
Given that this is a new column at War on the Rocks, you might be tempted to think that your humble columnist is going to use this space to discuss the ins and outs of Clausewitz, Sun Tzu, and all the other centuries-dead philosopher/scholars of war.
You’d be wrong.
Well, sort of. Let me explain.
This column – and the conversations I hope it inspires – is actually about the fine and creative arts, and what they can help us understand about the art and practice of statecraft.
There’s method to the madness, I assure you. Bear with me.
I suppose when it comes down to it, the inspiration for this column can be traced to around the time that Field Manual (FM) 3-24 “Counterinsurgency” was published, just before the Surge. FM 3-24 was, roughly speaking, the military’s “how to win Iraq” book. Despite what you may think about the feasibility of counterinsurgency, (indeed, the manual itself was alternately described as “brilliant” and “incomprehensible”), one aspect of the manual was particularly noteworthy. Namely, its underlying argument that commanders must think creatively about their local circumstances and adapt accordingly in order to win a population’s hearts and minds. In order to spur such creative thinking, paradoxes were introduced, such as “the more force you use, the less secure you may be,” – a sort of Army/Marine Corps answer to a Zen koan (even though our beloved ground forces aren’t exactly “Zen”).
Homo Sapiens as Storytellers
This was no accident; the point of a koan – a counterintuitive Zen puzzle – is to inspire a deeper, non-logical level of contemplation. But we haven’t always used koans to access those creative, intuitive, non-rational parts of our psyche. Indeed, as Karen Armstrong usefully argues in A Short History of Myth, ever since we were cavemen sitting around campfires, homo sapiens (and perhaps even our Neanderthal cousins) have used stories and myths to communicate meaning, purpose and truth. Myths were not expressions of religious belief per se; rather, they were an imaginative, non-logical attempt to understand who we are, and where we fit into our world.
Today, great art serves that purpose. It turns out there’s a reason we gravitate towards creative works. We’ve been programmed from our caveman days to use stories and myths as intellectual tools to learn, contemplate and interpret our circumstances in a creative and unbound manner. And in our field, those circumstances happen to be international security policy and statecraft.
The Importance of the Arts to the Art of Statecraft
But don’t just take my word for it. Indeed, some recent strategy scholars have started making this very point.
Christopher Coker, in his recently published book Men at War (reviewed here at WOTR) explores works of great fiction and what they tell us about the human condition and conflict. He argues that “great authors like Homer and Tolstoy reveal to us aspects of reality invisible to us except through a literary lens,” and goes on to explore works of fiction – from The Iliad to Catch-22 – in order to help expose us to those not necessarily logical – but highly important – truths.
Charles Hill – a Yale professor and former State Department diplomat – in his work, Grand Strategies: Literature, Statecraft and World Order, argues that literature and art are the necessary intellectual playgrounds of statesmen. He writes:
a grand strategist . . . needs to be immersed in classic texts from Sun Tzu to Thucydides to George Kennan, to gain real-world experience through internships in the realms of statecraft, and to bring this learning and experience to bear on contemporary issues.
Hill goes on to explore works such as Emma by Jane Austen and A Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens (among many, many others), discerning their respective themes and how they illuminate various aspects of national strategy formulation. Emma, for example, illustrates the necessity of reliable intelligence; Dickens’ Tale inspires reflection on modern state terror.
Hill is making an important point: “only literature is methodologically unbound.” And in a field like national security policy – alternately dominated by the behavioral sciences, technical arcana, and punditry – methodologically unbound, creative spaces are as important as they are, perhaps, underappreciated.
I could be wrong, of course. But it’s been my impression that when it comes to figuring out what we’re going to do in our spare time, many of us national security geeks would rather steer clear of the arts and instead retreat into histories, documentaries, over-the-top political genre pieces or contemporary political debates. Please don’t mistake me: I strongly believe that many of the latter are extremely important to our own educations. But they rarely provide that essential “methodology free” creative space wherein one grapples with a theme or idea in its most raw form.
The Purpose of this “Art of War” Column
Which brings us to the here and now. The purpose of this column is to inspire a conversation about the arts, and the lessons they can illuminate for the practice of statecraft. Every other week, I will be analyzing either a contemporary or classical piece of art, cinema or literature – many of which will have little, if any, direct linkage with national security policy – and drawing out some key themes for your contemplation and reactions.
Kind of like an online book-and-movie club, (mostly) without the gossip. BYOB.
It strikes me that the need for creative thinking has never been greater. Russia appears increasingly resurgent, Iran is a revisionist power in the Middle East that seems interested in destabilizing its neighbors as well as acquiring a nuke; Syria is on fire; North Korea is increasingly intransigent; China is increasingly flexing its military muscle while Japan is controversially rebuilding its military. Afghanistan and Pakistan will most likely be messes for the foreseeable future. The list of challenges grows longer; the need for creative solutions more urgent.
There won’t be easy answers, of course. But perhaps together we can find new, genuinely creative ways to understand our world, and in so doing, different ways of grappling with the extraordinary challenges before us.
And hell, if nothing else we’ll be that much more interesting at cocktail parties.
Kathleen J. McInnis is a PhD candidate at the Department of War Studies, King’s College London and a Research Consultant at Chatham House. She served as a Pentagon strategist from 2006-2009. She is the editor of the new WOTR series, Art of War. The views expressed are her own.
Photo credit: Chad Goddard



Tis true that the power of narrative is a key component of all phases of conflict, while force of arms is only an intermittent player. It is also true that creativity can be both a blessing and a curse in both strategy and tactics. Combining an appreciation for the arts and grand strategy is the conceit of a practicing romantic. You have established a tough objective – good luck.
Dear Kathleen J. McInnis,
Right up my ally. Thanks you very much.
Link to here shared on our site, with recommendation.
See https://www.facebook.com/VNC.communication.counsel
Vince
Looking forward to future entries of the column. There are certainly many great lessons that can be taken from literature and other cultural works.
An ambitious start…there is something that speaks to the slumped Samurai warrior under the cherry blossom here, pensive, captured in a few brushstrokes of the master. Art is both a bathetic release from war and its driver…we stumble back from the front, exhausted, only to be transfixed on the spot by a piece of music, or a painting. Think that moment in Redemption when the Pucini aria is played to the open mouthed prisoners.
Strength to your elbow, scribe.
This sounds fun….The only thing is that they don’t let me drink at work and you definitely need a drink in hand for discussions like this. Looks like I will have some night time reading to do now.
I think a Statesman is very similar to the Nietzschean “Ubermensch.” Not the bastardized version so often examined, but as the artistic creator of new balances of power. I wrote to this effect:
“f all human existence is transitoriness, or as Kissinger says in his undergrad thesis (The Meaning of History: Reflection of Spengler, Toynbee and Kant),
“Transitoriness is the fate of existence. No civilization has yet been permanent, no longing completely fulfilled. This is necessity, the fatedness of history, the dilemma of mortality.”
does not a man become quite mired in the muck of human experience? Can he escape? Nietzsche tried through creativity. So, in his way, I posit did Kissinger through the canvas of geopolitics and grand diplomacy.
Kissinger attempted to connect philosophy and statesmanship in a meaningful way, something that many policymakers do not do in an age where empiricism and technicism seem paramount.
Yet, even if this is tragic, the wise statesman, the true “realist”, understands the limits of what he alone can do and hopes to follow Bismarck in waiting “until he hears the steps of God sounding through events, then leap up and grasp the hem of his garment.”
A statesman is an artist, not a technocrat. Temporary as his work might be, it remains his duty to create anew structures and patterns of relative peace and stability despite the vagaries of historical contingency.
So even if haunted by the specter of no transcendence, trudge along like Nietzsche’s Zarathustra they must.”
http://gregrlawson.com/2012/05/18/statesman-as-ubermensch.aspx
Kathleen, this is a great post and sounds like a great idea. The grand strategists’ book of the month (week?) club. Perhaps we should have a drink pairing with each book to discuss as well; doubles your knowledge value at cocktail parties. What book is up first?
Cheers.
Highly recommend you vist the hall of battles at Versailles for one (or more) of your studies. Also the hall of battles at El Escorial in San Lorenzo Spain. These rooms were specifically designed for a compact display of the progression of warfare through art, and they are amazingly successful. I’m sure many other examples exist, but these are two of my favorites.
Please talk about Vermeyden’s depiction of Charles V’s capture of Tunis. It’s masterful.
Eerily I am reminded of Paul Fussel’s “Great War and Modern Memory” and my yearly reading aloud to my children the Epic of Gilgamesh. I look forward to the discussion.
E.
Cheers for taking this witty approach by engaging us to draw the parallels between our love of literature and its antithesis, our hatred of war.
I admittedly skim through current events…and foreign policy in my daily life is well…foreign.
So easing the otherwise painful experience of discussing war while instilling a desire to quite frankly give a damn about shaping the future of our global politics is remarkable.
Until now, I believe that I’ve been uninspired by most of what I have read regarding the actions/reactions of diplomats and leaders to the atrocities committed by countries that we have sworn to protect. Ultimately, I’ve become a bit jaded by the events that have unfolded specifically over the last decade; propagation of misinformation, renegotiations of treaties, and alliances that were seemingly faulty from their initiation.
I am proud to be a contractor who works side-by-side with military forces. Their dedication to each mission is impressive. Their training is extensive. Their commitment to freedom is inspiring and humbling. The unfortunate medical reality that our post-war military patients face both physically and mentally is disconcerting.
My hope is that if we can see the nuances of war through the eyes of authors such as you, perhaps our own eyes will be opened to the possibilities of mitigating the sacrifices that need to be made by future generations.
Oh, and a quick pitch for one of your next films: Star Wars.