A Critique of Hew Strachan's 'The Lost Meaning of Strategy'
1464 Words6 Pages
Critique of Hew Strachan's "The Lost Meaning of Strategy"
In his essay, "The Lost Meaning of Strategy," Hew Strachan examines the historical roots of strategy and how the use of the term has become commonplace by political leaders who want sound decisive during uncertain times. In support of his assertions that policy actually precedes strategy as tools for effecting governmental aims, Strachan cites several examples from the historical record to demonstrate how the concept of strategy evolved over time to refer to the conduct of war only, and how these original meanings have been changed over time to include a wide range of social and business contexts as well. This paper provides a critical review of Strachan's essay, "The Lost Meaning of Strategy" to identify its strengths and weaknesses, followed by a summary of the essay and important findings in the conclusion.
Review and Analysis Freedom and strategy are not synonyms, but that has not stopped government spin artists from trying to use them interchangeably. For example, Strachan reports that, "Strategy is a military means; freedom in this context is a political or even moral condition. Strategy can be used to achieve freedom, but can freedom be a strategy in itself?" (p. 33). Indeed, Strachan argues that the use of the word "strategy" by government authorities has become essentially synonymous with "policy" through overuse. In fact, this is one of the most relevant points made by the author in