Rwanda Case Study

724 Words 3 Pages
a. To conquer and destroy the armed power of the enemy.

b. To take possession of his material and other sources of strength.

c. To gain public opinion.

11. Offensive and defensive. Clausewitz said that basically the two conflict parties alike have a strong initiative to conduct offensive, so there is actually no defensive terms. But each didn't want to strike at the same time, so one party will probably wait until it has enough strength and therefore temporarily they took defensive strategy.

12. Center of Gravity. To achieve a decisive victory, military leaders must identify the Center of Gravity of the enemy, then concentrate all his strength at that point. He also believes that more power and strength of the troops will guarantee victory.


13. According to Clausewitz, war is not only political
…show more content…
Clausewitz also advocated that the military is the instrument of the country to conduct the politics. Therefore forbidden for military to determine policy of the political state, the military is also bans to take a part in practical political activities. In Indonesia, the military has to be "on track" with the publication of Indonesian National Defense Forces (INDF) Act No. 34 in 2004 article 17 paragraph 1 affirmed that "the authority and responsibility for the deployment of INDF's strength lies in the President of Indonesia".


15. The ends of war is to conquer the enemy and disarms them. Therefore the ends of the war should be devoted to political consideration appropriately, we find that the goal of any war is varied in accordance with the wishes of the political and environmental conditions.

16. Associated with the means Clausewitz said, to know how much resources should be mobilized in the war, we should see our political objectives and also enemy’s political purposes. Then we have to measure the strength of the enemy situation, including the character and ability of their government and their

Related Documents