To use armed force to have political effect as a direct extension of policy, those on one’s side whose actions involve making political choices, which typically will extend down to the tactical level, need to contribute to policy to keep the gap between desire and possibility as small as possible. The neat policy-operational distinction, an idea firmly entrenched in both constitutional and strategic thought, is untenable in many contemporary conflicts, not least in Afghanistan. Civil-military relations and strategic dialogue Strategic dialogue is essential for the desire of policy and the possibility of its implementation reciprocally to inform one another, in order to craft coherent actions that serve the end of policy. In On War Carl von Clausewitz deals with the interaction of policy and war during conflict. He advocates that the head of the Army should have a place in the Cabinet so that the reciprocal interaction between military possibility and political intention can take place.1 The importance Clausewitz attached to the understanding of the position of the commander-in-chief is revealed by his promise to the reader in book 8 to write a ‘special chapter’ on ‘the structure of supreme command’ to conclude On War.2 However, he died before it was written.
What do You think about War From The Ground Up (2013)?
