Although the threats facing the international community in the 21^st century (including terrorism, cyber attacks, and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction) differ from those of other periods in history, what has not changed since antiquity is the building of coalitions by foreign soldiers and statesmen in an effort to promote and maintain security. Equally longstanding have been misunderstandings and disagreements among people of different cultural backgrounds that have threatened coalition cohesiveness and jeopardized military operations.

Forget Clausewitz, Sun Tzu, and Machiavelli. Put aside Mackinder, Mahan, and Spykman. Close the military academies and war colleges. Shut our overseas bases. Bring our troops home. Make dramatic cuts in the defense budget. The end of major war, and perhaps the end of war itself, is near, according to Tulane assistant professor Christopher Fettweis in his recent book, Dangerous Times? The International Politics of Great Power Peace.

Carl von Clausewitz continues to inspire, antagonize, and confuse; at least 5 books have appeared in the last 3 years that seek to explain, contextualize, or critique On War. Hew Strachan's Clausewitz's On War (2007), Antulio Echevarria's Clausewitz and Contemporary War (2007), the Oxford University Press conference anthology on Clausewitz in the Twenty-first Century (2007), and Jon Sumida's Decoding Clausewitz: A New Approach to On War (2008) are inspired by Clausewitz's study and seek to clarify, elaborate on, or use his concepts to shed light on contemporary war. H.P. Willmott, by way of contrast, contends that On War has attained the status of a sacred text, with a fawning preeminence bordering on sycophancy accorded to it. In Clausewitz Reconsidered, Willmott and Michael Barrett seek to examine war in the two centuries that have passed since Clausewitz lived and fought. In a critique of Clausewitz reminiscent of those of John Keegan and Martin van Creveld, they contend that Clausewitz conceived of war solely in terms of interstate conflict pursued for political objectives. Their purpose is not to challenge On War's continued insights and relevance to wars between states, but rather to provide complementary insights about war in its many other forms.