Clausewitz advocates attacking enemy schwerpunkt or centers of gravity. How does this compare with Sun Tzus prioritization for attacking important elements of national power? Which theorist provides the most useful guidance for determining the object of a strategy or strategies?IntroductionClausewitzs attack of enemy centers of gravity and Sun Tzus prioritization of attack of important elements of national power provide contrasting approaches to the development of effective strategy. These contrasts are reflections of each authors perspective on how war should be waged, the proper use of force, their definitions of the ideal victory and how best to achieve that victory as well as their methodologies, styles, and levels of analysis (Handel, p. 18-19). The understanding of these varying points of view enable us to better appreciate how each man arrives at his own unique solution to the common problem of identifying and overcoming the enemys most critical point.Clausewitzs ApproachClausewitz uses systematic, empirical methods in arriving at his concept of the center of gravity being the critical strategic objective. This approach is both a product of his era, the age of enlightenment, where scientific thought was beginning to exert its primacy, as well as his view of war and how it should be waged. To Clausewitz war is armed conflict. It is an act of force to compel the enemy to do our will and equips itself with the inventions of art and science. (Clausewitz, p.75) Following his logical approach, if war is fighting, then war is waged according to Clausewitz, primarily by military means. All other means, such as diplomacy, are secondary and are not the concern of the military leader. (Handel, p. 19) This narrow perspective on the waging of war by military means leads Clausewitz to focus his level of analysis on the operational level of war. It is here that the critical strategic objective must be found. Combining this pe...
