Understanding Military Strategy and the Four Levels of War

SOURCE:
http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a39985/four-levels-of-war/

      Understanding Military Strategy

                               and

               the Four Levels of War

When "strategy" gets thrown around by politicians and the                       media, you can bet it's being misused.                                          By   

                              Robert Bateman

NOV 25, 2015

In my sustained effort to help others understand the news, there is one important area that really must be addressed, both because this is an election period and because some of these words are so widely confused and conflated in modern journalistic usage they now have little to no meaning. Specifically, I am referring to what we know as the "Levels of War," and the way that terms like "tactics" and "strategy" and "campaign" (and several other related concepts) are thrown around as though they are synonyms. They are not; and how they are used, both by reporters and the candidates themselves, appears to be a reliable way to separate the wheat from the chafe.

 

But why does this matter in reporting on—or in speaking/proclaiming about—news coming from the Middle East or any other conflict zone you might want to know about?

Simply put, if a candidate mixes and matches these words in very non-specific ways, it is a pretty clear indicator that both his national security advisors and perhaps even his international relations advisors are either rank amateurs or are flatly ignored by the candidate.
 

 

So down to brass tacks: There are four levels of warfare. These are the Political, Strategic, Operational, and Tactical levels of war. I will use examples from World War II in order to level the playing field and convey these ideas in their most basic (and least confused) form. For our purposes, we will only address three in detail: the tactical level, the operational level, and the strategic level. I believe that the "Political" level is self-evident, but for clarity I will address it briefly. It is perhaps the most important, because decisions at the political level have the ability to directly or indirectly affect the other three.

Tactical Level

A simple definition, though not an ironclad one, of the tactical level of warfare might read (my words): 

"The tactical level of warfare is that level where men meet and fight from the individual level through the division. It is the realm of skirmishes, engagements, and battles. Planning at the tactical level starts at 'now' and occurs out to roughly 48 hours in the future, or at most a few weeks. The tactical level of warfare is where one sees the face of battle." 

Most weapon systems used in war operate at this level. Knives, bayonets, guns, cannons, bombs, and torpedoes—the actual tools of personal destruction are mostly tactical. (Nuclear weapons, obviously, transcend this area.) Some information systems operate at this level as well. Speed at this echelon is sometimes measured in yards per day, but usually in miles per hour. Tactical combat for infantry on foot rarely moves faster than 2.5 m.p.h., but even jets moving to conduct an individual bombing raid rarely move faster than a few hundred miles per hour. This is the popular conception of war. This is war at the level of Saving Private Ryan. This is fighting by privates and sergeants, lieutenants, captains, and colonels. The battles on the beaches of Normandy in 1944 were tactical.

 

Operational Level

The operational level is somewhat more difficult to define and understand. Operational level planning occurs with the intent of setting missions and objectives that will bend the enemy to your will in an entire theater of operations. Think of this as the blueprint that helps you build a house from a bunch of bricks. Each brick is a tactical engagement. You put them together to make a wall, and then a house. Operational level plans are known as "campaigns," and by design each consists of a series of battles and engagements (ie. the 'tactical level') designed to win some larger objective. The operational level of warfare is the realm of generals. Plans begin with the intent that they will start a few days or weeks in the future and may stretch out to cover months of time and thousands of square miles. This level of war deals with the movements of entire corps, armies and army groups, or whole fleets at sea. Again, referring back to June 1944, the overall plan for invading the beaches and the entire province beyond the beaches, Operation Overlord, was an operational level plan.

Strategic Level

Thirdly, there is the strategic level of warfare. Over time there have been various definitions and subsets of this overarching term. There has been "Grand Strategy" and "National Strategy" and "Military Strategy," all of which address slightly different aspects of the same general concept. This level concerns the planning and conduct of the war at the highest levels. Strategic plans aim for objectives that lead directly to, or at least significantly toward, peace. In other words, these plans seek to answer the question, "How will we win this war?" It is easier to understand strategic concepts not by assigning a force level as a definition, but by understanding the level at which decisions occur. Within the U.S. Army, strategic level decisions occur at the highest level headquarters in the field, most often in conjunction and with the approval of the National Command Authority. This is the echelon that approves changes in force structure.

 

Strategic decisions also determine the allocation of portions of national resources. Decisions about production of material and allocations of raw material and personnel occur at this level. Strategy plans lay out what the lower level campaign objectives should be, allocate forces, and choose the "theaters" in which campaigns occur. The decision that the primary invasion of Occupied Europe in 1944 would take place at Normandy (as opposed to southern France, on the coast of Germany, or up from Italy and around or through the Alps) was a strategic-level decision. The decision to defeat Germany first, and then Japan, might also be considered strategic in nature. Decisions regarding the allocation of resources available to the nation ("Do we build 10,000 tanks and 2,000 planes and 100 ships, or should we devote our industrial base to making 3,000 ships and 1,000 tanks and 500 planes?") are strategic in that they indirectly determine the course and direction of the lower levels of warfare. You cannot fight a land war without land forces, and you cannot win at sea without ships. But you can never have all the things that the different services want, so choices have to be made, and these decisions, by their nature, are strategic.

Most Popular

Political Level

Finally, as I mentioned, there is the political level of warfare. In our society, the civilian government retains control over decisions to go to war, whom to fight, and with whom to ally.

  Decisions at this level involve the interrelationships between allies, decisions regarding the factors of production, the national will, and societal issues. And it is here that another profession holds great sway, one that operates in the realm of influencing civilians. Here, one of the most critical tools—"weapon" in all but name—is the power which is held by the press, by reporters.
 

Obviously, all four levels are interrelated. There was no way to avoid that in the 20th Century, and probably less so in the 21st.

 A political decision may directly result in a tactical engagement and even have bearing upon the conduct of that engagement. For example, and to return to our Normandy example, it was a political decision made at the War Department that resulted in a new rule that pulled sole surviving siblings out of combat zones. (Yes, Saving Private Ryan is at least partially based upon a true story.)

A political decision about something like Rules of Engagement or a desire not to seem too militaristic—such as the idea not to send U.S. armored vehicles to Somalia early on—can also have an effect on the nature of these fights. The reverse may also occur; for example, tactical events in South Vietnam pushed President Nixon towards a political decision to conduct bombing operations over Hanoi and Haiphong in North Vietnam. Cross level influence is even more common between adjoining levels, but, in general, these distinctions remain valid as mental constructs with which we may subdivide war for the purpose of discussion, decipher the news, and deconstruct the candidates' statements. The lines between these divisions may blur along the boundaries; this is to be expected.

 The separation between tactical and strategic warfare might become confused because these lines depend upon numerous factors, such as forces in theater and the geographic scale of the theater itself. Yet for our purposes, these divisions serve as an adequate starting point.
 

Now, for some examples of how terms like "Strategy" can be misused.
 

Donald Trump is often cited by journalists for having an ISIS "Strategy." But what you see, when you look at any of his actual statements, is not a "Strategy" linking Ends, Ways, and Means, but instead a grocery list of things that he thinks should be done. Most of it is quite tactical in nature. A grocery list of military buzzwords does not a strategy make.

 Journalists should know better, because words mean things.
 

Jeb Bush is even more egregious in that he himself uses the word "Strategy" over and over again, without apparently any actual idea about what the term might mean. Here you see him decrying the current President for a "lack of strategy" without ever actually explaining what he means, either in his critique or in his use of the term. Straight from Fox and Friends:

"What I would do is to do what I proposed two months ago at the Reagan Library, which is to defeat ISIS, and to defeat Assad, to bring stability because it's in our national security interest to do it…We don't have a strategy right now. This president is incrementally getting us into a quagmire without having a strategy to defeat ISIS."

We could go on, but now at least you have some ammo of your own to help you knock down the easy targets.

 

 

STRATEGY : List of Military Strategies and Concepts

SOURCE:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_strategies_and_concepts

      List of Military Strategies and Concepts

Main article: Military strategy

 

 

 

 

               CLICK  THE  LETTERING IN

 

                         INK BLUE

 

      TO OPEN FURTHER REFERENCES ON

 

                  THE CLIKED SUBJECT

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Part of a series about
War
History                                    [show] Prehistoric Ancient Medieval Early modern Industrial Modern Fourth-generation warfare
Battlespace                          [show] Air Cyber Information Land Sea Space
Weapons                                [show] Armor Artillery Biological Cavalry Chemical Conventional Cyber Electronic Infantry Nuclear Psychological Unconventional
Tactics                                      [show] Aerial Battle Cavalry Charge Counter-attack Counter-insurgency Cover Foxhole Guerrilla warfare Morale Siege Swarming Tactical objective Trench warfare
Operational                         [show] Blitzkrieg Deep battle Maneuver warfare Operational manoeuvre group
Strategy                                  [show] Attrition Counter-offensive Deception Defensive Goal Naval Offensive
Grand strategy                 [show] Containment Economic warfare Limited war Military science Philosophy of war Strategic studies Total war
Organization                      [show] Command and control Doctrine Education and training Engineers Intelligence Ranks Staff Technology and equipment
Logistics                                 [show] Materiel Supply chain management
Related                        [show] Asymmetric warfare Broken-Backed War Theory Cold war Deterrence theory Irregular warfare Law of war Mercenary Military campaign Military operation Network-centric warfare Operations research Principles of war Proxy war Religious war Slavery Theater War crimes War film War games War novel Wartime sexual violence World war
Lists                                            [show] Battles Military occupations Operations Sieges War crimes Wars Weapons Writers
v t e

This article is a list of military strategies and concepts that are commonly recognized and referenced. Military strategies are methods of arranging and maneuvering large bodies of military forces during armed conflicts.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Contents

 [hide] 

• 1 Offensive strategies
• 2 Defensive strategies
• 3 Strategic concepts
• 4 See also
• 5 References
• 6 External links

 

Offensive strategies[edit]

• Air superiority – Essential to a successful air campaign. It is achieved by 1) mastery of the air, 2) attacking the means of production, 3) maintain battle ourselves, 4) prevent the enemy from battle
• Attrition warfare – A strategy of wearing down the enemy to the point of collapse through continuous loss of personnel and material. Used to defeat enemies with low resources and high morale.
• Bait and bleed – to induce rival states to engage in a protracted war of attrition against each other "so that they bleed each other white", similar to the concept of divide and conquer
• Battle of annihilation – The goal of destroying the enemy military in a single planned pivotal battle
• Bellum se ipsum alet – A strategy of feeding and supporting an army with the potentials of occupied territories
• Blitzkrieg – An attack that uses concentrated force and rapid speed to break through enemy lines, named after the German World War II strategy meaning Lightning War
• Blockade / Siege / Investment – An attempt to cut off food, supplies, war material or communications from a particular area by force, usually taking place by sea
• Clear and hold – A counter-insurgency strategy
• Coercion – Compelling the enemy to involuntarily behave in a certain way by targeting the leadership, national communications, or political-economic centers
• Command of the sea – The naval equivalent of air superiority
• Counter-offensive – A strategic offensive taking place after the enemy's front line troops and reserves have been exhausted, and before the enemy has had the opportunity to assume new defensive positions. Tactic is usually implemented through surging at the enemy after their attack.
• Counterforce – A strategy used in nuclear warfare of targeting military infrastructure (as opposed to civilian targets)
• Countervalue – The opposite of counterforce; targeting of enemy cities and civilian populations. Used to distract the enemy.
• Decapitation – Achieving strategic paralysis by targeting political leadership, command and control, strategic weapons, and critical economic nodes
• Deception – A strategy that seeks to deceive, trick, or fool the enemy and create a false perception in a way that can be leveraged for a military advantage
• Denial – A strategy that seeks to destroy the enemy's ability to wage war
• Distraction – An attack by some of the force on one or two flanks, drawing up to a strong frontal attack by the rest of the force
• Encirclement – Both a strategy and tactic designed to isolate and surround enemy forces
• Ends, Ways, Means, Risk – Strategy is much like a three legged stool of ends, ways, means balanced on a plane of varying degree of risk
• Enkulette – A strategy used often in the jungle that aims at attacking the enemy from behind.
• Exhaustion – A strategy that seeks to erode the will or resources of a country
• Feint – To draw attention to another point of the battle where little or nothing is going on
• Flanking maneuver – Involves attacking the opponent from the side, or rear
• Guerrilla tactics – Involves ambushes on enemy troops. Usually used by insurgency.
• Heavy force – A counterinsurgency strategy that seeks to destroy an insurgency with overwhelming force while it is still in a manageable state
• Human wave attack – An unprotected frontal attack where the attacker tries to move as many combatants as possible into engaging close range combat with the defender
• Incentive – A strategy that uses incentives to gain cooperation
• Indirect approach – Dislocation is the aim of strategy. Direct attacks almost never work, one must first upset the enemy's equilibrium, fix weakness and attack strength, Seven rules of strategy: 1) adjust your ends to your means, 2) keep your object always in mind, 3) choose the line of the least expectation, 4) exploit the line of least resistance, 5) take the line of operations which offers the most alternatives, 6) ensure both plans and dispositions are flexible, 7) do not throw your weight into an opponent while he is on guard, 8) do not renew an attack along the same lines if an attack has failed
• Interior lines – Placing ones forces in between the enemy forces and attacking each in turn in order to allow ones forces to have better communications and allows one to mass all of ones forces against a part of the enemies
• Limited war – A war in which the survival of a nation is not at stake
• Penetration – A direct attack through enemy lines, then an attack on the rear once through
• Periclean strategy – The two basic principles of the "Periclean Grand Strategy" were the rejection of appeasement (in accordance with which he urged the Athenians not to revoke the Megarian Decree) and the avoidance of overextension
• Persisting strategy – A strategy that seeks to destroy the means by which the enemy sustains itself
• Pincer ambush – A "U"-shaped attack with the sides concealed and the middle held back until the enemy advances, at which point the concealed sides ambush them
• Pincer maneuver – Allowing the enemy to attack the center, sometimes in a charge, then attacking the flanks of the charge
• Punishment – A strategy that seeks to push a society beyond its economic and physiological breaking point
• Rapid Decisive Operations – Compelling the adversary to undertake certain actions or denying the adversary the ability to coerce or attack others.
• Raiding – Attacking with the purpose of removing the enemy's supply or provisions
• Refusing the flank – Putting the minimal number of troops required to hold out against the enemy's attack while the rest of the military launches a counterattack through the enemy's flank
• Separation of insurgents – A counterinsurgency strategy should first seek to separate the enemy from the population, then deny the enemy reentry, and finally execute long enough to deny the insurgent access
• Scorpion attack – A pincer attack that is supplemented by an air strike
• Shape, Clear, Hold, Build – The counterinsurgency theory that states the process of winning and insurgency is shape, clear, hold, build
• Siege – Continuous attack by bombardment on a fortified position, usually by artillery
• Shock and awe – A military doctrine using overwhelming power to try and achieve rapid dominance over the enemy
• Swarming – Military swarming involves the use of a decentralized force against an opponent, in a manner that emphasizes mobility, communication, unit autonomy and coordination/synchronization.
• Theater strategy – Concepts and courses of action directed toward securing the objectives of national and multinational policies and strategies through the synchronized and integrated employment of military forces and other instruments of national power
• Total war – War in which a nation's survival is at stake
• Troop surge – deploying a large number of troops into theatre in order to overcome resistance
• Turning maneuver – An attack that penetrates the enemy's flank, then curls into its rear to cut it off from home
• Win without fighting – Sun Tzu argued that a brilliant general was one that could win without fighting

Defensive strategies[edit]

• Boxing maneuver – A strategy used to "box in" and force an attack on all sides at once
• Choke point – A use of strategic geography, usually in a narrow area, intended to concentrate the enemy into a confined area where the defender can maximize his forces
• Defence in depth – A strategy to delay rather than prevent the advance of the attackers by buying time and causing additional casualties by yielding space so that the momentum of the attack is lost and the attacking force can be attacked on its flanks
• Fortification – A semi-permanent or permanent defensive structure that gives physical protection to a military unit
• Fabian strategy – Wearing down the enemy by using attrition warfare and indirection, while avoiding pitched battles or frontal assaults. Named after Quintus Fabius Maximus Verrucosus in his defense against Carthage. See Pyrrhic warfare
• Military district – An area controlled by a military force, for administrative purposes rather than combat. Also known as Wehrkreis in German
• Scorched earth – Destroying anything that might be of use to the enemy while retreating, or advancing
• Turtling – Continuous reinforcement of the military front until it has reached its full strength, then an attack with the now-superior force
• Withdrawal – A retreat of forces while maintaining contact with the enemy

Strategic concepts[edit]

• Center of gravity (military) – The hub of all power and movement on which everything depends, the point at which all energies should be directed
• Decisive point – A geographic place, specific key event, critical system, or function that allows commanders to gain a marked advantage over an enemy and greatly influence the outcome of an attack
• DIME(FIL) – The elements of national power diplomacy, information, military, and economics, often included are financial, intelligence, and law enforcement see MIDLIFE
• Expediency – War is a matter of expedients – von Moltke
• Fog, friction, chance – War is characterized by fog, friction, and chance
• Golden Bridge – To leave an opponent an opportunity to withdraw in order to not force them to act out of desperation – Sun Tzu
• Iron Calculus of War – Resistance = Means x Will – Clausewitz
• MIDLIFE – The elements of national power diplomacy, information, military, and economics, often included are financial, intelligence, and law enforcement, see DIME(FIL)
• Moral ascendancy – Moral force is the trump card for any military event because as events change the human elements of war remain unchanged – Du Piq
• OODA loop – Decision-making occurs in a recurring cycle of observe-orient-decide-act. An entity (whether an individual or an organization) that can process this cycle quickly, observing and reacting to unfolding events more rapidly than an opponent, can thereby "get inside" the opponent's decision cycle and gain the advantage – Boyd
• Paradoxical nature – The nature of strategy is a paradoxical and does not follow a linear pattern – Luttwak
• Positive ends – The possibility of taking advantage of a new security environment to create conditions for long-term peace – Wass de Czege
• Primary Trinity – (1) primordial violence, hatred, and enmity; (2) the play of chance and probability; and (3) war's element of subordination to rational policy – Clausewitz
  • Secondary Trinity – People, Army, and Government – Clausewitz
• Principles of war:
  • Objective (Direct every military operation towards a clearly defined, decisive, and attainable objective)
  • Offensive (Seize, retain, and exploit the initiative)
  • Mass (Concentrate combat power at the decisive place and time)
  • Economy of Force (Allocate minimum essential combat power to secondary efforts)
  • Maneuver (place the enemy in a disadvantageous position through the flexible application of combat power)
  • Unity of Command (For every Objective, ensure Unity of effort under one responsible commander)
  • Security (Never permit the enemy to acquire an unexpected advantage)
  • Surprise (Strike the enemy at a time, at a place, or in a manner for which he is unprepared)
  • Simplicity (Prepare clear, uncomplicated plans and clear, concise orders to ensure thorough understanding) – US Army FM 3.0
• Systems approach – Nation-states operate like biological organisms composed of discrete systems. These systems included: leadership, organic essentials, infrastructure, population, and the military – Warden
• Tipping point – The point at which "the momentum for change becomes unstoppable." – Gladwell
• VUCA – Volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity characterize the strategic environment – U.S. Army War College
• Weinberger-Powell Doctrine – A list of questions have to be answered affirmatively before military action is taken by the United States:
  • Is a vital national security interest threatened?
  • Do we have a clear attainable objective?
  • Have the risks and costs been fully and frankly analyzed?
  • Have all other non-violent policy means been fully exhausted?
  • Is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement?
  • Have the consequences of our action been fully considered?
  • Is the action supported by the American people?
  • Do we have genuine broad international support?

See also[edit]

• List of established military terms
• List of military tactics
• Military science
• Military strategy
• Military tactics
• Tactical formation
• Sun Tzu and The Art of War
• Thirty-Six Stratagems

References[edit]

Notes

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (May 2016) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

External links[edit]

• Strategic Theories and Concepts
• Siege

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_military_strategies_and_concepts&oldid=732603766"

Categories:

• Military strategy