Tuesday, January 26, 2016

Statecraft, Strategy, and Ethics: A Noetic Trinity | Small Wars Journal

From the article: 
Statecraft is what ought to be. It is normative. But in its very oughtness, it thereby oftentimes ends up being more an ideal (unattainable, but nonetheless worth pursuing) than an achievable objective to be pursued. It is what statesmen do – tradecraft by and for statesmen. It is an inherently strategic enterprise, and statesmen, its practitioners, must necessarily be strategically minded and strategically oriented.
To be sure, politics and statecraft share some common conceptual and practical terrain. They both concern themselves with purpose – accomplishing something, getting something done, achieving aims. In the case of politics, cynical though it may sound, purposiveness – serving or effecting a useful function, though not as a result of planning or design – is typically at play; while in the case of statecraft, purposefulness – having or tending to fulfill a conscious purpose or design – is the name of the game. Politics focuses on proximate aims; statecraft, on ultimate (or penultimate) ones.

http://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art/statecraft-strategy-and-ethics-a-noetic-trinity

Pretty interesting stuff here.  Considerations of long term vs short term goals and what is the real motive are important.

Disqus Comments