A total war is characterized by the unrestricted use of weapons, unspecified combatants and gross disregard for any prevalent war laws. The onset, progress and termination of the Civil War in the US, however, took a different perspective despite the war being the bloodiest in the US history. Triggered by the formation of the Confederate States of America by the seceded seven slave states in the South, the war was substantially controlled and limited by the Lincolns administration and therefore did not achieve the status of a total war.
Despite the bitterness amongst the Southerners, Lincoln sought to wage a restrained war. This is evidenced by his failure to demand unconditional surrender by the South but rather sets forth his acceptance to hold talks with any confederates who had any proposition for peace. The absence of total war features in the civil war is also evidenced by the continuous leniency and willingness by Lincoln to hold more talks with the Confederate agents on whatever they had in mind. Lincoln also drafted a letter stating that the war could cease after reinstatement of the union and all outstanding issues could be addressed peacefully. The Confederate hostility intensified in 1865 and Lincoln added a third condition to disband all forces that were opposing the government and in return, his government would liberally consider the Confederate propositions that were consistent with that.
The Confederates on the other side still felt oppressed and considered Lincolns terms near to an unconditional surrender and often intensified their bitterness and opposition against the government. This was a sufficient ground for Lincoln’s administration to respond with equivalent aggression resulting in a total war but it was never the case; Lincoln was not for a war, unlike Jefferson Davis.
Despite the existence of proponents of the Civil War having been a war in totality, McPherson argues that it was limited, limited to the restoration of the status quo ante-Bellum, and was not focused to the destruction of an opposing side. T.Harry also asserts that the War lacked the features of totality. Total wars are exemplified by armies waging wars against armies and not on the economic resources of the enemy; this was rather an aggressive cold war. Being a modern war did not qualify it to be a total war since the civilians were the soft military targets. After the formation of the Union armies, the declaration to treat all white men in the south as combatants was not honoured and even the military prisoners were respected.
In totality, the civil war lacked the motive of a total war; victory and destruction of the enemy. It was rather an act of statesmanship.
References
Neely, M. (2004). Was the Civil War a Total War?. Civil War History, 50(4), 434-458. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/cwh.2004.0073
