Report on War and Its Relation to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Introduction: Fundamental Questions About War

War, as a complex phenomenon, raises several essential questions:

1. What is war?
2. What types of war exist?
3. Why do wars occur?
4. What is the connection between war and justice?
5. What are war crimes?
6. Is it possible to replace war with “perpetual peace”?

Understanding these questions is crucial for advancing peace, justice, and strong institutions, which align with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions).

Defining War: Clausewitz’s Perspective

Carl von Clausewitz defined war as “merely the continuation of politics by other means” (On War, 1832). This definition highlights the political nature of war, emphasizing that war is an extension of political objectives. However, the devastating consequences of war, especially in the nuclear and Cold War eras, underline the urgent need for sustainable peace and conflict prevention, directly supporting SDG 16 and SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals).

Theoretical Foundations: Realism and War

• Realism in international relations views war as a natural and inevitable aspect of state interactions.
• Contrasting theories, such as Feminism, challenge this inevitability, advocating for peaceful conflict resolution aligned with SDG 5 (Gender Equality) and SDG 16.

Historical Context and Political Instrumentalization of War

Clausewitz, influenced by philosophers like Immanuel Kant and historians such as Thucydides, argued that war is a political instrument akin to diplomacy. His insights stress the importance of political control over military actions to prevent unlimited warfare, which is critical for achieving sustainable peace (SDG 16).

The Role of Military Leadership and Political Control

1. Clausewitz warned against allowing generals to control war decisions, as military priorities might escalate conflicts beyond political objectives.
2. Historical examples, such as World War I and the Schlieffen Plan, illustrate how military strategies can override diplomatic efforts, leading to total wars with devastating humanitarian impacts, hindering SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being) and SDG 1 (No Poverty).

Clausewitz’s Trinitarian Theory of Warfare

Clausewitz proposed a trinitarian theory involving:

1. The masses, motivated by national animosity.
2. The regular army, responsible for military strategy.
3. The political leaders, who set the goals and objectives of war.

This framework underscores the interconnectedness of society, military, and politics, highlighting the need for responsible governance to prevent conflict and promote SDG 16.

Criticism of Clausewitz’s Viewpoint

1. Moral Critique: Clausewitz’s acceptance of war as inevitable and justified by state interests neglects broader ethical considerations, conflicting with SDG 16’s emphasis on justice and human rights.
2. Relevance to Modern Warfare: His theories, rooted in the Napoleonic era, may not fully address contemporary conflicts characterized by economic, social, and geopolitical complexities. Modern warfare’s destructive potential challenges the achievement of multiple SDGs, including SDG 2 (Zero Hunger) and SDG 4 (Quality Education), due to war’s disruption of societies.

Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

• SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions): Understanding war’s political nature aids in developing strategies to prevent conflicts and promote peaceful societies.
• SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being): Reducing war-related violence improves health outcomes globally.
• SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 2 (Zero Hunger): Preventing war mitigates displacement, poverty, and food insecurity.
• SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals): International cooperation is essential to replace war with sustained peace.

Conclusion

The analysis of war through Clausewitz’s theories and their critiques reveals the complexity of war as a political instrument and its profound impact on global development. Emphasizing the Sustainable Development Goals, particularly SDG 16, is vital for advancing peace, justice, and strong institutions to prevent war and promote sustainable human development.

Author Information

Dr. Vladislav B. Sotirovic, Ex-University Professor, Research Fellow at Centre for Geostrategic Studies, Belgrade, Serbia

© Vladislav B. Sotirovic 2025

Website: www.geostrategy.rs

Email: [email protected]

1. Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Addressed or Connected to the Issues Highlighted in the Article

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
  • The article extensively discusses war, its causes, consequences, and the role of politics and military leadership, which directly relates to promoting peaceful and inclusive societies, reducing violence, and strengthening institutions.
• SDG 5: Gender Equality
  • The article mentions Feminism as a theory opposing the inevitability of war, indirectly connecting to gender equality and the role of women in peacebuilding.
• SDG 4: Quality Education
  • The historical and theoretical analysis of war and international relations promotes education and awareness about peace and conflict, which supports inclusive and equitable quality education.
• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities
  • Discussion of nationalism, militarism, and hegemonic ambitions relates to inequalities between states and peoples, which SDG 10 aims to reduce.

2. Specific Targets Under Those SDGs Identified Based on the Article’s Content

1. SDG 16 Targets
   • 16.1: Significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates everywhere.
   • 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.
   • 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.
   • 16.7: Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels.
   • 16.10: Ensure public access to information and protect fundamental freedoms, in accordance with national legislation and international agreements.
2. SDG 5 Targets
   • 5.5: Ensure women’s full and effective participation and equal opportunities for leadership at all levels of decision-making in political, economic and public life.
3. SDG 4 Targets
   • 4.7: Ensure that all learners acquire knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development, including peace, human rights, gender equality, and global citizenship.
4. SDG 10 Targets
   • 10.2: Empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status.

3. Indicators Mentioned or Implied in the Article to Measure Progress Towards the Identified Targets

• For SDG 16:
  • 16.1.1: Number of victims of intentional homicide per 100,000 population, by sex and age.
  • 16.3.1: Proportion of victims of violence in the previous 12 months who reported their victimization to competent authorities or other officially recognized conflict resolution mechanisms.
  • 16.6.1: Primary government expenditures as a proportion of original approved budget, by sector (or by budget codes or similar).
  • 16.7.1: Proportions of positions in national and local institutions, including the legislatures, public service, and judiciary, compared to national distributions.
  • 16.10.2: Number of countries that adopt and implement constitutional, statutory and/or policy guarantees for public access to information.
• For SDG 5:
  • 5.5.2: Proportion of women in managerial positions.
• For SDG 4:
  • 4.7.1: Extent to which (i) global citizenship education and (ii) education for sustainable development are mainstreamed at all levels in: (a) national education policies; (b) curricula; (c) teacher education; and (d) student assessment.
• For SDG 10:
  • 10.2.1: Proportion of people living below 50 per cent of median income, by age, sex and persons with disabilities.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: countercurrents.org