THE MEANING OF VICTORY

Beatrice Heuser Strategic Studies University of Reading (currently Paris)

“Victories“?

• Gulf War I • Afghanistan • Gulf War II • (and the many defeats in the Cold War) Debate about victory

• General Petraeus: “This is not the sort of struggle where you take a hill, plant the flag and go home with a victory parade … It’s not war with a simple slogan. (11 Sept. 2008) • Robert Mandel • William Martel • Colin Gray • Angstrom & Duyvesteyn • Boone Bartholomees • Pres. Obama: “Let’s not talk about victory” (June 2011)

The Age of the Napoleonic- Clausewitzian Paradigm • 19th century until 1945 (or even later, especially US armed forces – Col Harry Summers) • Obsession with victory for its own sake • Defined as: “imposing one’s will upon the enemy” (Clausewitz), negation of any give- and-take. • And… Pursuit of Victory at all cost

• Brian Bond: The Pursuit of Victory from Napoleon to Saddam Hussein • American Civil War: unconditional surrender. • Franco-Prussian War: Peace “Diktat”, unaffordable Reparations, extensive humiliation of defeated party. Perceived injustice. • World War I: Versailles “Diktat”, unaffordable Reparations, extensive humiliation of defeated party. Perceived injustice. • World War II: unconditional surrender. By contrast: earlier thinkers…

ARISTOTLE • The end of the medical art is health, that of shipbuilding a vessel, that of strategy victory, that of economics wealth. (Nicomachean Ethics I.1) • We are busy that we may have leisure, and make war that we may live in peace. … no-one chooses to be at war, or provokes war, for the sake of being at war. (Nicomachean Ethics X.7) Just War

• Goes back to pre-Christian ROMAN concepts • Preconditions for Just War: – Just cause (self-defence or defence of another) – Just aim: the pursuit of peace – Was is the last resort – Carried out with moderation (proportionality), – And balance of consequences, i.e. the destruction and suffering caused must not outweigh the evil that is fought. – After a formal declaration. (all in Cicero).

Classical Literature on the Art of War

Onosander (1st century): The causes of war … should be marshalled with the greatest care; it should be evident to all that one fights on the side of justice. For then the gods also, kindly disposed, become comrades in arms to the soldiers, and men are more eager to take their stand against the foe. For with the knowledge that they are not fighting an aggressive but a defensive war, with consciences free from evil designs, they contribute a courage that is complete; while those who believe an unjust war is displeasing to heaven, … enter the war with fear. Just War (cont.)

• Adopted by the Roman Augustine of Hippo, who fused it with Christianity (c.400 AD) – Adds: need for legitimate authority (God, or the legitimate government) • Codified by Thomas Aquinas (13th century) • General acceptance in International Law: – UN Charter (1945) only allows defensive war or war authorised (Chapter VII.51), or action authorised by UN in protection of international security (Chapter VI) – UN High Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change (2004): ‘A More Secure World: our shared responsiblity’. See over… “A more secure world” (UN 2004) five basic criteria of legitimacy (for authorization of action by UN):

(a) Seriousness of threat. Is the threatened harm to State or human security of a kind, and sufficiently clear and serious, to justify prima facie the use of military force? In the case of internal threats, does it involve genocide and other large - scale killing, ethnic cleansing or serious violations of international humanitarian law, actual or imminently apprehended? (b) Proper purpose. Is it clear that the primary purpose of the proposed military action is to halt or avert the threat in question, whatever other purposes or motives may be involved? (c) Last resort. Has every non-military option for meeting the threat in question been explored, with reasonable grounds for believing that other measures will not succeed? (d) Proportional means. Are the scale, duration and intensity of the proposed military action the minimum necessary to meet the threat in question? (e) Balance of consequences. Is there a reasonable chance of the military action being successful in meeting the threat in question, with the consequences of action not likely to be worse than the consequences of inaction? From Antiquity to Napoleon: Peace is self-evidently the war-aim.

• Both Pagan and Christian Roman • East Roman (Byzantine) – Especially Emperor Leo VI (c. 900 AD) • Western Medieval • Early Modern (from Christine de Pizan to eve of French Revolution) Victory is the preferred way to peace…

… but not the only one

Rühle von Lilienstern

• ‘War is the means of settling through chance and the use of force the quarrels of the peoples. Or: it is the pursuit of peace or for a legal agreement by States with violent means.’ (On War, 1813) • ‘Some say that the aim of war is victory. Others say it is peace. Even others say it is the defence … or the conquest of large pieces of land. In some cases any of these definitions may be right. In general, however, one is as unsatisfactory as the other, for otherwise each of these {three definitions} would have to State the same. Victory, however, is not always the necessary condition of conquest or of peace, and peace is not always the necessary result of victory and conquest.’ (Handbook, 1817)

Rühle von Lilienstern (cont.)

• ‘Victory and conquest are often causes of the continuation, the renewal and the multiplication of war.’ • ‘{It should be the case} that one only wages war for {the sake of} peace, and that one should only wage war, in order afterwards to build it the more firmly and intensively on the lawful understanding between States.’

Rühle von Lilienstern (cont. 2) ‘But in our experience and with individual real wars it does not always work like that. There are … political contexts … in which a warring State only concludes peace for the sake of the next war, in which it regards peace as a convenient and irreplaceable period of calm, in order to continue thereafter the struggle that has been decided upon the more forcefully and completely. There are other contexts … in which a State derives some substantial, or perhaps only imaginary, gains from the continuation of war. In such cases, war is by no means waged for the sake of peace, as this would be a quite undesired event, but for the sake of the hoped-for gains, to be achieved through war. Such wars include those that are waged for passion and personal interests of individual military men or officials, of the army – in short, because of some subordinate interest, but not the general welfare of the State.’ Sir Basil Liddell Hart

• ‘The more intent you appear to impose a peace entirely of your own choosing, by conquest, the stiffer the obstacle you will raise in your path. … if and when you reach your military goal, the more you ask of the defeated side the more trouble you will have, and the more cause you will provide for an ultimate attempt to reverse the settlement achieved by war.‘ (1939) So: Victory alone not a good aim?

• Imposed peace conditions after Napoleonic victories led to Prussian, Spanish, … Revanchism and anti- French coalition. • Imposed peace conditions of Franco-Prussian War led to French Revanchism, contrib. to World War I • Peace of Versailles led to German Revanchism, contributed to World War II • Arab-Israeli Wars • Defeat of Iraq 1991 not accepted by Saddam Hussein • … Immanuel Kant

• ‘The field of battle is the only tribunal before which states plead their cause; but victory, by gaining the suit, does not decide in favour of the cause. Though the treaty of peace puts an end to the present war, it does not abolish a state of war (a state where continually new pretences for war are found)…’ (On Eternal Peace, 1795) Victory through pietas and uirtus

Labarum, C 4th AD

Zeus nikepohoros, C 3rd BC Peace with JUSTICE Just war theory: you may fight the adversary only until your just cause is served. • Machiavelli (1513): ‘Victories are never so overwhelming that the conqueror does not have to show some scruples, especially regarding justice.’ • Matthew Sutcliffe (1593): ‘In the execution of wars, this precept must be diligently remembered, that no cruelty should be used. There is moderation even in the execution of justice, not only in the other actions of war.’ ‘To keep our conquest, there are two principal means which are necessary; force and justice.’ Peace and justice (Tiepolo; Corrado Giaquinto) Peace with Clemency • Polybius (2nd C BCE) ‘[G]ood men should not make war on wrongdoers with the object of destroying and exterminating them, but with that of correcting and reforming their errors.’ • Raymond de Beccarie de Pavie, Baron de Fourquevaux (1548): ‘the true office of the conqueror is to pardon and to have pity upon the conquered. ‘ • Giacomo di Porcia (1530): ‘the duty and office of any political leader, after the battle is won and victory achieved, [is] to save lives [of those] who have not been excessively cruel and overly resistant. For what would be less gentle, indeed more like to the cruel and fiercely brutal beasts, than to handle your enemy without any mercy and meekness. Undoubtedly a leader acting thus will kindle the minds of men against him…’ Peace with Clemency II

• Paul Hay du Chastelet (1668): What one has to do after having won a battle: {the captain} has to preserve a generous humanity for the vanquished, to have compassion with them, to comfort them in their disgrace, and through good treatment, sweeten their rude misfortune. … It is a sign of the greatness of a victorious prince if he … make[s] it easier [for the defeated enemy] to fulfil the condition of the treaties, proportionately to the fact that [the victor] has won the greatest advantages. … Justice is taken to mean…

• A just settlement of the dispute (acceptable to both sides) • Justice and clemency in punishment • Sparing wounded soldiers and POWs • Good governance of the occupied areas, no arbitrary arrests, requisitions, seizure of property, let alone crimes against non- combattants … Three components of conflict resolution:

• Military Victory: yes, if circumstances require. BUT: • Lasting Peace as the only just aim. • Justice must be perceived by both sides. Sir Maurice Hankey (1950)

”The first aim in war is to win, the second is to prevent defeat, the third is to shorten it, and the fourth and most important, which must never be lost to sight, is to make a just and durable peace. … It must always be kept in mind that after a war we have sooner or later to live with our enemies in amity.” For sources and references…