Q-What are the similarities and differences between the views of non-western political thinkers like Sun Tzu/ Kautilya with western political thinkers like Hobbes and Machiavelli, with regard to war/security of a state?
A war is “A state of armed conflict between different countries or different groups within a country.” In this essay, I will be focusing on the ideologies of western and non-western political thinkers with respect to war and security. This topic interests me mainly because of the recent turn of events between India and Pakistan where India retaliated to Pakistan’s sudden attack with surgical strikes in LOC. This served as a catalyst for me to choose this question. I would elaborate with the help of the ideas of western …show more content…
“Sun Tzu was a Chinese and the ‘shi’s’ or the scholarly gentlemen in china were trained in the military arts among other scholarly subjects, although they did not constitute a hereditary group” . Sun Tzu believed that ethics played an important role and that even though there was an absence of a religious base, the role of ethics in the war was never neglected. Sun Tzu took all his decisions in a very diplomatic manner, he believed that diplomacy was the main criteria in building alliances for war and deciding whether one must go to a war or not. It is ambiguous whether Sun Tzu believed in warfare or he was against warfare because he never played any role in the expansion of his ruler’s kingdom. Sun Tzu’s art of war is known as the Bingfa in which he emphasizes on the statement “sieges are expensive and wasteful” . He also stated that “the supreme art of power is to subdue the enemy without fighting” . He believed that war is not a necessity and one must not hesitate in withdrawing while conserving oneself. He relied least on the military powers and recommended the kings and the commanders to not rely on them as well. He did so because he didn’t believe in using weapons back then which included poisoned arrows, five arrows and other
A war is “A state of armed conflict between different countries or different groups within a country.” In this essay, I will be focusing on the ideologies of western and non-western political thinkers with respect to war and security. This topic interests me mainly because of the recent turn of events between India and Pakistan where India retaliated to Pakistan’s sudden attack with surgical strikes in LOC. This served as a catalyst for me to choose this question. I would elaborate with the help of the ideas of western …show more content…
“Sun Tzu was a Chinese and the ‘shi’s’ or the scholarly gentlemen in china were trained in the military arts among other scholarly subjects, although they did not constitute a hereditary group” . Sun Tzu believed that ethics played an important role and that even though there was an absence of a religious base, the role of ethics in the war was never neglected. Sun Tzu took all his decisions in a very diplomatic manner, he believed that diplomacy was the main criteria in building alliances for war and deciding whether one must go to a war or not. It is ambiguous whether Sun Tzu believed in warfare or he was against warfare because he never played any role in the expansion of his ruler’s kingdom. Sun Tzu’s art of war is known as the Bingfa in which he emphasizes on the statement “sieges are expensive and wasteful” . He also stated that “the supreme art of power is to subdue the enemy without fighting” . He believed that war is not a necessity and one must not hesitate in withdrawing while conserving oneself. He relied least on the military powers and recommended the kings and the commanders to not rely on them as well. He did so because he didn’t believe in using weapons back then which included poisoned arrows, five arrows and other