Just as a carpenter or plumber is incapable of effectively working without the right tools for the job at hand, a military professional will be unable to critically analyze military theories and campaigns without some tools which enhance his ability to think critically. This lesson will focus on three tools which have proven very effective when delving into the "arts" side of the military arts and sciences. By thoroughly understanding these tools and properly applying these analysis tools (along with any others deemed useful), one will be able to fully appreciate the theoretical concepts introduced in the remaining lessons of the War Theory course.

CLAUSEWITZIAN CRITICAL ANALYSIS

Clausewitz recognized that successful military leaders possessed a thorough understanding of warfare obtained through a combination of personal experience and the study of historical campaigns. In order to provide some structure to the latter, he developed a 3-step critical analysis process which provides a useful format for assessing and discussing military theory and operations.

FUQ. What are the three steps are required for a Clausewitzian critical analysis?

DISCUSSION. According to Clausewitz, when conducting an analysis, one must first identify pertinent facts. One must then determine the root causes surrounding those facts. and, finally, suggest other, better alternatives. In other words, the three step process is:

STEP 1. Discover and establish the facts (the "what happened")

-heavily relies upon history

-a thorough understanding of the context in which the event occurred is critical (key contextual and operational art elements are discussed later) -

STEP 2. Trace effects (the facts) back to their root causes (the "why")

-be aware of multiple "causes" for a single effect

-thorough analysis will usually dictate that one progress through more than a single cause-effect "level".

STEP 3. Propose alternatives (the "how better").

-critics must recognize that in hindsight they will have a more thorough understanding of some aspects of events than the commander at the time(especially their outcomes), while having less understanding of others

-any alternatives must be feasible

--must be realistic for the times (e.g. technological capabilities)

-- must consider the contextual elements and operational elements of the period

-it is possible that better alternatives may not exist

FOQ. What modifications are necessary to apply the process to military theories?

DISCUSSION. The modification is relatively simple and straightforward. In Step 1, rather than identifying the salient facts surrounding an historical event, one would identify the key concept concepts in a body of theory he wished to analyze. In Step 2, the critic would seek to establish cause and effect relationships suggesting why the theorist came to adopt certain concepts. Step 3 would then comprise suggesting modifications to the concepts. While the critic must be aware of the context of the times in which the theory being evaluated was developed, some (like Jomini and Clausewitz who will be briefly discussed in the next lesson) would argue that one of the attributes of correct theory is its timelessness - its enduring value irrespective of time, place, and technology.

FOQ. What utility does this thought process have to the military commander?

DISCUSSION. Critical analysis provides the commander with an organized way to derive lessons learned from campaigns, and assess the validity of theoretical concepts. It is a core decision making tool. By using the critical analysis process, a commander can better understand the relationship between seemingly unrelated events, and can identify general trends which permit him to more accurately predict future actions and the ramifications. Lastly, the critical analysis process trains the mind to rapidly sift through a tremendous amount of often conflicting data and act on only that information which is important. When application of the critical analysis process becomes second nature, a commander's battlefield decision-making will be more rapid, sound, and decisive.

OTHER CRITICAL ANALYSIS TOOLS.

There are several other "tools" which, if used in conjunction with the Clausewitzian critical analysis process, will result in an even more refined analysis of military campaigns or theories.

Contextual and Operational Art Elements

Successful commanders possess complete situational awareness and a comprehensive understanding of their capabilities and limitations. Consideration of contextual and operational are elements provides a framework to develop this awareness and understanding. In applying the contextual and operational elements discussed in the Weaver/Pollock reading, it is essential that one understand two important points. First, the lists are not necessarily all-inclusive. Individuals may find it useful to add categories to either or both lists. Second, one can make a strong case for identifying some categories (e.g. leadership) as both contextual and operational art elements. Neither modifying lists nor including categories under both headings is "wrong" provided doing so enhances quality of the analysis.

LOQ. According to the Weaver article, what are contextual and operational art elements?

DISCUSSION. Contextual elements are those elements that affect military operations--but are usually outside the influence of the military commander. They define the environment in which a commander must operate, and can have either positive or negative effect on his ability to execute his mission. In essence, contextual elements are what the commander is stuck with, or what's above his paygrade. While he can not affect the conditions imposed upon him by these elements, the better a commander understands the conditions in which he must operate, the better he will be able to employ his forces.

Operational Art Elements are those elements which can be influenced by the commander to varying degrees. A commander possessing a thorough understanding of his capabilities and weaknesses can manipulate operational art elements to minimize the adverse effects or maximize the advantages presented by the contextual elements discussed above.

LOQ. What are the six contextual and six operational art elements and what are some considerations associated with these elements?

DISCUSSION. Contextual Elements include the following:

Politics The form of government (i.e. dictatorship) & its stability

--can be de facto or de jure

--may or may not be influenced by the will of the people

--may or may not be based upon a balance of power

International Political and economic linkages to other nations

Relationships --who relies upon whom and for what?

--alliance structures and the strength of these alliances

--world outlook (e.g. inward, outward, expansionistic) --world opinion

Sociocutural -Societal norms, influences, religions, cultural biases .

Norms --accepted behaviors and standards of conduct

--persuasiveness within the government and population

--technological advancement

--cultural proclivities with other nation/states & cultural bonds

--"military culture" vs. "civilian culture"

--nationalism

--demographics

Physical Weather patterns, geography, distances, location,

Environment --extreme climate?

---effects on personnel and equipment

-- ability to control the "battlespace"

---ability to/speed of maneuver

---ability to fully employ weapons systems

Leadership Personalities, Formal and Informal leaders & decision- makers

--form of leadership (e.g. totalitarian, democratic)

--leadership style: autocratic, laissez faire, consensus builder

--informal bonds and influences

--other governmental institutions

--established chain of succession or hierarchy of command

--personal biases and beliefs of the leaders

Economics Market forces, manufacturing capabilities, trade deficit/surplus --price of waging war / maintaining a standing fielded force

--price free trade blocks & cartels

--economic reliance on others; ability to blockade or be blockaded

-- standard of living

-- trade deficit

-- natural resources

Operational Art Elements

Logistics The ability to supply and sustain forces in the field

--includes national infrastructure, personnel, and factories

--includes the manpower of the nation

---factory workers, farmers, scientists & armed forces

--ability to train and equip the forces

--transportation

--communications

Technology Incorporation of advanced technologies in existing systems, appropriate doctrine to permit its leveraged usage on the battlefield

--R&D capability

--production capability

Information - Knowledge of enemy

--existing knowledge of enemy capabilities, limitations, and intentions

--intelligence gathering capability

Targeting - Selection of target & optimum method of affecting it

Science --the heart of the operational art

--effects-based

---strategic, operational, or tactical?

---psychological or physical?

---required duration, level of destruction, size of area

Deception Keeping your intentions from your opponents while exploiting their intentions

--used at strategic, operational, and tactical levels --employs active or passive means

Measures of Knowing when you have succeeded or failed.

Merit --based upon objectives

--need to identify concrete indicators upon which to base your measurements

Military Technical Revolutions/Revolutions in Military Affairs

Tremendously one-sided wars have been relatively infrequent yet not uncommon events in the history of warfare. Krepinevich's concept of the military technical revolution (MTR) provides a plausible explanation for these apparent anomalies. An understanding of and appreciation for the concept of the MTR permits one to better leverage his technological and organizational strengths while minimizing his vulnerabilities. The side which best leverages technology will likely prevail in "lopsided" wars. Consideration of MTRs also provides one with a useful perspective from which to analyze historical military campaigns. Was the outcome of an event significantly affected by one side's having progressed through a given MTR than its opponent? If so, how was technology leveraged, and with what result?

While Krepinevich only uses the term "Military Technical Revolution" to describe his concept, it is useful to distinguish between the "instigating forces" which drive the incorporation of new technologies into military systems. We will therefore add the term "Revolution in Military Affairs" (RMA) to our lexicon. While numerous references will only refer to MTRs, we use that term only in discussing revolutionary change in military technology resulting from the direct application or modification of technology originally designed for non-military purposes. The term RMA, on the other hand, will be used to refer to revolutionary change in military technology resulting from the application of technology developed in response to a previously identified military need. A simple way to think of this distinction is as follows: In MTRs, technology inspires military application; in RMAs military requirements inspire technological development.

LOQ. Based on your Krepinevich reading, what are the typical elements of an MTR [and RMA]?

DISCUSSION. Typically, four elements comprise both MTR and RMA. These are:

1. New science / technology

2. Application of that technology in a device of military utility

3. Tactics and or operational concepts that best exploit that device

4. Organizations that facilitate that exploitation

FUQ. How does the existence of an MTR or RMA affect battlefield outcomes?

DISCUSSION. While it is theoretically possible for only one side in a conflict to be involved with an MTR or RMA, the Information Age makes such a situation increasingly unlikely. Therefore, the successful combatant will be the one whose MTR or RMA has reached the greatest level of "maturity". A fully mature MTR or RMA is one which has fully developed all four of the above-specified steps. From an MTR/RMA standpoint, the degree of "lopsidedness" in a war will reflect the difference in the levels of MTR/RMA maturity between combatants.

An Example of a MTR/RMA is provided below:

1. Science/Technology -- Wright Brothers' "Flyer"

The combination of the internal combustion engine , advanced aerodynamics, and external catapults resulted in a properly designed, manned, heavier than air machine which flew under its own power.

2. Application -- Reconnaissance and Air Interdiction

The Wright brothers toured Europe in 1909 and licensed manufacture of their aircraft to an Italian company, which in turn sold aircraft to the Italian Army. These aircraft were employed in the Italo-Turkish War of 1912 where they supported the Army by providing aerial reconnaissance. On their forth mission, they dropped grenades on Turkish positions in the first air interdiction mission. European nations looked on and recognized the military potential of the airpower.

3. New tactics/operational concept - Counter Air, Interdiction, Strategic Bombing

By 1916, the concepts of air superiority and interdiction were developed along with the tactics to execute them. By 1918, the concepts and tactics associated with close air support, and massed aerial operations had also matured. At the close of W.W.I, most of the major roles currently executed by the USAF had been developed along with their associated tactics. During the interwar years many people developed predictive theories on the use of Air Forces. Building on these predictive theories, the Air Corps Tactical School (ACTS) specifically developed the "industrial web" concept in support of strategic bombardment. The ideas of three highly influential "air pioneers" and the ACTS will be studied in TH 508.

4. Organizational impacts - Establishment of Independent Air Forces

The USAAF was given partial autonomy over the employment of US Army Air Forces in 1935 with the establishment of GHQ AF and full operational autonomy in 1942 after the Operation TORCH debacle in North Africa. After 1942, independent air operations resulted in significant improvements in the employment of airpower at the strategic and operational levels. Strategic bombardment took the war to the enemy's heartland, and while continuing to provide support to major ground operations.

CONCLUSION.

The ability to think critically is essential for military leaders in an increasingly complex world. Understanding and applying Clausewitz's critical analysis process, contextual and operational art elements, and the concept of Military Technical Revolutions/Revolutions in Military Affairs enhance this vital skill.