Warfare Studies: What is the Play of Politics in War? What is the Significance of this for Waging War?

Introduction
Warfare is a complex phenomenon that at times becomes impossible to define. The whole society and civilization have been ruined because they have failed to understand the meaning of war. Warfare has been used for decades to attempt to resolve problems that do not need military solutions. There is always the element in any human society of people who are willing to use violence to impose their will on others. These ambitions can only be thwarted by violent means. For many years, politics have played major roles in wars with political leaders using military instruments to force their interests to the society. The incurable step that leads to self-destruction is when a society over-relies on violent solution compared to moderate elements that do not require using forces.  Since the fall of the Berlin wall, several theories have been coined explaining the term war. Experts have come up with terms like warfare, cyber war among others serving as important pieces of analyzing war. Many people who sought to understand war have referred to Clausewitz theory of warfare to explain the logic behind wars. For Clausewitz, war is the conflict that merely assists in the continuation of policy by other means. Political objective is the goal; war is the means of reaching it. War, therefore, can never be considered in isolation from their purposes. War is a political activity that could be understood only in political context, meaning that politics is the origin of war. Politics is the womb where war develops from and where its outline exists. This paper analyzes the role played by politics in war, especially in instigating military strategies.
The Role of Politics in War and the Significance of This for Waging War
During conflicts, political objectives at times can be ambiguous because the contenders do not clearly understand their intention and desires. The main source of ambiguity in war in meeting political objectives lies in the different ways in which political entities define their survival. For example, after the Iraq's invasion of Kuwait in August 1990, the US publicly announced four national policy objectives of immediate, complete, and unconditional withdrawal of all Iraqi forces from Kuwait; restore of Kuwait's legitimate government; a providing safety and protection of American citizens abroad. The above objectives did not necessarily require military action. The Gulf war demonstrates how to achieve the applicability of the Clausewitz trinity, which stresses on the trinity interrelationship between the people, the military, and the government. The people provide the will to fight; the military provides the capability, and the government provides the policy and ultimate decision authority. In war, there are three predispositions that are from the people, that of the general and the army, and the government. The passion that leads to war needs to be existence in the. On the other hand, the range that people display courage and talents will depend on particular characteristics of general and his army but the political objects belong to the Government alone.
Even though the people component of trinity influences government decision to go to war and its ability to sustain war, however, the support of people can only be...