Comparative Analysis of Clausewitz’s and Basil Liddle Hart’s Military Theories and Their Applicability in Modern Warfare

Abstract

The celebrated idea of Prussian war strategist Clausewitz regarding the conventional warfare played a dominant role up to the First World War in the West. In his seminal work “On War”, Clausewitz posits “If you want to overcome your enemy, you must match your e orts against the power of resistance”. In way his idea was akin to annihilating enemy’s army in major battles. However, this idea was challenged by British military strategist Captain Basil Liddle Hart in his book titled “The Strategy” by proposing a di erent military theory called “Indirect Approach”. This objective of this paper is based on making a comparative analysis between Clausewitz and Liddle Hart regarding the utility of their military theories in the modern warfare. While taking a methodology based on a comparative analysis of the utility of the two doctrines, this paper explores the e ectiveness of those military strategies against the current asymmetries in modern warfare. In order to buttress the reliability of this research, the examples from Ukrainian war and the Sri Lankan civil war between 1990-2009 would be examined . The main objectivity of this paper lies in creating a novel discussion on the merits and demerits of Clausewitz and Captain Basil Liddle Hart’s theories of war in the contemporary warfare. The results emerging from this research will demonstrate the relevance of re reading both Clausewitz and Liddle Hart in an era, where the orthodox idea of warfare is at stake.