What is Total War?

Definitions and Examples

Total war is a strategy in which militaries use any means necessary to win, including those considered
morally or ethically wrong in the context of warfare. The goal is not only to decimate but to demoralize
the enemy beyond recovery so that they are unable to continue fighting.

 Total war is a war fought without limitations on targets or weapons.

 Ideological or religious conflicts are more likely to give rise to total war.

 Total wars have occurred throughout history and include the third Punic War, the Mongol
Invasions, the Crusades and the two World Wars.

Definition of Total War

Total war is mainly characterized by the lack of distinction between fighting lawful combatants and
civilians. The purpose is to destroy the other contender’s resources so that they are unable to continue
to wage war. This might include targeting major infrastructure and blocking access to water, internet, or
imports (often through blockades). Additionally, in total war, there is no limit on the type of weapons
used and biological, chemical, nuclear, and other weapons of mass destruction may be unleashed.

While state-sponsored imperialist wars tend to have the greatest numbers of casualties, it is not the
number of casualties alone that defines a total war. Smaller conflicts across the globe, such as tribal
wars, incorporate aspects of total war by kidnapping, enslaving, and killing civilians. This deliberate
targeting of civilians elevates less expansive wars to the level of total war.

A nation waging total war may also impact its own citizens through a mandatory draft, rationing,
propaganda, or other efforts deemed necessary to support the war on the home front.

History of Total War

Total war began in the Middle Ages and continued through the two World Wars. While there have long
been cultural, religious and political norms expressing who should and should not be targeted in war,
there was no international ordinance describing the laws of war until the Geneva Conventions, which
created the International Humanitarian Law (IHL).

Total War in the Middle Ages

Some of the earliest and most significant examples of total war occurred in the Middle Ages, during
the Crusades, a series of holy wars fought in the 11th century. During this period, it is estimated that
over one million people were killed. Soldiers sacked and burned countless villages in the name of
preserving their respective religions. The population of entire cities was slain in an attempt to
completely destroy the basis of their adversaries’ support.

Genghis Khan, the 13th-century Mongolian conqueror, followed a strategy of total war. He founded the
Mongol Empire, which grew as he and his troops spread across Northeast Asia, seizing cities, and
slaughtering large portions of their populations. This prevented uprisings in the defeated cities, as they
did not have the human or material resources to rebel. One of the best examples of Khan’s use of this
type of warfare is his largest invasion, which was against the Khwarazmian Empire. He sent hundreds of
thousands of troops across the empire to kill the citizens without discrimination and enslave others to
be used as human shields in later battles. This "scorched earth" policy holds that the best way to win a
war is to ensure that the opposition cannot mount a second attack.

Total War in the 18th and 19th Centuries

During the French Revolution, the Revolutionary Tribunal engaged in acts of total war, nicknamed “The
Terror.” During this period, the Tribunal executed anyone who did not show fervent and undying
support of the Revolution. Thousands of people also died in prison awaiting trial. During the Napoleonic
Wars that followed the revolution, it is estimated that approximately five million people died over the
twenty-year period. During this time, Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte became known for his savagery.

Another famous example of total war occurred during the American Civil War with Sherman’s March to
the Sea. After successfully capturing Atlanta, Georgia, the Union Major General William T. Sherman
marched his troops toward Savannah to the Atlantic Ocean. Along this route, General Sherman
and Lieutenant General Ulysses S. Grant burned and sacked smaller towns in order to destroy the
South’s economic basis—the plantations. This strategy was intended to demoralize the Confederates
and destroy their infrastructure so that neither the soldiers nor the civilians had the supplies to mobilize
for the war effort.

The World Wars: Total War and the Home Front

Nations in World War I mobilized their own civilians for the war effort through forced conscription,
military propaganda, and rationing, all of which can all be aspects of total war. People who had not
consented were made to sacrifice food, supplies, time, and money to aid the war. When it comes to the
conflict itself, the United States initiated the four-year Blockade of Germany which starved citizens and
soldiers alike and debilitated the nation’s access to resources. In addition to blocking food and
agriculture supplies, the blockade also restricted their access to foreign weapon imports.

During World War II, much like the previous World War, both the Allies and the Axis powers utilized
conscription and civilian mobilization on all fronts. Propaganda and rationing continued, and civilians
were expected to work longer hours to compensate for human capital lost during the war.

Much like World War I, the Allies targeted German citizens to hasten the end of the conflict. The British
and American forces firebombed the German city of Dresden because it was one of Germany’s industrial
capitals. The bombing destroyed the nation’s railways system, aircraft factories, and other resources.

Atomic Bombs: Mutually Assured Destruction

The practice of total war, however, largely ended with World War II, as nuclear war assured mutually
assured destruction. The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki by the United States showed the
apocalyptic possibilities of total nuclear war. Five years after this event, the International Humanitarian
Law outlawed any weapons that were indiscriminate (and though nuclear weapons are not explicitly
mentioned, many agree they are prohibited under this clause).
Total war impacts civilians as well as combatants. A little girl carries jerrycans after she filled them up
with clean water from a charity pump during a continuing clean water crisis on July 24, 2018 in Sana'a,
Yemen. Mohammed Hamoud / Getty Images

Conclusion

While the IHL helped curb total war by making the deliberate targeting of civilians illegal, it did not end
the use of certain strategies, such as mandatory military service in Israel, South Korea, Armenia (and
many others), or the destruction of civilian homes, such as in the Syrian Civil War, or the
deliberate targeting of civilians in the war in Yemen.
Limited war
A limited war is one in which the belligerents do not spend all of the resources at their disposal,
whether human, industrial, agricultural, military, natural, technological, or otherwise in a specific
conflict. This may be to preserve those resources for other purposes, or because it might be more
difficult for the participants to use all of an area's resources rather than part of them. Limited war is
the opposite concept to total war.
A limited war is a war carried out by a state that uses less than its total resources and has a goal of
less than total defeat of the enemy.[1] Very often it is the high cost of war that makes limited war
more practical than total war.[2] In a limited war a state's total survival does not depend on the
outcome of the war. For example, when Augustus sent his Roman legions to conquer Germania, the
fate of the Roman Republic was not at stake.[2] Since 1945 and the advent of nuclear weapons,
limited war has become the normal type of warfare.[3] Following World War II, because of its world
position, the United States has found itself involved in a number of limited
wars.[4] The Korean, Vietnam, Persian Gulf and Iraq wars were all examples of limited wars.[4] The
goal of at least one of the parties in a limited war is to maintain
its freedom and preserve itself.[3] Often the strategy used, especially against a much stronger enemy,
is to draw out the fighting until the other side gets tired and finally decides to quit.[3] This worked
for George Washington in the American Revolutionary War.[3] Although the British Army was the
strongest army in the world at the time, the war dragged out until the British got tired of the war
draining its resources.[3] Today the Taliban and other Islamist groups keep their wars going trying to
wear out their Western world enemies.[3]

Asymmetric warfare
Asymmetric warfare (or asymmetric engagement) is war between belligerents whose relative military
power differs significantly, or whose strategy or tactics differ significantly. This is typically a war between
a standing, professional army and an insurgency or resistance movement militias who often have status
of unlawful combatants.

Asymmetric warfare can describe a conflict in which the resources of two belligerents differ in essence
and, in the struggle, interact and attempt to exploit each other's characteristic weaknesses. Such
struggles often involve strategies and tactics of unconventional warfare, the weaker combatants
attempting to use strategy to offset deficiencies in quantity or quality of their forces and
equipment.[1] Such strategies may not necessarily be militarized.[2] This is in contrast to symmetric
warfare, where two powers have comparable military power and resources and rely on tactics that are
similar overall, differing only in details and execution.
The term is also frequently used to describe what is also called "guerrilla warfare", "insurgency",
"counterinsurgency", "rebellion", "terrorism", and "counterterrorism", essentially violent conflict
between a formal military and an informal, less equipped and supported, undermanned but resilient
and motivated opponent. Asymmetric warfare is a form of irregular warfare.