Boko Haram in the Sahel region of Africa.

Islamist terrorism diverges significantly from Clausewitz's notion of "limited" war due to several key factors. Firstly, the primary actors involved are non-state and transnational entities, operating beyond traditional borders and jurisdictions. Moreover, the motivation behind such conflicts has shifted away from purely political objectives towards ideological and religious ideologies. This ideological shift has led to a departure from conventional warfare strategies and a move towards a more de-territorialised and globalised battlefield, characterised by its transnational nature. Additionally, Islamist terrorism often manifests as asymmetric warfare, characterised by a series of widespread and indiscriminate terrorist attacks on a global scale, devoid of any semblance of political negotiation or resolution.

#3. Fighting against terrorism: a new form of warfare?

#A. The fight against Al-Qaeda

States, particularly Western ones, employ a martial vocabulary to rally their populations against Islamist terrorism. For instance, U.S. President George W. Bush (2001-2009) famously declared a "war on terror".

#a) An symmetric war: tegular armies against non-conventional actors

Regular armies faced Al-Qaeda: a significant international coalition, led by NATO under the UN mandate, focused on the Talibans in Afghanistan since 2001, accused of sheltering Al-Qaeda. Al-Qaeda militants sought refuge in neighboring countries like Pakistan, engaging in guerrilla warfare there.

#b) Western powers also engaged in irregular warfare

No declaration of war was made, as Al-Qaeda was not a State entity. Instead, unconventional methods were employed under the banner of counter-terrorism. This included the use of drones and special units for the assassination of Osama bin Laden in 2011.

Additionally, secret prisons operated outside the bounds of law, leading to instances of torture, such as those conducted by the USA at Guantanamo Bay (Cuba) and Abu Ghraib (Iraq).

Private military companies, like Blackwater, were also enlisted, exemplified by their involvement in locating bin Laden.

#B. The fight against Daesh

#a) A hybrid warfare, combining conventional means of asymmetric warfare plus cyberwarfare

In 2014, ISIS had an army of 18,000 jihadists. According to the political scientist Stéphane Mantoux, Daesh defies classification as a military entity: it is neither a guerrilla force nor a conventional army, but rather a hybrid of both.

There was indeed an identifiable front (Syria-Iraq) but several types of actors were involved: States (Western countries, Russia, Turkey, the Syrian government), but also rebel groups, insurgents, democrats, and Kurdish fighters, as well as Jihadist groups (Al-Qaeda and Daesh).

Since the beginning of territorial losses in 2015, Daesh's response became internationalised (attacks in France) and highly publicised. The Caliphate ended in 2019.

#b) Hybrid response from Western powers

The use of drones resulted in civilian casualties, a contentious aspect of modern warfare due to its impact on innocent lives.

Additionally, cyberwarfare had emerged as a significant strategy to counter the activities of Daesh. Cyberattacks were employed to disrupt Daesh operations, including dissemination of misinformation and propaganda, as well as to incapacitate vital activities of this non-state actor.

#C. Did the war on terrorism challenge Clausewitz's model of "limited" war?

Certain elements of the war on terrorism remain relevant. Firstly, Western countries have maintained their political objective of imposing democracy.

There has been a significant escalation to extremes, characterised by the counter-terrorism efforts of Western nations which aimed at annihilating the enemy, including actions such as bombing civilians and the assassination of Bin Laden. On the other side, Jihadists have committed crimes such as terrorism, suicide bombings against civilians, and even acts of enslavement and genocide against those they perceive as "infidels."

While there was a real military victory by Western coalitions, it did not translate into peace. Even without territory, Daesh continues to terrorise the world. The military victory has not led to political objectives and genuine peace, resulting in what can be termed as a negative peace. This situation reflects what political scientist Bertrand Badie describes as the "impotence of power."