Clausewitz's On War, first published in 1832, remains to this day one of the most influential studies in understanding the character, nature, and conditions of war. In his book Clausewitz not only traced an interplay of intention and planning with the realities of combat, but by exploring the relationship between war and politics, politics and society gave a new philosophical justification to the art of war. (Heuser, 2002) One of the most important statements made by Clausewitz in his book is that “war is a continuation of politics by other means”. (Clausewitz, 2007, p. 28) Indeed, Clausewitz argues that, despite its violent character, war is predetermined by political objectives and dictated by the rational pursuit of political objectives. As he says in his book: “The political object is the goal, war is the means to achieve it, and the means can never be considered separately from their goal.” (Clausewitz, 2007, p. 29) By the end of the Cold War literature focused on strategic studies highlighted transformative changes within the international system that influenced and altered the very nature of warfare. As a result, many security studies scholars have given up on traditional theories of strategic thinking. Clausewitzian theory, in particular, has received much criticism regarding its relevance to modern warfare. (Gray, How Has War Changed Since the End of the Cold War?, 2005) In this essay I argue that, despite transformative changes in the character of war, the nature of war has remained unchanged and thus the Clausewitzian concept of the relationship between “war ” and “Politics” remains a viable tool that contributes to our understanding of contemporary warfare. I will first evaluate Clausewitz's concept of the trinity, then I will present the arguments for... half the paper... war. It would probably be utopian to say that all of Clausewitz's military thoughts have remained relevant today. His vision of the war, for example, did not include its economic, air, sea and space dimensions. But his concept of war, his trinity and his understanding of the relationship between politics and war "will remain valid as long as states, drug lords, warrior clans and terrorist groups intend to carry it forward." (Echevarria, 1996) I agree that Clausewitz does not provide the best theory of war that could ever exist, only that it is the best available. (Gray, Clausewitz, History, and the Future Strategic World, 2003) Therefore, as long as communities wage war to preserve their identities and pursue their interests, Clausewitz's theory will remain a useful tool for understanding and analyzing war and conflict violent. . (Herberg-Rothe, 2009)