# Patterns of Conflict John R. Boyd Edited by Chet Richards and Chuck Spinney Produced and designed by Ginger Richards For information on this edition, please see the last page. ![](_page_1_figure_1.jpeg) *Figure (p. 1):* The image contains the logo for "DEFENSE AND THE NATIONAL INTEREST". It also shows the website "www.d-n-i.net" and the publication date "January 2007" with the page number "152". # Outline • Point of departure • Historical snapshots • Categories of conflict • Synthesis . Application • Wrap-up • Epilogue • Sources # Focus and direction ## Mission • To make manifest the nature of moral-mental-physical conflict • To discern a pattern for successful operations • To help generalize tactics and strategy • To find a basis for grand strategy ## Intent • To unveil the character of conflict, survival, and conquest # Point of departure Air-to-air # Generalization • Need fighter that can both lose energy and gain energy more quickly while outturning an adversary. • In other words, suggests a fighter that can pick and choose engagement opportunities—yet has fast transient (“buttonhook”) characteristics that can be used to either force an overshoot by an attacker or stay inside a hard turning defender. # Idea expansion • Idea of fast transients suggests that, in order to win, we should operate at a faster tempo or rhythm than our adversaries—or, better yet, get inside adversary’s observation-orientation-decision-action time cycle or loop. • Why? Such activity will make us appear ambiguous (unpredictable) thereby generate confusion and disorder among our adversaries—since our adversaries will be unable to generate mental images or pictures that agree with the menacing as well as faster transient rhythm or patterns they are competing against. # Examples - Blitzkrieg vs. Maginot Line mentality (1940) • - F-86 vs. MiG-15 (1951-53) • - Israeli raid (1976) # New conception ## Action • Exploit operations and weapons that: – Generate a rapidly changing environment (quick/clear observations, orientation and decisions, fast-tempo, fast transient maneuvers, quick kill) – Inhibit an adversary’s capacity to adapt to such an environment (cloud or distort his observations, orientation, and decisions and impede his actions) ## Idea • Simultaneously compress own time and stretch-out adversary time to generate a favorable mismatch in time/ability to shape and adapt to change ## Goal Collapse adversary’s system into confusion and disorder causing him to over and under react to activity that appears simultaneously menacing as well as ambiguous, chaotic, or misleading. # A-to-A and A-to-G Recipe for generating confusion and disorder ## Observations • Quick/clear scanning sensors • Suppressed/distorted signatures ## Activity • Fire – Quick shoot fire control systems and high speed weapons • Movement – High speed (supercruise) – Rapid energy gain and rapid energy loss coupled with high turn rates and low turn radii – High pitch rates/high roll rates/high yaw rates coupled with ease of control # Historical snapshots # Human nature ## Goal • Survive, survive on own terms, or improve our capacity for independent action. The competition for limited resources to satisfy these desires may force one to: • Diminish adversary’s capacity for independent action, or deny him the opportunity to survive on his own terms, or make it impossible for him to survive at all. ## Implication • Life is conflict, survival, and conquest. # Comment In addressing any questions about conflict, survival, and conquest one is naturally led to the Theory of evolution by natural selection and the conduct of war since both treat conflict, survival, and conquest in a very fundamental way. In this regard, many sources (a few on natural selection and many on war) are reviewed; many points of view are exposed. # Impression • In examining these many points of view one is bombarded with the notion that: – It is advantageous to possess a variety of responses that can be applied rapidly to gain sustenance, avoid danger, and diminish adversary’s capacity for independent action. – The simpler organisms—those that make-up man as well as man working with other men in a higher level context—must cooperate or, better yet, harmonize their activities in their endeavors to survive as an organic synthesis. – To shape and adapt to change one cannot be passive; instead one must take the initiative. • Put more simply and directly: the above comments leave one with the impression that variety/rapidity/harmony/initiative (and their interaction) seem to be key qualities that permit one to shape and adapt to an ever- changing environment. • With this impression in mind together with our notion of getting inside an adversary’s O-O-D-A loop we will proceed in our historical investigation. # Historical pattern Sun Tzu The Art of War c. 400 B.C. ## Theme • Harmony and trust • Justice and well being • Inscrutability and enigma • Deception and subversion • Rapidity and fluidity • Dispersion and concentration • Surprise and shock ## Desired outcome • Subdue enemy without fighting - Avoid protracted war ## Strategy • Probe enemy’s organization and dispositions to unmask his strengths, weaknesses, patterns of movement and intentions. • “Shape” enemy’s perception of world to manipulate his plans and actions. • Attack enemy’s plans as best policy. Next best disrupt his alliances. Next best attack his army. Attack cities only when there is no alternative. • Employ cheng and ch'i maneuvers to quickly and unexpectedly hurl strength against weaknesses. # Historical pattern ## Early commanders • Alexander • Hannibal • Belisarius • Jenghis Khan - Tamerlane Action Cheng and ch'i* ## Impression • Early commanders seem consistent with ideas of Sun Tzu • Western commanders more directly concerned with winning the battle • Eastern commanders closer to Sun Tzu in attempting to shatter adversary prior to battle * Cheng/ch'i maneuver schemes were employed by early commanders to expose adversary vulnerabilities and weaknesses (a la cheng) for exploitation and decisive stroke (via ch'i). # Historical pattern Keeping in mind the ideas of Sun Tzu and our comments about early commanders, let’s take a look at an early tactical theme and some battle (grand tactical) situations to gain a feel for the different ways that the cheng/ch'i game has been (and can be) played. # Historical pattern ## Tactical theme (from about 300 B.C. to 1400 A.D.) • Light troops (equipped with bows, javelins, light swords, etc.) perform reconnaissance, screening, and swirling hit-and-run actions to: – Unmask enemy dispositions and activities. – Cloud/distort own dispositions and activities. – Confuse, disorder enemy operations. • Heavy troops (equipped with lances, bows, swords, etc.) protected by armor and shields: – Charge and smash thinned-out/scattered or disordered/bunched-up enemy formations generated by interaction with light troops; or – Menace enemy formations to hold them in tight, or rigid, arrays thereby make them vulnerable to missiles of swirling light troops. • Light and heavy troops in appropriate combination pursue, envelop, and mop-up isolated remnants of enemy host. ## Idea • Employ maneuver action by light troops with thrust action of heavy troops to confuse, break-up, and smash enemy formations. # Battle of Marathon September 12, 490 B.C. ![](_page_18_figure_2.jpeg) *Figure (p. 18):* This image depicts a battlefield scene with the "Greeks" in blue rectangles and arrows, and the "Persian Army" represented by black horizontal lines and spikes. The "Persian Fleet" is shown at the bottom. The diagram illustrates a movement of Greek forces, with blue arrows indicating flanking maneuvers around the Persian Army. The date "September 12, 490 B.C." suggests this is a representation of the Battle of Marathon. # Battle of Leuctra ~July 6, 371 B.C. ![](_page_19_figure_3.jpeg) *Figure (p. 19):* This image depicts a battle formation with "Spartans" at the top and "Thebans" at the bottom. The Spartans are represented by black rectangles and arrows, while the Thebans are represented by blue rectangles and arrows. The blue arrows show the Theban forces advancing and attacking the Spartan lines, with some arrows curving to indicate flanking maneuvers. Small squares with black and white or blue and white halves likely represent different units or formations within each army. The date "6, 371 B.C." suggests this illustration pertains to a historical battle from that era, likely the Battle of Leuctra. # V. YE. Savkin – # The Basic Principles of Operational Art and Tactics – (1972) pages 7 and 203 ## Battle of Leuctra (371 B.C.) At this battle Frederick Engels (according to Savkin) credited Epaminondas for having first discovered and employed an unequal or uneven distribution of forces across a front as basis to concentrate forces for the main attack at the decisive point. # Battle of Arbela* October 1, 331 B.C. ![](_page_21_figure_4.jpeg) *Figure (p. 21):* | Unit | Positions | | -------- | ----------------------------------------------- | | Mazeus | 5 diagonal squares, 2 blank squares, 1 diagonal square | | Darius | 6 blank squares, 3 diagonal squares, 2 blank squares | | Bessus | 6 diagonal squares, 4 blank squares | | Chariots | 5 blank squares | | Alexander| 7 blue squares | | Parmenio | 2 blue squares, 1 white and blue flag, 1 blue rectangle | | Companions | 1 white and blue flag, 2 blue squares | | Reserve Line | 1 blue rectangle, 1 white arrow with blue outline, 2 white squares | The image depicts a battle formation, likely from ancient times, with different units positioned. The key entities are: Mazeus, Darius, Bessus, Parmenio, Alexander, Companions, and Chariots. The date is specified as October 1, 331 B.C. The battle is also known as the Battle of Gaugamela. Arrows indicate troop movements and engagements. Blue squares and rectangles likely represent one side's forces, while squares (some with diagonals) represent another. # Battle of Arbela (Phase II) ![](_page_22_figure_5.jpeg) *Figure (p. 22):* This is a battle map of the Battle of Arbela, Phase II. Key entities depicted: * **Alexander**: Leading the Macedonian forces. * **Parmenio**: Also part of the Macedonian forces. * **Darius**: Leading the Persian forces. * **Mazaeus**: Persian commander. * **Bessus**: Persian commander. * **Companions**: Macedonian elite cavalry. * **Reserve Line**: Macedonian reserve forces. The map illustrates troop movements and engagements, with blue shapes representing Macedonian units and white shapes representing Persian units. Arrows indicate the direction of movement and attacks. Notably, "Persians Flee" is indicated at the top of the map, suggesting a Persian retreat in those areas. # Battle of Cannae August 3, 216 B.C. ![](_page_23_figure_6.jpeg) *Figure (p. 23):* This image depicts the "Opening Phase" of a battle on August 3, 216 B.C. The key entities are: * **Romans:** Represented by black rectangles, arranged in a line with arrows indicating movement forward and flanking maneuvers. * **Hannibal:** Represented by blue rectangles, with a central formation and arrows suggesting movement and engagement. * **Afidus River:** A natural feature shown at the bottom of the image, likely a geographical marker for the battle. * **Markers:** Square icons with black and white sections and blue triangular sections, possibly representing units or strategic points, with blue arrows indicating movement. Opening Phase # Battle of Cannae ![](_page_24_figure_7.jpeg) *Figure (p. 24):* This image depicts the final phase of the Battle of Cannae. The key entities are the Roman forces, indicated by black curved shapes and labeled "Romans," and Hannibal's forces, represented by blue shapes and labeled "Hannibal." Arrows indicate troop movements. The Afidus River is shown at the bottom. The diagram illustrates Hannibal's forces encircling the Roman army. Final Phase # Impression • Battles of Marathon, Leuctra, Arbela, and Cannae emphasize an unequal distribution as basis for local superiority and decisive leverage to collapse adversary resistance. ## on the other hand • The discussion (so far) provides little insight on how these battle arrangements and follow-on maneuvers play upon moral factors such as doubt, fear, anxiety, etc. # Historical pattern Chingis Khan and the Mongols ## Key asymmetries - Superior mobility - Superior communications - Superior intelligence - Superior leadership ## Theme • Widely separated strategic maneuvers, with appropriate stratagems, baited retreats, hard-hitting tactical thrusts, and swirling envelopments to uncover and exploit adversary vulnerabilities and weaknesses. ## Aim Conquest, as basis to create, preserve, and expand Mongol nation in conjunction with • Clever and calculated use of propaganda and terror to play upon adversary’s doubts, fears, and superstitions in order to undermine his resolve and destroy his will to resist. # Mongol strategic maneuver (1219-1220) ![](_page_27_figure_8.jpeg) *Figure (p. 27):* The image displays a map illustrating Mongol strategic maneuvers during 1219-1220. Key entities include the Caspian Sea, Aral Sea, Kizyl-Kum desert, and the Khawarizm State. Major cities indicated are Bokhara and Samarkand (located in modern Uzbekistan). The map shows the movement of Mongol forces led by Genghis Khan, Chagatai, Jochi, and Jebe, with blue arrows indicating their paths of advance. The Oxus River is also a prominent geographical feature shown. ## ? Raises nagging question ? Even though outnumbered, why were Mongols able to maneuver in widely scattered arrays without being defeated separately or in detail? # Historical patterns Chingis Khan and the Mongols ## Message • By exploiting superior leadership, intelligence, communications, and mobility as well as by playing upon adversary’s fears and doubts via propaganda and terror, Mongols operated inside adversary observation- orientation-decision-action loops. ## Result • Outnumbered Mongols created impressions of terrifying strength—by seeming to come out of nowhere yet be everywhere. ## hence, • Subversive propaganda, clever stratagems, fast breaking maneuvers, and calculated terror not only created vulnerabilities and weaknesses but also played upon moral factors that drain-away resolve, produce panic, and bring about collapse. # Battle of Leuthen ![](_page_30_figure_9.jpeg) *Figure (p. 30):* This image depicts a battle map from December 5, 1757, likely the Battle of Leuthen. **Key Entities and Actions:** * **Frederick:** Represents the Prussian forces, shown in blue, advancing from the west. * **Austrians:** Represented in gray, positioned with their main line near Leuthen and a reserve. They appear to be defending. * **Borna:** A location indicated to the northwest, where some initial Prussian movement is shown. * **Scheuberg Hill:** A geographical feature to the north, also a point of engagement. * **Leuthen:** A village to the east, a central point of the battle. * **Breslau:** A city to the east, indicating the general direction. * **Advance Guard:** A detachment of Frederick's forces positioned to the south, engaging the Austrian flank. * **Arrows:** Indicate troop movements and directions of attack. Blue arrows show Prussian movements, while gray arrows show Austrian movements and a dashed gray line represents the Austrian defensive position. * **Grid Symbols:** Likely represent villages or fortified positions. The map illustrates a strategic maneuver where Frederick's forces are shown outflanking the Austrian line, with a significant engagement occurring near Leuthen and a separate action by an Advance Guard. # Historical pattern ## 18th century theoreticians • Saxe • Bourcet • Guibert • Du Teil ## Theme • Plan with several branches • Mobility/fluidity of force • Cohesion • Dispersion and concentration • Operate on a line to threaten alternative objectives • Concentrate direct artillery fire on key points to be forced ## Action Napoleon was deeply influenced by the ideas of the above men. In early campaigns (as a general) he applied these ideas of ambiguity, deception, and rapid/easy movement to surprise and successively defeat fractions of superior forces. In later campaigns (as emperor) he relied increasingly on massed direct artillery fire, dense infantry columns, and heavy cavalry going against regions of strong, resistance—at an eventually crippling cost in casualties. American colonists, Spanish and Russian Guerrillas, in unexpected ways, used environmental background (terrain, weather, darkness, etc.) and mobility/fluidity as basis for dispersion and concentration to harass, confuse, and contribute toward the defeat of the British and French under Napoleon. # Historical pattern ## 18th century theoreticians • Saxe • Bourcet • Guibert • Du Teil ## Theme • Plan with several branches • Mobility/fluidity of force • Cohesion • Dispersion and concentration • Operate on a line to threaten alternative objectives • Concentrate direct artillery fire on key points to be forced ## Action Napoleon was deeply influenced by the ideas of the above men. In early campaigns (as a general) he exploited these ideas of variety and rapidity with harmony for ambiguity, deception, and rapid/easy movement in order to surprise and successively defeat fractions of superior forces. In later campaigns (as emperor) he exchanged variety and harmony for rigid uniformity via massed direct artillery fire, dense infantry columns, and heavy cavalry going against regions of strong resistance—that resulted in an ever higher and crippling cost in casualties. American colonists, Spanish and Russian guerrillas exploited variety and rapidity associated with environmental background (terrain, weather, darkness, etc.) and mobility/fluidity of small bands with harmony of common cause against tyranny/injustice as basis to harass, confuse, and contribute toward the defeat of the British and French under Napoleon. # Impression The ideas of Sun Tzu, Saxe, Bourcet, and Guibert seem to be at home with either regular or guerrilla warfare. # Historical pattern Napoleon’s art of war ## Revolutionary army gifts to Napoleon • Moral and physical energy of citizen- soldiers and new leaders generated by the revolution and magnified by successes against invading allied armies • Subdivision of army into smaller self- contained but mutually supporting units (divisions) • Ability to travel light and live-off countryside without extensive baggage, many supply wagons, and slow-moving resupply efforts • Rapid march associated with “120” instead of the standard “70” steps per minute • Discontinued adherence to 1791 Drill Regulations pertaining to the well regulated and stereotype use of column and line formations for movement and fighting ## Beneficial asymmetry • Mobility/fluidity of force dramatically better than that possessed by potential adversaries. ? Raises question ? How did Napoleon exploit this superior mobility/fluidity of force? # Historical pattern Napoleon’s art of war ## General features - Plan and resolution: Evolve plan with appropriate variations each of which correspond to probable or possible actions. Employ Intelligence/recce units (spies, agents, cavalry, etc.) in predetermined directions to eliminate or confirm hypotheses concerning enemy actions thereby reduce uncertainty and simplify own plans as well as uncover adversary plans and intentions. - Security: Generate misinformation, devise stratagems, and alter composition of major formations to confuse and baffle enemy agents, spies, etc. Employ screens of cavalry, infantry, or both and make rise of natural features such as terrain, weather, and darkness to mask dispositions and cloak movements against enemy observation. • Strategic dispersion and tactical concentration: Expand then contract intervals between force components in an irregular and rapid fashion to cloud/distort strategic penetration maneuvers yet quickly focus tactical effort for a convergent blow at the decisive point. • Vigorous offensive action: Seize initiative at the outset by attacking enemy with an ever- shifting kaleidoscope of (strategic) moves and diversions in order to upset his actions and unsettle his plans thereby psychologically unbalance him and keep initiative throughout. ## Strategic theme • Use unified (or single) line of operations as basis for mutual support between separated adjacent and follow-on units. • Menace (and try to seize) adversary communications to isolate his forces from outside support or reinforcement and force him to fight under unfavorable circumstances by the following actions: – Employ fraction of force to hold or divert adversary attention—by feints, demonstrations, pinning maneuvers, etc. – Exploit “exterior maneuvers” against exposed flanks or “interior maneuvers” thru a weak front to place (bulk of) forces in adversary’s flank and rear. • Set-up supporting “centers (bases) of operation” and alternative lines of communication and keep (at least some) safe and open as basis to maintain freedom of maneuver. Aim Destroy enemy army # Strategy of envelopment (idealized schematic) ## I. The Envelopment March ## II. The Reversed Front Battle ![](_page_36_figure_10.jpeg) *Figure (p. 36):* This image depicts a military battle plan, titled "The Reversed Front Battle." It illustrates troop movements and defensive positions. **Key Entities and Actions:** * **Cheng pinning force:** Blue rectangular units positioned on the left, indicating a force holding an enemy in place. * **Line of defense:** A wavy line separating forces, with gray rectangular units and triangular markers representing defensive positions. Gray arrows indicate movement along this line. * **ch'i maneuver force:** Blue rectangular units at the bottom, suggesting a flanking or deceptive movement. * **curtain of maneuver:** A broad horizontal line, likely representing a terrain feature or a broader strategic maneuver. * **cavalry screen:** Blue circular markers with flags, indicating a light, fast-moving force screening the main advance. * **maneuver:** A thick blue arrow showing the primary direction of attack or movement. * **strategic barrier:** A vertical line with black circular markers and white rectangular segments, representing a significant obstacle or fortified line. * **corps of observation:** A cluster of blue rectangular units to the right of the strategic barrier, indicating a force tasked with reconnaissance or delaying action. * **LOCs:** Dashed lines labeled "LOCs" (Lines of Communication) extend from the main battlefield, suggesting supply routes or strategic objectives. The overall scene suggests a pincer movement or envelopment strategy, with a pinning force holding the enemy on one side while a maneuver force attempts to bypass or attack from another direction, potentially through or around the strategic barrier. ![](_page_36_figure_11.jpeg) *Figure (p. 36):* This image is a strategic map depicting troop movements. Key entities and actions include: * **Pinning Force:** Blue rectangles and flags positioned on the left, engaging a "line of defense." * **Line of Defense:** A wavy line, occupied by gray rectangles representing defending forces. * **Main Attack:** Thick blue arrows indicate a primary assault by blue rectangles, targeting the center of the defense. * **Secondary Attack:** A blue arrow shows a flanking maneuver or diversionary attack to the north of the main attack. * **Strategic Barrier:** A series of black circles and lines representing a fortified position or obstacle. * **Corps of Observation:** A labeled area on the right, indicating a reserve or scouting force. * **Curtain of Maneuver:** A broad, open area below the main battlefield, suggesting a route for larger troop movements. * **Cavalry Screen:** Blue flags at the bottom, indicating a screening force, likely cavalry. * **Gray Arrows:** Indicate movements or actions of the defending forces. Source: David G. Chandler, Waterloo: The Hundred Days, 1980. # The strategy of central position ## (idealized schematic) ## I. Advance to Contact ## III. The Coup de Grace ![](_page_37_figure_12.jpeg) *Figure (p. 37):* The image depicts a military formation diagram. **Key Entities:** * **Bases:** Labeled "A" and "B", each with a surrounding circle and "LOC" (Line of Communication) indicated by dashed lines. * **Units:** Represented by squares with "XXX" or "XXXX" and one square with "N". Blue squares are in the foreground, and diamond shapes with "XXX" are further back. * **Cavalry Screen:** Labeled text indicating a "cavalry screen" consisting of small circles with flags and solid blue circles with flags. * **Movement:** Blue arrows indicate a split in movement from the center. **Context:** The diagram appears to illustrate a tactical scenario, possibly a battle plan or a description of troop positions. The text "II. The Double" and "III. The Coup de Grace" suggest this is part of a larger document or series of diagrams. ![](_page_37_figure_13.jpeg) *Figure (p. 37):* This is a battle diagram depicting two opposing forces, labeled "A" and "B". **Force A:** * Has a "base" location. * Consists of multiple units represented by diamond shapes with Xs inside and blue squares labeled "XXX". * Units are positioned near a "LOC" (Line of Communication). * Blue arrows indicate movement, with some units described as undertaking an "overnight forced march". **Force B:** * Has a "base" location. * Consists of multiple units represented by diamond shapes with Xs inside and blue squares labeled "XXX". * White arrows indicate movement away from Force B's position. * Blue arrows indicate an advance or engagement towards Force A's positions. * There are also flags, likely indicating control points or objectives. Battle ![](_page_37_figure_14.jpeg) *Figure (p. 37):* This image is a battle diagram. Key entities include two bases labeled "A" and "B," connected by a Line of Communication (LOC). There are several square symbols representing units, some with "XXX" or "XXXX" markings, and one labeled "N." Blue arrows indicate troop movements. Small flags and circles with flags suggest additional units or positions. The diagram is sourced from David G. Chandler's "Waterloo: The Hundred Days, 1980." Source: David G. Chandler, Waterloo: The Hundred Days, 1980. # Historical pattern Napoleon’s art of war ## Early tactics “The action was opened by a cloud of sharpshooters, some mounted, some on foot, who were sent forward to carry out a general rather than a minutely-regulated mission; they proceeded to harass the enemy, escaping from his superior numbers by their mobility, from the effect of his cannon by their dispersal. They were constantly relieved to ensure that the fire did not slacken, and they also received considerable reinforcement to increase their over-all effect … Once the chink in foe’s armour had been revealed … the horse artillery would gallop up and open fire with canister at close range. The attacking force would meantime be moving up in the indicated direction, the infantry advancing in column, the cavalry in regiments or squadrons, ready to make its presence felt anywhere or everywhere as required. Then, when the hail of enemy bullets or cannon balls began to slacken … The soldiers would begin to run forward, those in the front ranks crossing their bayonets, as the drums beat the charge; the sky would ring a thousand battle-cries constantly repeated: ## Later tactics “At the outset, a heavy bombardment would be loosed against the enemy formations, causing fearful losses if they failed to seek shelter, and generally lowering their power of resistance. Under cover of this fire, swarms of voltigeurs would advance to within musketry range and add a disconcerting ‘ nuisance’ element by sniping at officers and the like. This preliminary phase would be followed by a series of heavy cavalry and infantry attacks. The secret of these was careful timing and coordination. The first cavalry charges were designed to defeat the hostile cavalry and compel the enemy infantry to form squares”, thereby reduce fire in any one direction and enable the columns to get to close grips before the enemy could resume his linear formation. The infantry (deployed or not) and accompanying horse artillery would then blaze a gap in the enemy formation and finally the cavalry would sweep forward, again, to exploit the breakthrough. “En avant. En avant. Vive la Republique.” ## Essential point Early tactics, without apparent design, operate in a fluid, adaptable manner to uncover, expand and exploit adversary vulnerabilities and weaknesses while later tactics emphasize massed firepower and stereotyped formations working formally together to smash adversary strength. # Historical pattern Napoleon’s art of war ## Critique • Napoleon exploited ambiguity, deception, and mobility at the strategic level, whereas, • He increasingly emphasized formal battering ram methods and de-emphasized loose, irregular methods (e.g. skirmishers) at the tactics level—via a return to, and increasingly heavy-handed application of, the 1791 Drill Regulations. ## Why? • Napoleon emphasized the conduct of war from the top down. He created and exploited strategic success to procure grand tactical and tactical success. • To support his concept, he set up a highly centralized command and control system which, when coupled with essentially unvarying tactical recipes, resulted in strength smashing into strength by increasingly unimaginative, formalized, and predictable actions at lower and lower levels. ## Result Strategic maneuvers ambiguous and deceiving prior to tactical concentration; after concentration, “maneuvers” stereotyped and obvious. ## hence Tactical “maneuvers” could not easily procure the victory because of their obvious, predictable nature. # Which unveils ## The Napoleonic spirit Strategic “fog” followed by stereotyped and ruinous tactical assaults. # Historical pattern Carl von Clausewitz On War 1832 ## Character/nature of war • An act of policy to use violence to impose one’s will upon another • Duel or act of human interaction directed against an animate object that reacts • Uncertainty of information acts as an impediment to vigorous activity. • Psychological/moral forces and effects (danger, intelligence, emotional factors …) either impede or stimulate activity. • Friction (interaction of many factors, including those above) impedes activity. • Genius (harmonious balance of mind/temperament that permit one to overcome friction and excel at the complex activity of war) changes the nature and magnifies the scope of operations. ## Strategy • Exhaust enemy by influencing him to increase his expenditure of effort. • Seek out those centers of gravity upon which all power/movement depend and, if possible, trace them back to a single one. • Compress all effort, against those centers, into the fewest possible actions • Subordinate all minor, or secondary, actions as much as possible. • Move with the utmost speed. • Seek the major battle (with superiority of number and conditions that will promise a decisive victory). ## Aim “Render enemy powerless”— with emphasis on “the destruction of his armed forces” # Historical pattern Carl von Clausewitz On War 1832 ## Critique - Clausewitz overemphasized decisive battle and underemphasized strategic maneuver. • Clausewitz emphasized method and routine at the tactical level. ? Raises question ? What does all this mean? ## Why? • Clausewitz was concerned with trying to overcome, or reduce, friction/uncertainty. He failed to address the idea of magnifying adversary’s friction/uncertainty. • Clausewitz was concerned with trying to exhaust adversary by influencing him to increase his expenditure of effort. He failed to address, or develop, the idea of trying to paralyze adversary by denying him the opportunity of expend effort. • Clausewitz incorrectly stated: “A center of gravity is always found where the mass is concentrated most densely”—then argued that this is the place where the blows must be aimed and where the decision should be reached. He failed to develop idea of generating many non-cooperative centers of gravity by striking at those vulnerable, yet critical, tendons, connections, and activities that permit a larger system to exist. # Historical pattern Carl von Clausewitz On War 1832 ## Message • Clausewitz did not see that many non-cooperative, or conflicting, centers of gravity paralyze adversary by denying him the opportunity to operate in a directed fashion, hence they impede vigorous activity and magnify friction. ## Likely result • Operations end in a “bloodbath”—via the well regulated stereotyped tactics and unimaginative battles of attrition suggested by Clausewitz. # Historical pattern Jomini 1861 ## Secret of success “… the narratives of Frederick the Great: commenced to initiate me in the secret which had caused him to gain the miraculous victory of Leuthen. I perceived that this secret consisted in the very simple maneuver of carrying the bulk of his forces upon a single wing of the hostile army … I found again, afterwards, the same cause in the first successes of Napoleon in Italy, which gave me the idea that by applying, through strategy, to the whole chess- table of a war this same principle which Frederick had applied to battles, we should have the key to all the science of war.” # Historical pattern Jomini The Art of War 1836 ## Key idea and supporting mechanism • Generalize oblique order associated with Battles at Leuctra and Leuthen • Divide theater and its subordinate components (zones, fronts, positions, etc.) into three-subdivisions—a center and two wings—as basis to apply the Leuctra/Leuthen concept in strategic and grand tactical maneuvers. • Set-up base(s) of operations and (alternative) lines of communication for freedom to shape and shift flow/direction of operations as basis to apply Leuctra/Leuthen strategic and grand tactical maneuvers. Aim To make evident a “secret” for success in war ## Strategy/grand tactics • By free and rapid movements carry bulk of the forces (successively) against fractions of the enemy. • Strike in the most decisive direction—that is to say against the center or one wing or the center and one wing simultaneously. • If possible, seize adversary’s communications (without losing one’s own) and force him to fight on a reverse front, by using bulk of forces to hit his flank and take him in the rear—while using detachments, as needed, to block the arrival of reinforcements as well as draw his attention elsewhere. • If the enemy’s forces are too much extended, pierce his center to divide and crush his fractions separately. • To outflank and turn (envelop) a wing, hit enemy in the flank and also contain him at the front. • An attack may be made simultaneously upon both extremities but not when the attacking force is equal or inferior (numerically) to the enemy. # Historical pattern Jomini The Art of War 1836 ## Critique • Preoccupation with form of operations, spatial arrangement of bases, formal orders of battle, and tactical formations. • Lack of appreciation for the use of loose, irregular swarms of guerrillas and skirmishers to mask own dispositions, activities, and intentions as well as confuse and disorder enemy operations. ## Likely result • Operations become stereotyped—unless one can appreciate Jomini’s ideas outside their formal underpinnings. # Historical pattern Napoleon, Clausewitz, Jomini ## Key point Napoleon, Clausewitz, and Jomini did not appreciate importance of loose, irregular tactical arrangements and activities to mask or distort own presence and intentions as well as confuse and disorder adversary operations. ? Why ? ## Major flaw Napoleon, Clausewitz, and Jomini viewed the conduct of war and related operations in essentially one direction—from the top down—emphasizing adaptability at the top and regularity at the bottom. # Emil Schalk Summary of The Art of War 1862 “There are three great maxims common to the whole science of war; they are: - 1st—Concentrate your force, and act with the whole of it on one part only of the enemy’s force. - 2nd—Act against the weakest part of your enemy—his center, if he is dispersed; his flank or rear, if concentrated. Act against his communications without endangering your own. 3rd—Whatever you do, as soon as you have made your plan, and taken the decision to act upon it, act with the utmost speed, so that you may obtain your object before the enemy suspects what you are about.” ## Caution While these maxims by Schalk portray, in a general way, physical maneuvers that can be used to realize one’s purpose in war at the strategic level, they do not address the non-adaptability and predictability (via the drill regulation mind- set) that permeated 19th century “maneuvers” at the tactical level. # Impact of 19th century technology on war ## Key ingredients • Railroad/telegraph • Quick fire artillery • Machine gun • Repeating rifle • Barbed wire • Trenches ## Early trends • Emphasis toward massed firepower and large armies supported by rail logistics • Increased emphasis on a holding defense and flanking or wide turning maneuvers into adversary rear to gain a decision • Continued use of frontal assaults by large stereotyped infantry formations (e.g. regiments, battalions), supported by artillery barrages, against regions of strong resistance ## Result Huge armies, and massed firepower and other vast needs supported through a narrow fixed logistics network, together with tactical assaults by large stereotyped formations, suppressed ambiguity , deception, and mobility hence surprise of any operation. # Technology and the art of war • The legacy of Napoleon, Clausewitz, and Jomini’s tactical regularity and the continued use of large stereotyped formations for tactical assault, together with the mobilization of large armies and massing of enormous supplies through a narrow logistics network, “telegraphed” any punch hence minimized the possibility of exploiting ambiguity, deception, and mobility to generate surprise for a decisive edge. • In this sense, technology was being used as a crude club that generated frightful and debilitating casualties on all sides during the: – American Civil War (1861-65) – Austro-Prussian War (1866) – Franco-Prussian War (1870) - Boer War (1899-1902) – Russo-Japanese War (1904-05) - World War I (1914-18) ## Point • Evolution of tactics did not keep pace with increased weapons lethality developed and produced by 19th century technology. ## ? Raises question ? • Why were the 19th century and early 20th century commanders unable to evolve better tactics to avoid over a half century of debilitating casualties? # Impact of 19th century capitalism on insurrection/revolution ## (with a Marxian flavor) ## Comment • A look back reveals that we have been speaking of conflict between social systems, rather than within social systems. With the explosive expansion of capitalism in the 19th century we begin to see the rise of much turmoil and attendant conflict due to opposing tendencies contained within capitalism itself. ## Trend • Without going into explicit detail we find (according to many investigators, including Karl Marx): that the interaction of competition, technology, specialization (division of labor), concentration of production in large scale enterprises, and the taking and plowing back of profits into this interaction produce opposing tendencies and periodic crises that leave in their wake more and more workers competing for jobs in fewer and fewer, but larger, firms that increasingly emphasize (percentage-wise) the use of more machines and less labor. ## Result • Low paid wage earners exhibit discontent and hatred for a system that permits others to live in comfort or luxury while they must live a life of toil, subject to strict and frequently harsh factory discipline. • Witnessing these unfolding circumstances disillusioned intellectuals, bankrupt owners, and others take the side of the workers, as an enlightened vanguard, to mold them into a powerful opposition. ## Raises question • How should such an unpleasant situation be corrected? # Impact of 19th century capitalism on insurrection/revolution (with a Marxian flavor) ## Message • According to Marx/Engels and their followers, the only way out is via revolution and dictatorship of the proletariat (workers) to smash the capitalistic system and replace it with one that does not exploit and oppress masses for the benefit of a ruling elite or class. ## Necessary conditions for success • Crisis generated by discontent/misery of masses and vacillation by authorities who indicate unwillingness or inability to come to grips with existing instability. • Vanguard, or disciplined hard core, that offers leadership, provides a way out, and has support of masses. ## Why • Crises represent height of confusion/disorder due to many opposing tendencies (centers of gravity) that magnify friction, hence paralyze efforts by authorities to dominate such surges of turmoil. In this sense, crises are periods of vulnerability/weakness that beg to be exploited. • Vanguards represent disciplined moral/mental/physical bodies focused to shape and guide masses as well as participate in action to exploit and expand confusion/disorder of crises that shake adversary’s will to respond in a directed way. ## Key insight • Crises and Vanguards are the golden keys that permit us to penetrate to the core of insurrection/revolution and, as we shall see later, modern guerrilla warfare. # Capitalism, technology and the conduct of war • The creation of crises and vanguards, via 19th century capitalism, make evident the foundations upon which to conduct insurrection/revolution in order to destroy a society from within. ## On the other hand • It is not yet clear how these notions change or fit into the way we exploit technology and conduct war against societies from within as well as from without. To gain such an appreciation we must look at the period containing World War I, World War II, and their aftermath. # World War I • Plans and execution - Stagnation - Finale # Schlieffen strategic maneuver ![](_page_55_figure_15.jpeg) *Figure (p. 55):* This image is a map illustrating the Schlieffen Plan maneuver during World War I, from August 4 to September 8, 1914. Red arrows depict the movement of German forces from Germany through Belgium and into France, with the objective of encircling Paris. Key entities shown are: * **Germany:** The starting point of the German advance. * **Belgium:** The territory through which a significant portion of the German army moved. * **France:** The target country, with Paris indicated as a key location. * **Netherlands:** A neutral country bordering Belgium and Germany. * **LU (Luxembourg):** A small country between Belgium and Germany that was also traversed. * **Paris:** The capital of France, a strategic objective. # World War I ## Action • Offensives conducted on wide frontages—emphasizing few, rather than many, harmonious yet independent thrusts. • Evenness of advance maintained to protect flanks and provide artillery support as advance makes headway. • Reserves thrown in whenever attack held-up—against regions or points of strong resistance. ## Reaction • Defense organized into depth of successive belts of fortified terrain. • Massed artillery and machine-gun fire designed to arrest and pin down attacker. • Counter-attack to win back lost ground. ## Result Stagnation and enormous attrition since advances made generally as expected along paths of hardened resistance because of dependence upon railroads and choice of tactics of trying to reduce strong points by massed firepower and infantry. # World War I a way out
IdeaAuthors
•Infiltration tactics•Capt. Andre Laffargue
•Gen. von Hutier?
•Gen. Ludendorff
•Guerrilla tactics•T.E. Lawrence
•Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck
# World War I infiltration tactics ## Action • Brief but intense artillery bombardment, that includes gas and smoke shell, to disrupt/suppress defenses and obscure the assault. • Stosstruppen (small teams or squads of thrust troops equipped with light machine- guns, flame-throwers, etc.) thrust forward close behind rolling artillery barrage, without any “effort to maintain a uniform rate of advance or align formations”. Instead, as many tiny, irregular swarms spaced in breadth and echeloned in depth, they seep or flow into any gaps or weaknesses they can find in order to drive deep into adversary rear. • Kampfgruppen (small battle groups consisting of infantry, machine-gunners, mortar teams, artillery observers and field engineers) follow-up to cave-in exposed flanks and mop-up isolated centers of resistance from flank and rear. • Reserves and stronger follow-on echelons move through newly created breaches to maintain momentum and exploit success, as well as attack flanks and rear to widen penetration and consolidate gains against counter attack. ## Idea • Hurl strength (echeloned in great depth), via an irruption of many thrusts, thru weaknesses along (many) paths of least resistance to gain the opportunity for breakthrough and envelopment. # World War I infiltration tactics ## Note • Such classic descriptions, often repeated, create in listeners or readers minds vivid images of the infiltration technique. ## Critique • Unfortunately this depiction does not address how and why infiltration fire and movement schemes work. # World War I infiltration tactics ## Key points • Fire at all levels by artillery, mortars, and machine-guns is exploited to hold adversary attention and pin him down hence— • Fire together with gas and smoke (as well as fog and mist) represent an immediate and ominous threat to capture adversary attention, force heads down and dramatically obscure view, thereby cloak infiltrators movements. • Dispersed and irregular character of moving swarms (as opposed to well defined line abreast formations) permit infiltrators to blend against irregular and changing terrain features as they push forward. • Taken together, the captured attention, the obscured view, and the indistinct character of moving dispersed/irregular swarms deny adversary the opportunity to picture what is taking place. ## Result • Infiltration teams appear to suddenly loom-up out of nowhere to blow thru, around, and behind disoriented defenders. # World War I infiltration tactics ## Essence • Cloud/distort signature and improve mobility to avoid fire yet focus effort to penetrate, shatter, envelop, and mop-up disconnected or isolated debris of adversary system. ## Intent • Exploit tactical dispersion in a focused way to gain tactical success and expand it into a grand tactical success. ## Implication • Small units exploiting tactical dispersion in a focused way— rather than large formations abiding by the “Principle of Concentration”—penetrate adversary to generate many non- cooperative (or isolated) centers of gravity as basis to magnify friction, paralyze effort, and bring about adversary collapse. ## ? Natural question ? Are infiltration tactics a rejection of the Napoleonic methods—or are they application of these methods under a different guise? ## Response Infiltration fire and movement schemes can be viewed as Napoleon’s multi- thrust strategic penetration maneuvers being transformed into multi-thrust tactical penetration maneuvers down to the lowest operational/organizational level—the squad. ## Point Until the rise of the infiltration tactics (and the use of tanks by the allies) in the latter part of WWI, neither the 19th century nor the 20th century commanders were able to evolve effective tactical penetration maneuvers that could offset the massive increase in weapons lethality developed during this same period. ## Why The aristocratic tradition, the top-down command and control system, the slavish addiction to the “Principle of Concentration”, and the drill regulation mind-set, all taken together, reveal an “obsession for control” by high-level superiors over low-level subordinates that restrict any imagination, initiative, and adaptability needed by a system to evolve the indistinct- irregular-mobile tactics that could counter the increase in weapons lethality. # World War I infiltration tactics ## Result • Immediate success at platoon/company/battalion level coupled with ultimate failure at corps/army level. ## Why • Ludendorff violated his own concept by his tendency to use strategic reserves to reinforce against hardened resistance—hence, at the strategic level, he seduced himself into supporting failure not success. • Exhaustion of combat teams leading the assault. • Logistics too inflexible to support rapid/fluid penetration and deeper exploitation of breakthrough. • Communications too immobile to allow command to quickly identify and reinforce successful advances. • Elastic zone defense, when used, (as developed by the Germans and practiced by Pétain) that emphasizes artillery and flank attacks against penetrations when they stretch beyond their own artillery support. # World War I Guerrilla Warfare (a la T.E. Lawrence) ## Action • Gain support of population. Must “arrange the minds” of friend, foe and neutral alike. Must “get inside their minds”. • Must “be an idea or thing invulnerable, without front or back, drifting about like a gas” (inconspicuousness and fluidity-of action). Must be an “attack-in-depth”. • Tactics “should be tip-and-run, not pushes but strokes” with “use of the smallest force in the quickest time at the farthest place”. • Should be a war of detachment (avoiding contact and presenting a threat everywhere) using mobility/fluidity-of-action and environmental background (vast unknown desert) as basis for “never affording a target” and “never on the defensive except by accident and in error”. ## Idea • Disintegrate existing regime’s ability to govern. # Impression • Infiltration tactics a la Ludendorff seem to be similar in nature to irregular or guerrilla tactics a la Lawrence. • Why? Both stress clouded/distorted signatures, mobility and cohesion of small units as basis to insert an amorphous yet focused effort into or thru adversary weaknesses. # Major advances between World War I and II ## Soviet revolutionary strategy • Lenin, and after him Stalin, exploited the idea of crises and vanguards—that arise out of Marxian contradictions within capitalism—to lay-out Soviet revolutionary strategy. - Result: – A scheme that emphasizes moral/psychological factors as basis to destroy a regime from within. ## Lightning war (Blitzkrieg) • Infiltration tactics of 1918 were mated with: ![](_page_67_figure_16.jpeg) *Figure (p. 67):* The image lists military concepts associated with individuals. **Concepts:** * Tank * Motorized Artillery * Tactical Aircraft * Motor Transport * Better Communications **Associated with:** * J.F.C. Fuller * Heinz Guderian - Result: – Blitzkrieg to generate a breakthrough by piercing a region with multiple narrow thrusts using armor, motorized infantry, and follow-up infantry divisions supported by tactical aircraft. ## Guerrilla war • Mao Tse-Tung synthesized Sun Tzu’s ideas, classic guerrilla strategy and tactics, and Napoleonic style mobile operations under an umbrella of Soviet revolutionary ideas to create a powerful way for waging modern (guerrilla) war. - Result: – Modern guerrilla warfare has become an overall political, economic, social and military framework for “total war”. # Soviet revolutionary strategy ## (a la Lenin/Stalin) ## Tasks • Employ agitation and propaganda in order to exploit opposing tendencies, internal tensions, etc. Object is to bring about a crises, to make revolution ripe as well as convince masses that there is a way-out. This is accomplished when the vanguard is able to: – Fan discontent/misery of working class and masses and focus it as hatred toward existing system. – Cause vacillation/indecision among authorities so that they cannot come to grips with existing instability. – “Confuse other elements in society so that they don’t know exactly what is happening or where the movement is going.” – Convince “proletariat class they have a function—the function of promoting revolution in order to secure the promised ideal society.” • Concentrate “the main forces of the revolution at the enemy’s most vulnerable spot at the decisive moment, when the revolution has already become ripe, when the offensive is going full steam ahead, when insurrection is knocking at the door, and when bringing the reserves up to the vanguard is the decisive condition of success.” To quote Lenin on paraphrasing Marx and Engels: – “Never play with insurrection, but, when beginning it, firmly realize that you must go to the end.” – “Concentrate a great superiority of forces at the decisive point, at the decisive moment, otherwise the enemy, who has the advantage of better preparation and organization, will destroy the insurgents.” – “Once the insurrection has begun, you must act with the greatest determination, and by all means, without fail, take the offensive. The defensive is the death of an armed rising.’“ – “You must try to take the enemy by surprise and seize the moment when his forces are scattered.” – “You must strive for daily successes, even if small (one might say hourly, if it is the case of one town), and at all costs retain the ‘moral ascendancy.” # Soviet revolutionary strategy ## (a la Lenin/Stalin) ## Tasks • Select “the moment for the decisive blow, the moment for starting the insurrection, so timed as to coincide with the moment when the crisis has reached its climax, when the vanguard is prepared to fight to the end, the reserves are prepared to support the vanguard, and maximum consternation reigns in the ranks of the enemy.” According to Lenin the decisive moment has arrived when: – “All the class forces hostile to us have become sufficiently entangled, are sufficiently at loggerheads, have sufficiently weakened themselves in a struggle which is beyond their strength;” – “All the vacillating, wavering, unstable, intermediate elements—the petty bourgeoisie, the petty-bourgeois democrats as distinct from the bourgeoisie—have sufficiently exposed themselves in the eyes of the people, have sufficiently disgraced themselves through their practical bankruptcy;” – “Among the proletariat a mass sentiment in favor of supporting the most determined, supremely bold, revolutionary action against the bourgeoisie has arisen and has. begun to grow vigorously. Then revolution is indeed ripe. Then, indeed, if we have correctly gauged all the conditions indicated above … and if we have chosen the moment rightly, our victory is assured.” • Pursue “the course adopted, no matter what difficulties and complications are encountered on the road towards the goal. This is necessary in order that the vanguard not lose sight of the main goal of the struggle and the masses not stray from the road while marching towards that goal and striving to rally around the vanguard.” • Maneuver “the reserves with a view to effecting a proper retreat when the enemy is strong … when, with the given relation of forces, retreat becomes the only way to escape a blow against the vanguard and retain the vanguard’s reserves. The object of this strategy is to gain time, to disrupt the enemy, and to accumulate forces in order later to assume the offensive.” ## Goal • Destroy capitalism as well as its offspring imperialism and replace it with a dictatorship of the proletariat. # Blitzkrieg and guerrilla strategy ## Infiltration and isolation • Blitz and guerrillas infiltrate a nation or regime at all levels to soften and shatter the moral fiber of the political, economic and social structure. Simultaneously, via diplomatic, psychological, and various sub-rosa or other activities, they strip-away potential allies thereby isolate intended victim(s) for forthcoming blows. To carry out this program, a la Sun Tzu, blitz, and guerrillas: – Probe and test adversary, and any allies that may rally to his side, in order to unmask strengths, weaknesses, maneuvers, and intentions. – Exploit critical differences of opinion, internal contradictions, frictions, obsessions, etc., in order to foment mistrust, sow discord and shape both adversary’s and allies’ perception of the world thereby: • Create atmosphere of “mental confusion, contradiction of feeling, indecisiveness, panic” … • Manipulate or undermine adversary’s plans and actions. • Make it difficult, if not impossible, for allies to aid adversary during his time of trial. ## Purpose • Force capitulation when combined with external political, economic, and military pressures • Weaken foe to minimize his resistance against military blows that will follow. # Blitzkrieg ## Action • Intelligence (signal, photo, agent … ), reconnaissance (air and ground), and patrol actions probe and test adversary before and during combat operations to uncover as well as shape changing patterns of strengths, weaknesses, moves, and intentions. • Adversary patterns, and associated changes, are weighed against friendly situation to expose attractive, or appropriate, alternatives that exploit adversary vulnerabilities and weaknesses, hence help shape mission commitment and influence command intent. • Mission assigned. Schwerpunkt (focus of main effort) established before and shifted during combat operations to bypass adversary strength and strike at weakness. Nebenpunkte (other related or supporting efforts) employed to tie-up, focus, or drain-away adversary attention and strength (elsewhere). • Special seizure/disruption teams infiltrate (by air or other means) enemy rear areas where, with agents already in place, they: seize bridges and road crossings, sever communications, incapacitate or blow-up power stations, seize or blow-up fuel dumps, … as well as sow confusion/disorder via “false messages and fake orders”. • Indirect and direct air firepower efforts together with (any needed) sudden/brief preliminary artillery fires are focused in appropriate areas to impede (or channel) adversary movement, disrupt communications, suppress forward defensive fires, obscure the advance, and divert attention. • Armored reconnaissance or stormtrooper teams, leading armored columns, advance rapidly from least expected regions and infiltrate adversary front to find paths of least resistance. • Armored assault teams of tanks, infantry, anti-tank guns, and combat engineers as well as other specialists, together with close artillery and air support, quickly open breaches (via frontal/flank fire and movement combinations) into adversary rear along paths of least resistance uncovered by armored reconnaissance or stormtroopers. • When breakthrough occurs, relatively independent mobile/armored teams led by armored recce with air support (recce, fire, and airlift when necessary), blow-through to penetrate at high speed deep into adversary interior. Object is to cut lines of communication, disrupt movement, paralyze command and envelop adversary forces and resources. • Motorized or foot infantry further back supported by artillery and armor pour-in to collapse isolated pockets of resistance, widen the breaches and secure the encirclement or captured terrain against possible counter-attack. ## Idea • Conquer an entire region in the quickest possible time by gaining initial surprise and exploiting the fast tempo/fluidity-of-action of armored teams, with air support, as basis to repeatedly penetrate, splinter, envelop, and roll-up/wipe-out disconnected remnants of adversary organism in order to confuse, disorder, and finally shatter his will or capacity to resist. # Impression Reflection upon discussion, so far, reveals that Blitzkrieg generates many non-cooperative centers of gravity, as well as undermines or seizes those that adversary depends upon, in order to impede vigorous activity and magnify friction, thereby paralyze adversary by denying him the opportunity to operate in a directed way. ## ? Raises nagging question ? How do blitzers simultaneously sustain rapid pace and abruptly adapt to changing circumstances without losing cohesion or coherency of their overall effort? # Blitz operating philosophy ## Key point • Each level from simple to complex (platoon to theater) has their own observation-orientation-decision- action time cycle that increases as we try to control more levels and details of command at the higher levels. Put simply, as the number of events we must consider increase, the longer it takes to observe- orient-decide-act. ## Idea • This brings out the idea that faster tempo, or rhythm, at lower levels should work within the slower rhythm but larger pattern at higher levels so that overall system does not lose its cohesion or coherency. ## Raises question • How do blitzers harmonize these differing tempos/rhythms so that they can exploit the faster rhythm/smaller pattern (of the lower-level units) yet maintain the coherency of the rhythm/pattern for the larger effort? ## Response • Give lower-level commanders wide freedom, within an overall mind-time-space scheme, to shape/direct their own activities so that they can exploit faster tempo/rhythm at tactical levels yet be in harmony with the larger pattern/slower rhythm associated with the more general aim and larger effort at the strategic level. ## Shaping agents • Shape overall scheme by using mission concept or sense of mission to fix responsibility and shape commitment at all levels and through all parts of the organism. Likewise, use Schwerpunkt concept through all levels to link differing rhythms/patterns so that each part or level of the organic whole can operate at its own natural rhythm—without pulling organism apart—instead of the slower pace associated with a rigid centralized control. # ? Raises questions ? • What does an overall mind-time-space scheme imply or presuppose? • How do mission and Schwerpunkt concepts give shape to this overall scheme? # Overall mind-time-space scheme ## Message • According to General Gunther Blumentritt, such a scheme presupposes a common outlook based upon “a body of professional officers who have received exactly the same training during the long years of peace and with the same tactical education, the same way of thinking, identical speech, hence a body of officers to whom all tactical conceptions were fully clear.” • Furthermore, a la General Blumentritt, it presupposes “an officers training institution which allows the subordinate a very great measure of freedom of action and freedom in the manner of executing orders and which primarily calls for independent daring, initiative and sense of responsibility.” ## Point • Without a common outlook superiors cannot give subordinates freedom-of- action and maintain coherency of ongoing action. ## Implication • A common outlook possessed by “a body of officers” represents a unifying theme that can be used to simultaneously encourage subordinate initiative yet realize superior intent. # ? Raises question ? Very nice, but how do the German concepts of mission and Schwerpunkt give shape to this scheme? # Mission ## Message • The German concept of mission can be thought of as a contract, hence an agreement, between superior and subordinate. The subordinate agrees to make his actions serve his superior’s intent in terms of what is to be accomplished, while the superior agrees to give his subordinate wide freedom to exercise his imagination and initiative in terms of how intent is to be realized. • As part of this concept, the subordinate is given the right to challenge or question the feasibility of mission if he feels his superior’s ideas on what can be achieved are not in accord with the existing situation or if he feels his superior has not given him adequate resources to carry it out. Likewise, the superior has every right to expect his subordinate to carry-out the mission contract when agreement is reached on what can be achieved consistent with the existing situation and resources provided. ## Limitation • While this concept of mission gives form and expression to what is expected between an individual superior and subordinate, it does not suggest ways to coordinate or harmonize activities among many superiors and subordinates as a collective group. # ? Raises question ? With this limitation in mind how does Schwerpunkt play into or add to this concept? # Schwerpunkt (focus of main effort) ## Message • Schwerpunkt acts as a center or axis or harmonizing agent that is used to help shape commitment and convey or carry-out intent, at all levels from theater to platoon, hence an image around which: – Maneuver of all arms and supporting elements are focused to exploit opportunities and maintain tempo of operations, ## and – Initiative of many subordinates is harmonized with superior intent. • In this sense Schwerpunkt can be thought of as: – A focusing agent that naturally produces an unequal distribution of effort as a basis to generate superiority in some sectors by thinning-out others, ## as well as – A medium to realize superior intent without impeding initiative of many subordinates, hence a medium through which subordinate initiative is implicitly connected to superior intent. ## Implication • Schwerpunkt represents a unifying concept that provides a way to rapidly shape focus and direction of effort as well as harmonize support activities with combat operations, thereby permit a true decentralization of tactical command within centralized strategic guidance—without losing cohesion of overall effort. ## or put another way • Schwerpunkt represents a unifying medium that provides a directed way to tie initiative of many subordinate actions with superior intent as a basis to diminish friction and compress time in order to generate a favorable mismatch in time/ability to shape and adapt to unfolding circumstances. # German operational philosophy ## Impression • The German operational philosophy based upon a common outlook and freedom-of- action, and realized through their concepts of mission and Schwerpunkt, emphasized implicit over explicit communication. which suggests • The secret of the German command and control system lies in what’s unstated or not communicated to one another—to exploit lower-level initiative yet realize higher-level intent, thereby diminish friction and reduce time, hence gain both quickness and security. ## Result • The Germans were able to repeatedly operate inside their adversary’s observation- orientation-decision-action loops. or as stated by General Blumentritt, • “The entire operational and tactical leadership method hinged upon … rapid, concise assessment of situations … quick decision and quick execution, on the principle: ‘each minute ahead of the enemy is an advantage.’” # Impression of the Blitzkrieg penetration Thrust and roll out/roll up tactics ![](_page_81_figure_17.jpeg) *Figure (p. 81):* The image depicts an abstract representation of "Blitzkrieg penetration" using yellow arrows that branch and converge, illustrating "Thrust and roll out/roll up tactics." The text overlay "JRB Comment: Bundles of multiple thrusts inside multiple thrusts" further describes the nature of these penetrative actions. # Impression of the pincer envelopment # Impression of the envelopment JRB comment: “Even if the situation is the same, do it differently.” – Gen Hermann Balck 88 # Typical impression of Blitzkrieg envelopment JRB comment: typical, but incorrect. Should be multiple thrusts, instead of a steamroller. ![](_page_84_figure_18.jpeg) *Figure (p. 84):* The image shows two large yellow arrows forming an arc, with their ends pointing towards each other horizontally. The background is a light purple. There are two smaller, thin upward-pointing arrows on the horizontal line below each large arc, suggesting a starting point or origin. The surrounding text provides a comment: "typical, but incorrect. Should be multiple thrusts, instead of a steamroller." # Creation of the Blitzkrieg ![](_page_85_figure_19.jpeg) *Figure (p. 85):* The image depicts the origins of Blitzkrieg, attributed to Heinz Guderian. It shows four precursor concepts feeding into Blitzkrieg: * **Flying Columns** (Mongols) * **Tank Attack with Motorized Vehicles** (J.F.C. Fuller) * **Envelopment** (Leuctra, Cannae) * **Infiltration** (Ludendorff) Blitzkrieg itself is characterized by: * Multiple, narrow thrusts * Armored reconnaissance * Commanders forward * Extensive communications network * Air support in lieu of (or with) artillery ## ? Natural question ? Why employ multiple thrusts, bundles of multiple thrusts, or bundles of thrusts inside bundles of thrusts? 85 # Response • Present many (fast breaking) simultaneous and sequential happenings to generate confusion and disorder—thereby stretch-out time for adversary to respond in a directed fashion. • Multiply opportunities, to uncover, create, and penetrate gaps, exposed flanks, and vulnerable rears. • Create and multiply opportunities to splinter organism and envelop disconnected remnants thereby dismember adversary thru the tactical, grand tactical, and strategic levels. # Which lead to: ## Essence of Blitzkrieg Employ a Nebenpunkte/Schwerpunkt maneuver philosophy to generate ambiguity, realize deception, exploit superior mobility , and focus violence as basis to quickly : • Create many opportunities to penetrate weaknesses in the form of any moral or mental inadequacies as well as any gaps or exposed flanks that open into adversary’s vulnerable rear and interior, hence- • Create and exploit opportunities to repeatedly penetrate adversary organism, at all levels (tactical, grand tactical, and strategic) and in many ways, in order to splinter, envelop, and roll-up/wipe-out isolated remnants, thereby generate confusion and disorder, hence- • Create and exploit opportunities to disrupt his system for communication, command, and support, as well as undermine or seize those connections or centers that he depends upon, thus shake his will or capacity to decisively commit his back-up echelons, operational reserves, and/or strategic reserves, thereby magnify adversary’s confusion and disorder and convince him to give up. ## Intent Create grand tactical success then exploit and expand it into strategic success for a decisive victory. ## Implication Blitzers, by being able to infiltrate or penetrate or get inside adversary’s system, generate many moral-mental-physical non-cooperative (or isolated) centers of gravity, as well as undermine or seize those centers of gravity adversary depends upon, in order to magnify friction, produce paralysis, and bring about adversary collapse. # World War II Blitzkrieg ## Keys to success • Emphasis on a common outlook and freedom-of-action that are exploited by mission and Schwerpunkt concepts to fix responsibilities as well as to rapidly shape, focus, and shift operations and support at all levels. • Flexible command—based on a common outlook and freedom-of-action that are exploited by mission and Schwerpunkt—that encourages lower-level combat leaders (forward) to exploit opportunities generated by rapid action within a broad loosely woven scheme laid down from central command. • Intelligence, reconnaissance (air and ground) and stratagem emphasized before and during combat operations to unmask and shape patterns of adversary strengths, weaknesses, moves, and intentions. • Broad use of Schwerpunkt concept coupled with fast tempo/fluidity-of-action of armored teams and air support permit blitzers to repeatedly reshape strength and rapidly shift it against, or through, weaknesses thereby generate doubt and uncertainty which magnify into panic and chaos. • Superior mobile communications to maintain cohesion of overall effort and to enable higher command levels to allocate reserves and support and to reshape as well as shift focus of main effort. • Essential and only essential logistics tail (using airlift when appropriate and necessary) to support high-speed movement and rapid shift among routes of advance. # Blitz results ## Successful • Poland 1939 • France 1940 • Balkans 1941 • Russia 1941 • North Africa 1941-42 • Russia Summer 1942 • Russia Feb-March 1943 • Advance thru France 1944 • Manchuria 1945 • Middle East 1967 • Czechoslovakia 1968 • Middle East 1973 ## Unsuccessful • Russia Winter 1941-42 • Russia Fall, Winter 1942-43 • North Africa 1942 • Russia Summer 1943 • Ardennes Winter 1944-45 # Modern guerrilla campaign ## Action • Capitalize on discontent and mistrust generated by corruption (real or imagined), exploitation, oppression, incompetence, and unwanted presence of existing regime to evolve a common cause or unifying theme as basis to organize and maintain mass popular support through a militant political program. • Set-up administrative and military organization, sanctuary, and communications network under the control of the guerrilla political leadership without arousing regime’s intelligence and security apparatus. Build-up a shadow government, with “parallel hierarchies”, in localities and regions that can be made ripe for insurrection/revolution by infiltrating cadres (vanguards) who can not only subvert existing authority but also convert leaders and people to guerrilla cause and organizational way. • Exploit subversion of government and conversion of people to guerrilla cause to create an alien atmosphere of security and intelligence in order to “blind” regime to guerrilla plans, operations, and organization yet make “visible” regime’s strengths, weaknesses, moves, and intentions. • Shape propaganda, foment civil disorders (such as rallies, demonstrations, strikes, and riots), use selected terrorism, perform sabotage, and exploit resulting misinformation to expand mistrust and sow discord thereby magnify the appearance of corruption, incompetence, etc., and the inability of regime to govern. • Employ tiny cohesive bands for surprise hit-and-run raids against lines of communications to gain arms and supplies as well as disrupt government communication, coordination, and movement. Retreat and melt into environment when faced by superior police and armed forces. • Disperse or scatter tiny guerrilla bands to arouse the people (and gain recruits) as well as harass, wear-out, and spread-out government forces while larger bands, or mobile formations, concentrate to wipe-out his dispersed, isolated, and relatively weak fractions by sudden ambush or sneak attack. • Play upon the grievances and obsessions of people (via propaganda, re-education, and selected successes) as well as encourage government to indiscriminately take harsh reprisal measures against them in order to connect the government with expanding climate of mistrust, discord, and moral disintegration. Simultaneously, show (by contrast) that guerrillas exhibit moral authority, offer competence, and provide desired benefits in order to further erode government influence, gain more recruits, multiply base areas, and increase political infrastructure hence expand guerrilla influence/control over population and countryside. • Demonstrate disintegration of regime by striking cheng/ch'i fashion, with small fluid bands and ever larger mobile formations, to split-up, envelop, and annihilate fractions of major enemy forces. ## Idea • Defeat existing regime politically by showing they have neither the moral right nor demonstrated ability to govern and militarily by continuously using stealth/fast-tempo/fluidity-of-action and cohesion of small bands and larger units in cooperation with political “agitprop” (agitation/propaganda) teams as basis to harass, confuse and ultimately destroy the will or capacity to resist. 00 # Modern guerrilla campaign ## Essence • Capitalize on corruption, injustice, incompetence, etc., (or their appearances) as basis to generate atmosphere of mistrust and discord in order to sever moral bonds that bind people to existing regime. ## Simultaneously, • Share existing burdens with people and work with them to root out and punish corruption, remove injustice, eliminate grievances, etc., as basis to form moral bonds between people and guerrillas in order to bind people to guerrilla philosophy and ideals. ## Intent • Shape and exploit crises environment that permits guerrilla vanguards or cadres to pump-up guerrilla resolve, attract the uncommitted, and drain-away adversary resolve as foundation to replace existing regime with guerrilla regime. ## Implication • Guerrillas, by being able to penetrate the very essence of their adversary’s moral-mental-physical being, generate many moral-mental-physical non-cooperative (or isolated) centers of gravity, as well as subvert or seize those centers of gravity that adversary regime must depend upon, in order to magnify friction, produce paralysis, and bring about collapse. ## Yet, • Guerrillas shape or influence moral-mental-physical atmosphere so that potential adversaries, as well as the uncommitted, are drawn toward guerrilla philosophy and are empathetic toward guerrilla success. # Looking back Now, if we look at the ingredients that make-up modern guerrilla campaigns as well as refer back to our discussion about Soviet revolutionary strategy and the impact of 19th century capitalism on insurrection/revolution, we gain some insight into the strategic philosophy that underlies today’s guerrilla efforts. # Modern guerrilla campaign ## Underlying strategic philosophy • Guerrilla vanguards employ a variety of means to play-upon regime’s internal frictions, obsessions, etc., as well as stimulate discontent/mistrust of people. In this way, vanguards sow discord that in turn magnifies regime’s internal frictions, obsessions, etc., thereby paralyze its ability to come to grips with crises that further fan atmosphere of mistrust and discord that feed crises—hence push them out-of-control. ## Simultaneously, • Guerrilla vanguards share burden as well as help people cope with turmoil—that vanguards keep fanning and enmesh people into—in order to demonstrate ability to deal with surging crises as well as shape image that only guerrillas offer a way-out of existing unpleasant circumstances. # Insight Insurrection/revolution becomes ripe when many perceive an illegitimate inequality—that is, when the people see themselves as being exploited and oppressed for the undeserved enrichment and betterment of an elite few. This means that the guerrillas not only need an illegitimate inequality but they also need support of the people; otherwise, insurrection/revolution is impossible. ## ? Raises question ? In the deepest possible sense what does it mean to have support of the people? # Message • Guerrillas must establish implicit connections or bonds with people and countryside. ## In other words • Guerrillas must be able to blend into the emotional-cultural-intellectual environment of people until they become one with the people. ## In this sense • People feelings and thoughts must be guerrilla feeling and thoughts while guerrilla feelings and thoughts become people feelings and thoughts; people aspirations must be guerrilla aspirations while guerrilla aspirations become people aspirations; people goals must be guerrilla goals while guerrilla goals become people goals. ## Result • Guerrillas become indistinguishable from people while government is isolated from people. 95 # Modern guerrilla campaign ## Keys to success • Ability to continuously demonstrate government weakness, erode government influence, and cause government to alienate itself from people. • Support of people (both psychological and physical) for intelligence, recruits, shelter, transportation, refuge, food, money, and medical aid. • Access to (more or less permanent) safe sanctuaries or base areas and/or fluid bases that can be shifted from place to place, away from enemy forces—in order to rest, recuperate, repair materiel, etc., as well as indoctrinate, train, and equip recruits. • Use of stealth/fast-tempo/fluidity-of-action coupled with cohesion of guerrilla bands as basis for: – dispersion, to arouse people, to avoid adversary strength, and to force government to thin-out, or disperse, its strength; – concentration, to hit and wipe-out isolated fractions; – shifting of effort (in these as well as other activities), in order to gain and keep initiative. # Guerrilla results ## Successful • American Colonies 1775-81 • Spain 1808-14 • Russia 1812 • German East Africa 1914-18 • Arabia 1916-18 • China 1927-49 • Russia 1941-45 • Yugoslavia 1941-45 • Indochina 1945-54 • Algeria 1954-62 • Cuba 1956-59 • South Vietnam 1958-75 ## Unsuccessful • Philippines 1899-1902 • South Africa 1900-02 • Greece 1944-49 • Philippines* 1946-54 • Malaya* 1948-60 * Regime exercised particular care not to inflict casualties and to protect population. # Blitz/guerrilla theme ## Essence • Avoid battles—instead penetrate adversary to subvert, disrupt, or seize those connections, centers, and activities that provide cohesion (e.g., psychological/moral bonds, communications, lines of communication, command and supply centers …) • Exploit ambiguity, deception, superior mobility, and sudden violence to generate initial surprise and shock followed by surprise and shock again, again, again … • Roll-up/wipe-out the isolated units or remnants created by the subversion, surprise, shock, disruption, and seizure. ## Intent • Exploit subversion, surprise, shock, disruption, and seizure to generate confusion, disorder, panic, etc., thereby shatter cohesion, paralyze effort, and bring about adversary collapse. # Disrupt the connections and centers that provide cohesion ## Israeli example (a la Gen. Y. Yadin - 1949) To exploit the principles of war for our purpose and base ourselves upon (the) strategic indirect approach, so as to determine the issue of the fighting even before fighting has begun, it is necessary to achieve the three following aims: a. to cut the enemy’s lines of communications, thus paralyzing his physical build-up; b. to seal him off from his lines of retreat, thus undermining the enemy’s will and destroying his morale; c. to hit his centers of administration and disrupt his communications, thus severing the link between his brain and limbs. # ? Key question ? Why have blitz and guerrilla tactics been so extraordinarily successful? # Message • Blitz and guerrillas, by being able to operate in a directed, yet more indistinct, more irregular, and quicker manner than their adversaries, can: – Repeatedly concentrate or disperse more inconspicuously and/or more quickly from or to lower levels of distinction (organizational, operational, and environmental) without losing internal harmony, as well as, – Repeatedly and unexpectedly infiltrate or penetrate adversaries’ vulnerabilities and weaknesses in order to splinter, isolate or envelop, and overwhelm disconnected remnants of adversary organism. ## or put another way • Blitz and guerrillas, by operating in a directed, yet more indistinct, more irregular, and quicker manner, operate inside their adversaries’ observation-orientation-decision-action loops or get inside their mind-time-space as basis to penetrate the moral-mental-physical being of their adversaries in order to pull them apart, and bring about their collapse. ## Underlying idea • Such amorphous, lethal, and unpredictable activity by blitz and guerrillas make them appear awesome and unstoppable which altogether produce uncertainty, doubt, mistrust, confusion, disorder, fear, panic … and ultimately collapse—a notion implied by Sun Tzu around 400 B.C. and more recently by J.F.C. Fuller after observing the impact of Ludendorff’s infiltration tactics in 1918. ## ? Natural questions ? • How can we defend against or counter the blitz? • How can we defend against or counter the guerrilla movement? # “Where are the weaknesses of the blitz?” ![](_page_104_figure_20.jpeg) *Figure (p. 104):* The image illustrates a concept related to "blitz" weaknesses. It shows two large yellow zigzag lines, resembling lightning bolts, extending from the bottom and meeting at the top, forming an arrow shape pointing towards each other. A magnified circular inset shows a more intricate, branching pattern of yellow lines within a white circle, suggesting a detailed view of the "blitz." Small orange arrows radiating from the base of the yellow zigzag lines on the ground indicate outward dispersion or impact. The question posed in the surrounding text, "Where are the weaknesses of the blitz?", implies that the visual representation is a metaphor for a strategy or phenomenon with potential vulnerabilities. # Key point Difficult to sustain fast-tempo and maintain cohesion of blitz effort when forced to repeatedly and rapidly shift concentration of strength against weakness. # Counter-blitz # (Variation of German experiences during WWII) ## Posture • Emphasize intelligence, reconnaissance (air and ground) and set-up screen of forward outposts and patrols to report on adversary activity and warn of any impending or actual incursions. • Deploy, disperse, and frequently redeploy/redisperse reconnaissance and mobile antitank/infantry/armored teams together with artillery in region behind screen, so that they can mask dispositions, as well as move inconspicuously/quickly to focus and shift local main efforts against adversary thrusts. • Place armored teams, as mobile reserve, in echelon behind recce, anti-tank/infantry/armor and artillery so that they can easily focus effort, and quickly move-in to decapitate any local breakthrough—or push-off for a blitz counterstroke. ## Action • Employ air and fast moving mobile/armored reconnaissance teams to determine direction/strength of thrusts and to continuously harass by repeated delaying actions and hit-and-run attacks in order to slow momentum and erode cohesion of blitz attack. • Inconspicuously move-in with high-speed mobile anti-tank/infantry/armored teams, together with air and artillery support, to strengthen favorable sectors. Hit adversary thrusts and resupply efforts with ambuscades and with repeated sudden/sharp flank and rear counter-thrusts to channel as well as drain- away momentum and break-up cohesion of blitz thrusts. • Concentrate swift armored combat forces (held in reserve) and use with air to rapidly drive a shallow and/or deep flank counterstroke in order to swing in behind and roll-up blitz offensive in detail (counterstroke launched while adversary is moving forward). ## Idea • Smash blitz offensive by inconspicuously using fast-tempo/fluidity-of-action and cohesion of counter- blitz combat teams as basis for shifting of forces and quick focus of air and ground effort to throttle momentum, shatter cohesion, and envelop blitz in order to destroy adversary’s capacity to resist. # Blitz and counter-blitz ## Main features and emphasis • Intelligence and recce action • Infiltration/penetration and isolation • Ambiguity, deception, speed, and violence to generate surprise and shock - Mission/Schwerpunkt philosophy • Acceptance of “gaps” and (related) “risks” in support of mission/Schwerpunkt philosophy • Echelon-in-depth (offense and defense) • Reserves reconstituted and accumulated (at all levels) to support or generate success • Posture of positions, alternative positions, dummy positions and roving positions to mask maneuvers and intentions # Guerrilla/counter-guerrilla campaigns ## Key points • Guerrilla vanguards need cause and support of people that is dependent upon regime’s unwillingness/inability to come to grips with crises of its’ own making. ## or more simply • Crises and vanguards represent the marriage of instability and initiative that create and expand guerrilla effort. ## hence • The thought occurs that in order to dry-up a guerrilla upsurge one should strike at those root causes or illegitimate inequalities that generate and exacerbate crises as well as provide a favorable climate for vanguards to form or operate in. # Counter-guerrilla campaign ## Action • Undermine guerrilla cause and destroy their cohesion by demonstrating integrity and competence of government to represent and serve needs of people—rather than exploit and impoverish them for the benefit of a greedy elite.* • Take political initiative to root out and visibly punish corruption. Select new leaders with recognized competence as well as popular appeal. Ensure that they deliver justice, eliminate grievances and connect government with grass roots.* • Infiltrate guerrilla movement as well as employ population for intelligence about guerrilla plans, operations, and organization. • Seal-off guerrilla regions from outside world by diplomatic, psychological, and various other activities that strip-away potential allies as well as by disrupting or straddling communications that connect these regions with outside world. • Deploy administrative talent, police, and counter-guerrilla teams into affected localities and regions to: inhibit guerrilla communication, coordination and movement; minimize guerrilla contact with local inhabitants; isolate their ruling cadres; and destroy their infrastructure. • Exploit presence of above teams to build-up local government as well as recruit militia for local and regional security in order to protect people from the persuasion and coercion efforts of the guerrilla cadres and their fighting units. • Use special teams in a complementary effort to penetrate guerrilla controlled regions. Employ (guerrillas’ own) tactics of reconnaissance, infiltration, surprise hit-and-run, and sudden ambush to: keep roving bands off-balance, make base areas untenable, and disrupt communication with outside world. • Expand these complementary security/penetration efforts into affected region after affected region in order to undermine, collapse, and replace guerrilla influence with government influence and control. • Visibly link these efforts with local political/economic/social reform in order to connect central government with hopes and needs of people, thereby gain their support and confirm government legitimacy. ## Idea • Break guerrillas’ moral-mental-physical hold over the population, destroy their cohesion, and bring about their collapse via political initiative that demonstrates moral legitimacy and vitality of government and by relentless military operations that emphasize stealth/fast-tempo/fluidity-of-action and cohesion of overall effort. * If you cannot realize such a political program, you might consider changing sides! ## Note We have indicated again and again the importance of popular support for guerrilla or counter-guerrilla success. Why? ## Insight Without support of people the guerrillas (or counter- guerrillas) have neither a vast hidden intelligence network nor an invisible security apparatus that permits them to “see” into adversary operations yet “blinds” adversary to their own operations. # Categories of conflict # Categories of conflict • Now looking back and reflecting upon the panorama of military history we can imagine three kinds of human conflict: – Attrition warfare—as practiced by the Emperor Napoleon, by all sides during the 19th century and during World War I, by the Allies during World War II, and by present-day nuclear planners. – Maneuver conflict—as practiced by the Mongols, General Bonaparte, Confederate General Stonewall Jackson, Union General Ulysses S. Grant, Hitler’s Generals (in particular Manstein, Guderian, Balck, Rommel) and the Americans under Generals Patton and MacArthur. – Moral conflict—as practiced by the Mongols, most guerrilla leaders, a very few counter-guerrillas (such as Magsaysay) and certain others from Sun Tzu to the present. • With these comments in mind let’s look into the essentials of each. # Attrition observations • Firepower, as a destructive force, is king. • Protection (trenches, armor, dispersion, etc.) is used to weaken or dilute effects of enemy firepower. • Mobility is used to bring firepower to bear or to evade enemy fire. • Measures of success are (now) “body count” and targets destroyed. • Seize and hold terrain objectives replaces Napoleon’s dictum: Destroy enemy army. # Essence of attrition warfare ## Create and exploit • Destructive force: Weapons (mechanical, chemical, biological, nuclear, etc.) that kill, maim, and/or otherwise generate widespread destruction. • Protection: Ability to minimize the concentrated and explosive expression of destructive force by taking cover behind natural or manmade obstacles, by dispersion of people and resources, and by being obscure using camouflage, smoke, etc., together with cover and dispersion. ## Payoff • Frightful and debilitating attrition via widespread destruction as basis to: - Mobility: Speed or rapidity to focus destructive force or move away from adversary’s destructive focus. - Break enemy's will to resist – Seize and hold terrain objectives Aim Compel enemy to surrender and sue for peace # Observations regarding maneuver • Ambiguity, deception, novelty, mobility, and violence (or threat thereof) are used to generate surprise and shock. • Fire and movement are used in combination, like cheng/ch'i or Nebenpunkte/Schwerpunkt, to tie-up, divert, or drain-away adversary attention and strength in order to expose as well as menace and exploit vulnerabilities or weaknesses elsewhere. • Indications of success tend to be qualitative and are related to the widespread onset of confusion and disorder, frequent envelopments, high prisoner counts, or any other phenomenon that suggests inability to adapt to change. # Essence of maneuver conflict ## Create, exploit, and magnify • Ambiguity Alternative or competing impressions of events as they may or may not be. • Deception An impression of events as they are not. • Novelty Impressions associated with events/ideas that are unfamiliar or have not been experienced before. • Fast transient maneuvers Irregular and rapid/abrupt shift from one maneuver event/state to another. • Effort (cheng/ch'i or Nebenpunkte/Schwerpunkt) An expenditure of energy or an irruption of violence—focused into, or thru, features that permit an organic whole to exist. ## Payoff • Disorientation Mismatch between events one (seemingly) observes or anticipates and events (or efforts) he must react or adapt to. • Surprise Disorientation generated by perceiving extreme change (of events or efforts) over a short period of time. • Shock Paralyzing state of disorientation generated by extreme or violent change (of events or efforts) over a short period of time. • Disruption State of being split-apart, broken-up, or torn asunder. ## Aim Generate many non-cooperative centers of gravity, as well as disorient or disrupt those that adversary depends upon, in order to magnify friction, shatter cohesion, produce paralysis, and bring about his collapse. # Note Surprise and shock can also be represented as an overload beyond one’s immediate ability to respond or adapt. In this context, we may view the “Essence of Maneuver Conflict” a bit differently— # Essence of maneuver conflict ## Create, exploit, and magnify • Ambiguity: Alternative or competing impressions of events as they may or may not be. • Deception: An impression of events as they are not. • Novelty: Impressions associated with events/ideas that are unfamiliar or have not been experienced before. • Fast transient maneuvers: Irregular and rapid/abrupt shift from one maneuver event/state to another. • Effort (cheng/ch'i or Nebenpunkte/Schwerpunkt): An expenditure of energy or an irruption of violence—focused into, or thru, features that permit an organic whole to exist. ## Payoff • Disorientation: Mismatch between events one observes or imagines and events (or efforts) he must react or adapt to. • Disruption: State of being split-apart, broken-up, or torn asunder. • Overload: A welter of threatening events/efforts beyond one’s mental or physical capacity to adapt or endure. ## Aim Generate many non-cooperative centers of gravity, as well as disorient, disrupt, or overload those that adversary depends upon, in order to magnify friction, shatter cohesion, produce paralysis, and bring about his collapse; or equivalently, Uncover, create, and exploit many vulnerabilities and weaknesses, hence many opportunities, to pull adversary apart and isolate remnants for mop-up or absorption. # Observations related to moral conflict Gen. Hermann Balck ## Theme • No fixed recipes for organization, communications, tactics, leadership, etc. • Wide freedom for subordinates to exercise imagination and initiative—yet harmonize within intent of superior commanders. • Heavy reliance upon moral (human values) instead of material superiority as basis for cohesion and ultimate success. • Commanders must create a bond and breadth of experience based upon trust—not mistrust—for cohesion. ## How is this atmosphere achieved? • By example leaders (at all levels) must demonstrate requisite physical energy, mental agility, and moral authority, to inspire subordinates to enthusiastically cooperate and take initiative within superior’s intent. ## What is the price? • Courage to share danger and discomfort at the front. • Willingness to support and promote (unconventional or difficult) subordinates that accept danger, demonstrate initiative, take risks, and come-up with new ways toward mission accomplishment. • Dedication and resolve to face-up to and master uncomfortable circumstances that fly in the face of the traditional solution. ## Benefit • Internal simplicity that permits rapid adaptability. # Observations related to moral conflict Cyril Falls— The Art of War from The Age of Napoleon to The Present Day—1961 ## Page 124 “In the First World War ‘cellar life’ had been a feature of the adversities of Paris, which actually came under the fire of specially built long-range guns in 1918, as well as aircraft bombing. In the East End of London air raids cause a tendency to panic in the latter part of 1917, and, whether there was a raid or not, some 300,000 people crowded each night into the underground railway stations and slept on the platforms … There was little organized civil defence beyond the reduction of lights.” ## Page 161 “The Germans, who were far ahead of any rival in the science of lighter-than-air construction, refused to accept the general belief that the future lay entirely with the heavier-than-air. Their Zeppelins … were employed chiefly in night attacks on England. On one occasion a single airship did a million pounds worth of damage in a raid, but on the whole their success was mainly moral and measured in terms of absenteeism in factories and sensational drops in production of warlike material.” ## Page 165 “Early in the war the German Armies owed much in their victories in Poland, Belgium, and France to their dive-bombers. These aircraft acted in close support to the armour and infantry … They often put hostile artillery out of action, but generally by driving the detachments from their guns. The successes were won for the most part by moral rather than material effect. To troops unused to them, especially the French division of low categories, they proved extremely unsettling.” # Observations related to moral conflict ## Insights regarding Falls’ statement and Balck’s ideas - From Falls' comments we note (with slight alteration) the following words and phrases: panic ... moral absenteeism sensational drops in production dive bombers success were for the most part ... moral-to troops unused to them ... they proved extremely unsettling. A quick glance shows that all these words and phrases are directly related to one another. • Going even further we can say: Falls’ comments on pages 124, 161, and 165 suggest that moral effects are related to the menace posed by the Zeppelins and dive bombers, and the uncertainty associated with not knowing what to expect or how to deal with this menace. Put simply: Moral-effects are related to menace and uncertainty. • For a first cut this suggests that moral-strength represents mental capacity to overcome menace and uncertainty. • On the other hand, this first cut seems to leave out something that humans either need or must overcame for collective moral strength. Fortunately we have some clues: – First: Remember that guerrilla commanders (see Modern Guerrilla Campaign) stress use of propaganda, civil disorders, selected terrorism, etc., as basis to generate mistrust and discord. – Second: Balck emphasizes the importance of trust—not mistrust—for cohesion. • Now, recognizing that both Balck and guerrilla commanders work in a hostile environment (of menace and uncertainty) that naturally breeds mistrust, it is clear that moral effects must include this factor. • This suggest moral strength represents mental capacity to overcome menace, uncertainty, and mistrust. # Observations related to moral conflict • Now by using moral strength as a point of departure—and by feeding in those unsettling or threatening experiences (a la Clausewitz) that either bring out fear, anxiety, and alienation, or their more noble counterweights: courage, confidence, and esprit—we can evolve the following related notions: – Moral strength: Mental capacity to overcome menace, uncertainty, and mistrust. – Moral victory: Triumph of courage, confidence, and esprit (de corps) over fear, anxiety, and alienation when confronted by menace, uncertainty, and mistrust. – Moral defeat: Triumph of fear, anxiety, and alienation over courage, confidence, and esprit when confronted by menace, uncertainty, and mistrust. – Moral values: Human values that permit one to carry on in the face of menace, uncertainty, and mistrust. – Moral authority: Person or body that can give one the courage, confidence, and esprit to overcome menace, uncertainty, and mistrust. • Finally, by stripping away and recombining essentials—from these notions as well as from the ideas and experiences of Clausewitz, Balck, and Falls—we can evolve the Essence of Moral Conflict. # Essence of moral conflict ## Create, exploit, and magnify • Menace: Impressions of danger to one’s well being and survival. • Uncertainty: Impressions, or atmosphere, generated by events that appear ambiguous, erratic, contradictory, unfamiliar, chaotic, etc. • Mistrust: Atmosphere of doubt and suspicion that loosens human bonds among members of an organic whole or between organic wholes. ## Idea • Surface, fear, anxiety, and alienation in order to generate many non-cooperative centers of gravity, as well as subvert those that adversary depends upon, thereby magnify internal friction. Aim Destroy moral bonds that permit an organic whole to exist # Suspicion • The essence of moral conflict, as presented, seems to be one-sided and emphasizes the negative or dark side of one’s moral make-up. ## ? Raises question ? • How do we bring out the positive side? In other words—if courage, confidence, and esprit represent the positive counterweights to fear, anxiety, and alienation—what are the positive counterweights to menace, uncertainty, and mistrust? # Insight • In addressing this question we find that the counterweights to menace and uncertainty are not at all obvious unless we start with mistrust and work in reverse order. Proceeding in this way we note that: – The presence of mistrust implies that there is a rupture or loosening of the human bonds or connections that permit individuals to work as an organic whole harmony with one another. This suggests that harmony itself represents an appropriate counterweight to mistrust. – In dealing with uncertainty, adaptability seems to be the right counterweight. Otherwise, how can one adjust to the unforeseen or unpredictable nature of uncertainty? JRB comment: the counterweight to “uncertainty” cannot be “certainty.” – Finally, with respect to menace one cannot be passive. Instead, initiative is needed otherwise menace may obliterate the benefits associated with harmony and adaptability. Intuitively, this suggests that initiative is the right counterweight here. • Using these ideas, together with the previous ideas already uncovered, we can modify and enrich the essence of moral conflict as follows: # Essence of moral conflict ## Negative factors • Menace: Impressions of danger to one’s well being and survival • Uncertainty: Impressions, or atmosphere, generated by events that appear ambiguous, erratic, contradictory, unfamiliar, chaotic, etc. • Mistrust: Atmosphere of doubt and suspicion that loosens human bonds among members of an organic whole or between organic wholes ## Counterweights • Initiative: Internal drive to think and take action without being urged • Adaptability: Power to adjust or change in order to cope with new or unforeseen circumstances • Harmony: Interaction of apparently disconnected events or entities in a connected way ## Aim Pump-up friction via negative factors to breed fear, anxiety, and alienation in order to generate many non-cooperative centers of gravity, as well as subvert those that adversary depends upon, thereby sever moral bonds that permit adversary to exist as an organic whole. ## Simultaneously, build-up and play counterweights against negative factors to diminish internal friction, as well as surface courage, confidence, and esprit, thereby make possible the human interactions needed to create moral bonds that permit us, as an organic whole, to shape and adapt to change. # Synthesis # Pattern for successful operations - Goal • Plan • Action • Support • Command # Patterns for successful operations ## Goal • Diminish adversary’s freedom-of-action while improving our freedom-of-action, so that our adversary cannot cope—while we can cope—with events/efforts as they unfold. ## Plan • Probe and test adversary to unmask strengths, weaknesses, maneuvers, and intentions. • Employ a variety of measures that interweave menace-uncertainty-mistrust with tangles of ambiguity-deception-novelty as basis to sever adversary’s moral ties and disorient or twist his mental images, hence mask-distort-magnify our presence and activities. • Select initiative (or response) that is least expected. • Establish focus of main effort together with other (related) effort and pursue directions that permit many happenings, offer many branches, and threaten alternative objectives. • Move along paths of least resistance (to reinforce and exploit success). • Exploit, rather than disrupt or destroy, those differences, frictions, obsessions, etc., of adversary organism that interfere with his ability to cope with unfolding circumstances. • Subvert, disorient, disrupt, overload, or seize adversary’s vulnerable, yet critical, connections, centers, and activities that provide cohesion and permit coherent observation-orientation-decision-action in order to dismember organism and isolate remnants for absorption or mop-up. ## Action • Observe-orient-decide-act more inconspicuously , more quickly , and with more irregularity as basis to keep or gain initiative as well as shape and shift main effort: to repeatedly and unexpectedly penetrate vulnerabilities and weaknesses exposed by that effort or other effort(s) that tie-up, divert, or drain-away adversary attention (and strength) elsewhere. ## Support • Superior mobile communications • Only essential logistics to maintain cohesion of overall effort and sustain appropriate pace of operations within available resources. ## Command • Decentralize, in a tactical sense, to encourage lower-level commanders to shape, direct, and take the sudden/sharp actions necessary to quickly exploit opportunities as they present themselves. • Centralize, in a strategic sense, to establish aims, match ambitions with means/talent, sketch flexible plans, allocate resources, and shape focus of overall effort. # Impressions • Plan and action statements suggest that we are trying to: – Penetrate adversary system and mask own system against his penetration; – Create a variety of impressions of what is occurring and what is about to occur; – Generate mismatches between what seems to be and what is; – Push adversary beyond his ability to adapt. • Intentions that make-up plan cannot happen without application of transients that make-up action. # First impression • Note how these strategic and tactical ideas, that we evolved from the plan and action statements, fit in nicely with the following comments by Napoleon: – “The art of land warfare is an art of genius, of inspiration … A general never knows anything with certainty, never sees his enemy clearly, never knows positively where he is. When armies are face to face, the least accident in the ground, the smallest wood, may conceal part of the enemy army. The most experienced eye cannot be sure whether it sees the whole of the enemy’s army or only three-fourths. It is by the mind’s eye, by the integration of all reasoning, by a kind of inspiration, that the general sees, knows, and judges.” – “The first quality for a commander in chief is a cool head which receives a just impression of things; he should not allow himself to be confused by either good or bad news; the impressions which he receives successively or simultaneously in the course of a day should classify themselves in his mind in such a way as to occupy the place which they merit; because reason and judgment are the result of the comparison of various impressions taken into just consideration.” • Above comments, by Napoleon, reveal ever-present vulnerabilities and weaknesses that commanders and subordinates alike must accept. ## hence • If we turn these comments around and connect them with the tactical and strategic ideas presented thus far, we surface a modern notion of grand tactics. # Which becomes: ## Grand tactics • Operate inside adversary’s observation-orientation-decision-action loops, or get inside his mind-time-space, to create a tangle of threatening and/or non-threatening events/efforts as well as repeatedly generate mismatches between those events/efforts adversary observes, or anticipates, and those he must react to, to survive; ## thereby • Enmesh adversary in an amorphous, menacing, and unpredictable world of uncertainty, doubt, mistrust, confusion, disorder, fear, panic, chaos … and/or fold adversary back inside himself; ## thereby • Maneuver adversary beyond his moral-mental-physical capacity to adapt or endure so that he can neither divine our intentions nor focus his efforts to cope with the unfolding strategic design or related decisive strokes as they penetrate, splinter, isolate or envelop, and overwhelm him. # Second impression ## Transients • Observe, orient, decide and act more inconspicuously, more quickly, and with more irregularity … or put another way • Operate inside adversary’s observation- orientation-decision action loops or get inside his mind-time-space. ![](_page_133_figure_21.jpeg) *Figure (p. 133):* The image displays two abstract blue arrows on a light purple background. One arrow, larger and curved, points downwards and to the left. The other, smaller and straight, points upwards and to the right. Below the arrows, the text "permits one to" is visible. ## Intentions • Probe and test adversary to unmask strengths, weaknesses, maneuvers, and intentions. • Employ a variety of measures that interweave menace- uncertainty-mistrust with tangles of ambiguity-deception- novelty as basis to sever adversary’s moral ties and disorient … • Select initiative (or response) that is least expected. • Establish focus of main effort together with other effort and pursue directions that permit many happenings, offer many branches, and threaten alternative objectives. • Move along paths of least resistance (to reinforce and exploit success). • Exploit, rather than disrupt or destroy, those differences, frictions, and obsessions of adversary organism that interfere with his ability to cope … • Subvert, disorient, disrupt, overload, or seize adversary’s vulnerable, yet critical, connections, centers, and activities … in order to dismember organism and isolate remnants for wrap-up or absorption. • Generate uncertainty, confusion, disorder, panic, chaos … to shatter cohesion, produce paralysis and bring about collapse. • Become an extraordinary commander. # Which leads to: ## Strategy Penetrate adversary’s moral-mental-physical being to dissolve his moral fiber, disorient his mental images, disrupt his operations, and overload his system—as well as subvert, shatter, seize, or otherwise subdue those moral-mental-physical bastions, connections, or activities that he depends upon—in order to destroy internal harmony, produce paralysis, and collapse adversary’s will to resist. # Now altogether ## Tactics • Observe-orient-decide-act more inconspicuously, more quickly, and with more irregularity as basis to keep or gain initiative as well as shape and shift main effort: to repeatedly and unexpectedly penetrate vulnerabilities and weaknesses exposed by that effort or other effort(s) that tie-up, divert, or drain-away adversary attention (and strength) elsewhere. ## Grand tactics • Operate inside adversary’s observation-orientation-decision-action loops, or get inside his mind-time-space, to create tangles of threatening and/or non-threatening events/efforts as well as repeatedly generate mismatches between those events/efforts adversary observes, or imagines, and those he must react to, to survive; thereby • Enmesh adversary in an amorphous, menacing, and unpredictable world of uncertainty, doubt, mistrust, confusion, disorder, fear, panic, chaos … and/or fold adversary back inside himself; thereby • Maneuver adversary beyond his moral-mental-physical capacity to adapt or endure so that tie can neither divine our intentions nor focus his efforts to cope with the unfolding strategic design or related decisive strokes as they penetrate, splinter, isolate or envelop, and overwhelm him. ## Strategy • Penetrate adversary’s moral-mental-physical being to dissolve his moral fiber, disorient his mental images, disrupt his operations, and overload his system, as well as subvert, shatter, seize, or otherwise subdue those moral-mental-physical bastions, connections, or activities that he depends upon, in order to destroy internal harmony, produce paralysis, and collapse adversary’s will to resist. ## Strategic aim • Diminish adversary’s capacity while improving our capacity to adapt as an organic whole, so that our adversary cannot cope—while we can cope—with events/efforts as they unfold. ## ! An alternative portrait ! Now, after some introspection, it is not difficult to see that these tactical and strategic statements are very definitely destructive in nature. Keeping these words in mind, while working backwards thru this presentation, one is left with the impression that the destructive attrition-maneuver-moral ideas played-out in the “Categories of Conflict” aren’t much different than the tactical and strategic ideas that we have just discussed. As a consequence, by stripping-down and recombining the ideas associated with both these conceptual streams, we can evolve an alternative portrait of ruin as follows: # Theme for disintegration and collapse ## Synthesize • Lethal effort: Tie-up, divert, or drain-away adversary attention and strength as well as (or thereby) overload critical vulnerabilities and generate weaknesses. - Maneuver: Subvert, disorient, disrupt, overload, or seize those vulnerable yet critical connections, centers, and activities as basis to penetrate, splinter, and isolate remnants of adversary organism for mop-up or absorption. • Moral: Create an atmosphere of fear, anxiety, and alienation to sever human bonds that permit an organic whole to exist. ## Idea • Destroy adversary’s moral-mental- physical harmony, produce paralysis, and collapse his will to resist. ## Aim Render adversary powerless by denying him the opportunity to cope with unfolding circumstances ## Underlying insight Unless one can penetrate adversary’s moral-mental-physical being, and sever those interacting bonds that permit him to exist as an organic whole, by being able to subvert, shatter, seize, or otherwise subdue those moral-mental-physical bastions, connections, or activities that he depends upon, one will find it exceedingly difficult, if not impossible, to collapse adversary’s will to resist. which leads to ## The name-of-the-game Morally-mentally-physically isolate adversary from allies or any outside support as well as isolate elements of adversary or adversaries form on another and overwhelm them by being able to penetrate and splinter their moral-mental-physical being at any and all levels. ## ? Raises question ? How do we connect the tactical and strategic notions, or the theme for disintegration and collapse, with the national goal? # Via a sensible grand strategy that will: • Support national goal. • Pump-up our resolve, drain-away adversary resolve, and attract the uncommitted. • End conflict on favorable terms. • Ensure that conflict and peace terms do not provide seeds for (unfavorable) future conflict. # Grand strategy ## Essence • Shape pursuit of national goal so that we not only amplify our spirit and strength (while undermining and isolating our adversaries) but also influence the uncommitted or potential adversaries so that they are drawn toward our philosophy and are empathetic toward our success. ## Basis • An appreciation for the underlying self-interests, critical differences of opinion, internal contradictions, frictions, obsessions, etc., that we as well as the uncommitted and any potential or real adversaries must contend with. # Pattern - National goal Improve our fitness, as an organic whole, to shape and cope with an ever-changing environment. • Grand strategy Shape pursuit of national goal so that we not only amplify our spirit and strength (while undermining and isolating our adversaries) but also influence the uncommitted or potential adversaries so that they are drawn toward our philosophy and are empathetic toward our success. • Strategic aim Diminish adversary’s capacity while improving our capacity to adapt as an organic whole, so that our adversary cannot cope—while we can cope—with events/efforts as they unfold. - Strategy Penetrate adversary’s moral-mental-physical being to dissolve his moral fiber, disorient his mental images, disrupt his operations, and overload his system, as well as subvert, shatter, seize, or otherwise subdue those moral-mental-physical bastions, connections, or activities that he depends upon, in order to destroy internal harmony, produce paralysis, and collapse adversary’s will to resist. - Grand tactics Operate inside adversary’s observation-orientation-decision-action loops, or get inside his mind-time-space, to create tangles of threatening and/or non-threatening events/efforts as well as repeatedly generate mismatches between those events/efforts adversary observes, or imagines, and those he must react to, to survive; thereby Enmesh adversary in an amorphous, menacing, and unpredictable world of uncertainty, doubt, mistrust, confusion, disorder, fear, panic, chaos … and/or fold adversary back inside himself; thereby Maneuver adversary beyond his moral-mental-physical capacity to adapt or endure so that he can neither divine our intentions nor focus his efforts to cope with the unfolding strategic design or related decisive strokes as they penetrate, splinter, isolate or envelop, and overwhelm him. - Tactics Observe-orient-decide-act more inconspicuously, more quickly, and with more irregularity as basis to keep or gain initiative as well as shape and shift main effort: to repeatedly and unexpectedly penetrate vulnerabilities and weaknesses exposed by that effort or other effort(s) that tie- up, divert, or drain-away adversary attention (and strength) elsewhere. # Insight On one hand, as shown on the previous chart, the national goal and grand strategy tend to be constructive in nature. On the other hand, the strategic aim, strategy, grand tactics, and tactics are destructive in nature and operate over a shorter time frame. In this sense, the upper two and the latter four notions, as expressed, appear to be in disharmony with one another. Yet, application of these latter four strategic and tactical notions permit real leadership to avoid high attrition, avoid widespread destruction, and gain a quick victory. This combined with shattered cohesion, paralysis, and rapid collapse demonstrated by the existing adversary regime, makes it appear corrupt, incompetent, and unfit to govern. Under these circumstances, leaders and statesmen offering generous terms can form the basis for a viable peace. In this sense, the first two and the latter four notions can be in harmony with one another. # Further elaboration Up to this point—by repeatedly adding, stripping-away, and recombining many different, yet similar, ideas and thoughts—we have examined the nature of conflict, survival, and conquest in many different ways. A review and further manipulation of the ideas and thoughts that make-up these different ways suggests that, for success over the long haul and under the most difficult conditions, one needs some unifying vision that can be used to attract the uncommitted as well as pump- up friendly resolve and drive and drain-away or subvert adversary resolve and drive. In other words, what is needed is a vision rooted in human nature so noble, so attractive that it not only attracts the uncommitted and magnifies the spirit and strength of its adherents, but also undermines the dedication and determination of any competitors or adversaries. Moreover, such a unifying notion should be so compelling that it acts as a catalyst or beacon around which to evolve those qualities that permit a collective entity or organic whole to improve its stature in the scheme of things. Put another way, we are suggesting a need for a supra-orientation or center-of-gravity that permits leaders, and other authorities, to inspire their followers and members to enthusiastically take action toward confronting and conquering all obstacles that stand in the way. Such a scheme can be portrayed as follows: # Theme for vitality and growth ## Unifying vision • A grand ideal, overarching theme, or noble philosophy that represents a coherent paradigm within which individuals as well as societies can shape and adapt to unfolding circumstances—yet offers a way to expose flaws of competing or adversary systems. ## Aim Improve fitness as an organic whole to shape and expand influence or power over the course of events in the world ## Ingredients needed to pursue vision • Insight Ability to peer into and discern the inner nature or workings of things. • Initiative Internal drive to think and take action without being urged. • Adaptability Power to adjust or change in order to cope with new or unforeseen circumstances. • Harmony Power to perceive or create interaction of apparently disconnected events or entities in a connected way. Editors’ note: In later versions, Boyd listed the ingredients as “IOHAI”: insight, orientation, harmony, agility, and initiative. “Agility” means to operate inside an opponent’s OODA loop. For “orientation,” see pages 12-17 of Organic Design. # Application # Counter-blitz a la Sun Tzu # Counter-blitz a la Sun Tzu ## Maneuver scheme • Employ cheng/Nebenpunkte as basis to repeatedly and unexpectedly tie-up, divert, stretch-out, or drain-away adversary attention and strength in order to expose vulnerabilities and weaknesses for decisive stroke(s) by ch'i/Schwerpunkt. ## Aim . Blind-side adversary regardless of circumstances. # Counter-blitz a la Sun Tzu strategy ## Shape adversary impression Arrange elements of defense (in harmony with penchant for humans to generate mental patterns), as basis to guide adversaries to form or project patterns on the environment they are facing. In other words, emphasize certain features so that adversary intelligence, recce, patrols, and other observation activity generate mental pictures of what we seem to be doing. In this sense, we cause adversary to project tempo or rhythm as well as a sense of form or gestalt upon the environment. Naturally, this raises the question: How do we want our posture to appear to an adversary—or put another way, what kind of mental picture do we want him to generate in his mind? # Counter-blitz a la Sun Tzu strategy ## How? Set-up positions echeloned-in-depth (similar to German philosophy) with flexibility to quickly rotate or shift both front and flank maneuver schemes-yet convince adversary (with help from “shaping” and “disruption” agencies/activities— intelligence, electronic warfare, etc.) that he is facing, for example, an in-depth strongpoint/checkerboard or multiple belts of an in depth linear or elastic defense. In this sense, we suggest three belts or bands behind the front as follows: • Emphasize intelligence, reconnaissance (air and ground) and set-up screen of forward outposts and patrols to report on adversary activity and warn of any in pending or actual incursions. • Deploy, disperse, and frequently redeploy/redisperse reconnaissance and mobile anti-tank/infantry/armored teams together with artillery in region behind screen, so that they can mask dispositions, as well as move inconspicuously/quickly to focus and shift local main efforts against adversary thrusts. • Place armored teams, as mobile reserve, in echelon behind recce, antitank/infantry/armor and artillery so that they can easily focus effort, and quickly move-in to decapitate any local breakthrough—or push-off for a blitz counterstroke. # Counter-blitz a la Sun Tzu strategy ## Game • Shift from such an ambiguous or misleading posture into a gauntlet defense with alternate channels, sectors, or zones by thinning-out some sectors or zones in order to strengthen others. • Basic notion is to think in terms of channels, avenues and gauntlets (instead of just belts, bands and fronts) so that ambush gauntlets will naturally evolve or be set-up to deal with forward as well as lateral (roll-out) thrusts of adversary. In this way, ambush gauntlets can then be set- up at any level from platoon to theater. # Counter-blitz a la Sun Tzu tactics ## Basic maneuver • Use obstacles, delaying actions, hit-and-run attacks, and/or baited retreats in thinned-out sectors/zones together with “shaping” and “disruption” activities to disorient adversary as well as pile-up or stretch-out his maneuver. Combine this action with fire and movement into adversary flank and/or rear from strengthened adjacent sectors/zones to: – slow momentum and blow adversary away (during pile-up) or – channel momentum then decapitate and break-up cohesion of thrust (during stretch-out). ## Mental picture • Think of obstacles, delay, hit-and-run, and baited retreats together with “shaping” and “disruption” activities as cheng or Nebenpunkte to create caps, exposed flanks, and vulnerable rears by the pile-up/congestion or stretch-out of adversary maneuver. • Think of ch'i or Schwerpunkt maneuver (fire and movement) hitting unexpectedly thru gaps into adversary flank/rear, or blind-side, as a decisive stroke to pull enemy apart and roll-up his isolated remnants. # Counter-blitz a la Sun Tzu tactics ## Action • Employ air and fast moving mobile/armored recce teams, with mobile antitank teams, artillery, and “shaping”/”disruption” activities in support, as Nebenpunkte to determine direction/strength of thrusts and (by local front/flank combinations) to continuously harass with repeated delaying actions and hit-and-run attacks. Object is to: - disorient adversary; – provide information to senior commanders to help them decide which sectors to thin-out and which to strengthen; – pile-up or stretch-out adversary maneuver to “shape” (or disrupt) tempo/rhythm and pattern of blitz attack as well as create gaps, exposed flanks, and vulnerable rears. • Inconspicuously move-in with high-speed mobile anti-tank/infantry/armored teams together with air and artillery support as Schwerpunkt to strengthen appropriate sectors that flank adversary thrusts. From here, exploit gaps, or any other vulnerabilities and weaknesses, to ambush adversary with fire together with sudden/sharp flank and rear counter-thrusts into his forward, roll-out, and resupply efforts moving through out thinned-out sectors. Object is to work Schwerpunkt in harmony with Nebenpunkte in order to break-up cohesion and roll- up isolated remnants of blitz thrusts. # Counter-blitz # a la Sun Tzu grand maneuver ## Mental picture • Imagine the fluid cheng/ch'i or Nebenpunkte/Schwerpunkt counter-operations just discussed to be super Nebenpunkte operations that are used to tie—up or drain-away adversary strength. Idea is to set-up and launch a blitz counter- stroke, or super Schwerpunkt, deep into adversary weakness while he (with his strength) is preoccupied in overcoming the challenge posed by the super Nebenpunkte operations. ## Action • Keep pressure on and continually force adversary to adapt to many abrupt and irregular changes generated by the ongoing super Nebenpunkte operations. • When adversary is strung-out, or disconnected, and vulnerable: Unleash swift armored forces (held in reserve) together with air to hook-in behind and roll-up adversary blitz as well as push-off for a blitz counteroffensive. Shift forces, as appropriate, from local Nebenpunkte/Schwerpunkt operations (as well as from other sectors) into this super Schwerpunkt to both generate and exploit a decisive success. # Counter-blitz a la Sun Tzu caution • Extensive use of many shallow, lower-level Nebenpunkte/Schwerpunkt actions across many sectors/zones drains-away resources needed for fewer but decisive large scale Nebenpunkte/Schwerpunkt operations. • Furthermore, experience has shown, when under active pressure, it is difficult to disengage forces committed to these local efforts and shift them to the larger operation. • In this sense, these many shallow lower-level actions or maneuvers across a broad front tend to take-on the character battle or attrition warfare while deep, large scale (up to theater level) Nebenpunkte/Schwerpunkt operations take-on the character of strategic maneuver. # Counter-blitz a la Sun Tzu ## Underlying idea Pull adversary apart and bring about his collapse by causing him to generate or project mental images that agree neither with the faster tempo/rhythm nor with the hidden form of the transient maneuver patterns to must compete against. # Blitz/counter-blitz strategic design or Manstein Divined # Outline - Background - Strategic design # Background • Battle of Leuctra and Leuthen • Battle of Canne . Schlieffen strategic maneuver # Observation Single envelopment schemes (a la Leuctra, Leuthen, or Schlieffen) take less force than double envelopment schemes (a la Marathon or Cannae) to achieve the same benefit. # Strategic design • Poland - France • Russia # Poland September 1 – 19, 1939 Concentric Cannae with Leuctra/Leuthen Undertone. ![](_page_162_figure_22.jpeg) *Figure (p. 162):* This is a military map depicting troop movements. Key entities: * **Army Group North**: Operating near Danzig and East Prussia. * **Fourth Army**: Moving from Germany towards the east. * **Third Army**: Moving from East Prussia towards Warsaw. * **Army Group South**: Operating from Germany, moving east. * **Eighth Army**: Moving east from Germany. * **Tenth Army**: Moving east from Germany. * **Fourteenth Army**: Moving east from Germany. * **Warsaw**: The central objective of some army movements. * **Germany**: The origin point for several armies. * **Danzig**: A coastal city. * **East Prussia**: A region north of the depicted armies. * Blue shapes represent bodies of water or difficult terrain. * Red arrows indicate troop movement directions. ![](_page_162_figure_23.jpeg) *Figure (p. 162):* The image displays a light blue shape labeled "Polish Army Areas." This is a geographical representation, not a chart. # Poland (1939) ## Key point Germans had more forces than Poles. # France ## Phase I: May 10 June 2, 1940 ![](_page_164_figure_24.jpeg) *Figure (p. 164):* This is a map depicting military movements during the Battle of France in May-June 1940. Key entities and information: * **France:** Labeled on the map. * **Dunkirk:** A blue square indicating a location in France. * **Paris:** A blue square indicating a location in France. * **BE:** Abbreviation for Belgium. * **NL:** Abbreviation for the Netherlands. * **Germany:** Labeled on the map. * **Sedan:** A blue square indicating a location in France. * **Red Arrows:** Indicate the direction and movement of forces, originating from Germany and moving into Belgium and France, with some forces appearing to be trapped near Dunkirk. * **Green Area:** Likely represents a forest or natural obstacle. ![](_page_164_figure_25.jpeg) *Figure (p. 164):* This is a map illustrating "Phase II: June 5 – June 25, 1940". Red arrows indicate troop movements on what appears to be France, with the city of Paris marked. A light blue area denotes "Surrounded French Forces". Leuctra/Leuthen Eccentric Cannae with Leuctra/Leuthen Wings # France (1940) ## Key points • Germans had fewer forces than allies before Phase I. • Germans had more forces than allies before Phase II. # Russia June 22 – December 5, 1941 Eccentric Cannae with Two Leuctra/Leuthen Wings ![](_page_166_figure_26.jpeg) *Figure (p. 166):* The image is a map illustrating military movements with red arrows indicating directions. Key locations labeled are Leningrad, Moscow, Kharkiv, and Rostov within the USSR. The map also shows surrounding countries including Poland, CZ (Czechoslovakia), HU (Hungary), RO (Romania), and YU (Yugoslavia). There are several blue areas representing bodies of water. The title mentions "Eccentric Cannae with Two Leuctra/Leuthen Wings" and "Main Russian pockets," suggesting a historical military strategy or battle analysis. Main Russian pockets # Russia (1941) ## Key point Germans had fewer forces than Russians. # Caucasus/Stalingrad ![](_page_168_figure_27.jpeg) *Figure (p. 168):* The image depicts military movements during the Caucasus/Stalingrad campaign from May 28 to November 18, 1942. It shows red arrows indicating troop movements towards Stalingrad and Rostov, with the Black Sea and Turkey visible in the south. May 28 – November 18, 1942 Leuctra/Leuthen followed by Eccentric … # Blitz/counter-blitz strategic design ## Leuctra/Leuthen/Schlieffen • Manstein - France (Phase I) 1940 • ????????????????? • Manstein - Kerch Peninsula 1942 • OKW/OKH - Caucasus/Stalingrad counterstroke 1942 • Manstein - Donetz counterstroke 1943 • Manstein proposal - counterstroke from Kharkov to Sea of Azov 1943 • Rundstedt/Rommel proposal - Normandy 1944 • Ardennes 1944-45 ## Cannae with Leuctra/Leuthen/Schlieffen undertone • Poland - 1939 • France (Phase II) - 1940 • Russia - 1941 • Kursk - 1943 # ? Natural question ? How come Germans did not attempt a Leuctra/Leuthen strategic maneuver against Russia in 1941? # B. H. Liddell Hart The German Generals Talk 1948 page 184 ## Rundstedt The 1941 operations in Russia should, in my opinion have had their main effort directed, not at first towards Moscow, but towards Leningrad. That would have linked up with the Finns. Then, in the next stage, should have come an attack on Moscow from the north, in co- operation with the advance of Field-Marshal von Bock’s Army Group from the west. # Blitz/counter-blitz strategic design ## Leuctra/Leuthen/Schlieffen • Manstein - France (Phase I) 1940 • Rundstedt proposal - thrust to Leningrad followed by thrust (roll-up) to south and take Moscow - 1941 • Manstein - Kerch Peninsula 1942 • OKW/OKF - Caucasus/Stalingrad counterstroke 1942 • Manstein - Donetz counterstroke 1943 • Manstein proposal - counterstroke from Kharkov to Sea of Azov 1943 • Rundstedt/Rommel proposal - Normandy 1944 - Ardennes 1944-45 ## Cannae with Leuctra/Leuthen/Schlieffen undertone • Poland 1939 - • France (Phase II) - 1940 • Russia - 1941 • Kursk - 1943 # Message Only Manstein (and few others) knew how to synthesize and apply the experiences and ideas of Napoleon, Clausewitz, Jomini, Moltke, and Schlieffen in a strategic as well as a grand tactical sense. # Wrap-up # Wrap-up ## Message • He who is willing and able to take the initiative to exploit variety, rapidity, and harmony—as the basis to create as well as adapt to the more indistinct - more irregular - quicker changes of rhythm and pattern, yet shape the focus and direction of effort—survives and dominates. or contrariwise • He who is unwilling or unable to take the initiative to exploit variety, rapidity, and harmony … goes under or survives to be dominated. # Wrap-up ## Game • Create tangles of threatening and/or non-threatening events/efforts as well as repeatedly generate mismatches between those events/efforts adversary observes or imagines (cheng/Nebenpunkte) and those he must react to (ch'i/Schwerpunkt) ## as basis to • Penetrate adversary organism to sever his moral bonds, disorient his mental images, disrupt his operations, and overload his system, as well as subvert, shatter, seize, or otherwise subdue those moral-mental-physical bastions, connections, or activities that he depends upon ## thereby • Pull adversary apart, produce paralysis, and collapse his will to resist. ## How • Get inside adversary observation-orientation-decision-action loops (at all levels) by being more subtle, more indistinct, more irregular, and quicker—yet appear to be otherwise. # Wrap-up ## Implications • In a tactical sense, these multi-dimensional interactions suggest a spontaneous, synthetic/creative, and flowing action/counteraction operation, rather than a step-by-step, analytical/logical, and discrete move/countermove game. – In accepting this idea we must admit that increased unit complexity (with magnified mental and physical task loadings) does not enhance the spontaneous synthetic/creative operation. Rather, it constrains the opportunity for these timely actions/counteractions. ## or put another way – Complexity (technical, organizational, operational, etc.) causes commanders and subordinates alike to be captured by their own internal dynamics or interactions—hence they cannot adapt to rapidly changing external (or even internal) circumstances. • In a strategic sense, these interactions suggest we need a variety of possibilities as well as the rapidity to implement and shift among them. Why? – Ability to simultaneously and sequentially generate many different possibilities as well as rapidly implement and shift among them permits one to repeatedly generate mismatches between events/efforts adversary observes or imagines and those he must respond to (to survive). – Without a variety of possibilities, adversary is given the opportunity to read as well as adapt to events and efforts as they unfold. # Wrap-up • Alternatively—by stripping away and recombining some of the comments associated with “Clausewitz”, “Grand Tactics”, “Message”, “Game”, “How”, and “Implications”—we can say: – Variety/Rapidity allow one to: Magnify adversary friction hence stretch-out his time to respond in a directed way. – Harmony/Initiative permit on to: Diminish own friction hence compress own time to exploit variety/rapidity in a directed way. – Altogether Variety/Rapidity/Harmony/Initiative enable one to: Operate inside adversary’s observation-orientation-decision-action loops to enmesh adversary in a world of uncertainty, doubt, mistrust, confusion, disorder, fear, panic, chaos, … and/or fold adversary back inside himself so that he cannot cope with events/efforts as they unfold. • Simultaneously—by repeatedly rolling-thru O-O-D-A loops while appealing to and making use of the ideas embodied in “Grand Strategy” and “Theme for Vitality and Growth”—we can: – Evolve and exploit Insight/Initiative/Adaptability/Harmony as basis to: Shape or influence events so that we not only amplify our spirit and strength (while isolating our adversaries and undermining their resolve and drive) but also influence the uncommitted or potential adversaries so that they are drawn toward our philosophy and are empathetic toward our success. # Wrap-up —or summarizing in another, yet similar way— We have in a nutshell: ## The art of success • Appear to be an unsolvable cryptogram while operating in a directed way to penetrate adversary vulnerabilities and weaknesses in order to isolate him from his allies, pull him apart, and collapse his will to resist. ## yet • Shape or influence events so that we not only magnify our spirit and strength but also influence potential adversaries as well as the uncommitted so that they are drawn toward our philosophy and are empathetic toward our success. # Epilogue # Comment • Reflection upon the previous discussion and reflection upon the various principles of war that are bandied about leave one unsettled about the real value associated with these principles. • To illustrate, let’s take a look at some of the principles of war (or military art). # Principles of war
USAUnited KingdomSoviet UnionFrance
ObjectiveAim/goalMobility/tempoConcentration of efforts
Offensive•CoordinationConcentration of effortsFreedom of action
Mass•OffensiveSurpriseEconomy of forces
Economy of forcesFreedom of actionCombat activeness
ManeuverConcentrationPreservation of
Unity of commandEconomy of effortscombat effectiveness
Security•SurpriseConformity of goal/plan to actual situation
SurpriseSecurityCoordination/interworking
SimplicityMorale
Control of rear
# Critique • A list of principles does not reveal how individual principles interact nor the mechanism for doing so. • Scientific laws and principles are the same for all countries and tend to change little over time. On the other hand, we note that the principles of war are different for different countries and change more dramatically over time. Furthermore, they do not make evident the importance of variety/rapidity/harmony/ initiative as basis to shape and adapt to circumstances—a necessary requirement for success in the uncertain and ever- changing environment of conflict or war. • This would suggest that the principles are not principles. Instead, they seem to be some kind of a (shifting) static checklist or laundry list of what should be adhered to. JRB comment: USA, UK, and USSR principles also mix inputs (e.g., economy of forces/efforts) and outputs (surprise.) # Alternative possibility • With this critique in mind, if we still feel we need some guidance, why not evolve statements that reflect the essence of conflict dynamics in a connected sense? or put another way • Why not collect appropriate bits and pieces and assemble them in a coherent way to present a more satisfying picture? # Appropriate bits and pieces • Compress own time and stretch-out adversary time. • Generate unequal distributions as basis to focus moral-mental- physical effort for local superiority and decisive leverage. • Diminish own friction (or entropy) and magnify adversary friction (or entropy). • Operate inside adversary’s observation—orientation-decision- action loops or get inside his mind-time-space. • Penetrate adversary organism and bring about his collapse. • Amplify our spirit and strength, drain-away adversaries’ and attract the uncommitted. # Central theme Evolve and exploit insight/initiative/adaptability/harmony together with a unifying vision, via a grand ideal or an overarching theme or a noble philosophy, as basis to: • Shape or influence events so that we not only amplify our spirit and strength but also influence the uncommitted or potential adversaries so that they are drawn toward our philosophy and are empathetic toward our success, yet be able to • Operate inside adversary’s observation-orientation-decision- action loops or get inside his mind-time-space as basis to: • Penetrate adversary’s moral-mental-physical being in order to isolate him from his allies, pull him apart, and collapse his will to resist. # Sources # Sources by author Adcock, F.E. “The Greek and Macedonian Art of War”, 1957 Alger, John I. “The Quest for Victory”, 1982 Asprey, Robert B. “Guerrilla Warfare” (Encyclopedia Britannica - EB), 1972 Asprey, Robert B. “Tactics” (EB), 1972 Asprey, Robert B. “War in the Shadows” (two volumes), 1975 Atkinson, Alexander “Social Order and the General Theory of Strategy”, 1981 Axelrod, Robert “The Evolution of Cooperation”, 1984 Balck, William “The Development of Tactics”, 1922 Baldwin, Hanson W. “Tiger Jack”, 1979 Barnett, Correlli “Bonaparte”. 1978 Barron, John “KGB: The Secret Work of Soviet Secret Agents”, 1974 Bateson, Gregory “Mind and Nature”, 1979 Bayerlein, Fritz “With the Panzers in Russia 1941 & 43” (Marine Corps Gazette), December 1954 Beaufre, Andre “An Introduction to Strategy”, 1965 Beaufre, Andre “Strategy of Action”, 1967 Becker, Ernest “The Structure of Evil”, 1968 Beesley, Patrick “Very Special Intelligence”, 1977 Beesley, Patrick “Room 40”, 1982 Betts, Richard K. “Surprise Attack”, 1982 Bloom, Allan “The Closing of the American Mind”, 1987 Blumentritt, Gunther “Experience Gained from the History of War on the Subject of Command Technique”, 27 January 1947 Blumentritt, Gunther “Operations in Darkness and Smoke”, 1952 Bretnor, Reginald “Decisive Warfare”, 1969 Briggs, John P. and Peat, F. David “Looking Glass Universe”, 1984 Bronowski, J. “The Identity of Man”, 1971 Bronowski, J. “A Sense of the Future”, 1977 Brown, Anthony Cave “Bodyguard of Lies”, 1975 Brownlow, Donald Grey “Panzer Baron”, 1975 Brzezinski, Zbigniew “Game Plan”, 1986 Callendar, H.L, and Andrews, D.H. “Heat, Entropy and Information” (EB), 1972 Calvocoressi, Peter “Top Secret Ultra”, 1980 Campbell, Jeremy “Grammatical Man”, 1982 Capra, Fritjof “The Tao of Physics”, 1976 Carver, Michael “The Apostles of Mobility”, 1979 Chambers, James “The Devil’s Horsemen”, 1979 Chaliand, Gerard (editor) “Guerrilla Strategies”, 1982 Chandler, David G. “The Campaigns of Napoleon”, 1966 Cincinnatus “Self-Destruction”, 1981 Clausewitz, Carl von “Principles of War” (translated by Hans W. Gatske, 1942), 1812 Clausewitz, Carl von “War, Politics and Power” (translated by Edward M. Collins,, 1962) Clausewitz, Carl von “On War” (translated by M. Howard and P. Paret, 1976), 1832 Cline, Ray S. “Secrets, Spies and Scholars”, 1976 Clutterbuck, Richard “Guerrillas and Terrorists”, 1977 Cole, K.C. “Sympathetic Vibrations”, 1984 Colin, Jean “The Transformations of War”, 1912 Conway, James “Mr. Secret Weapon” (Washington Post Magazine), 15 May 1982 Cooper, Matthew “The German Army 1933-1945”, 1978 Corbett, Julian S. “Some Principles of Maritime Strategy”, 1911 Cruickshank, Charles “Deception in World War II”, 1979 Daniel, Donald C. and Herbig, Katherine L. “Strategic Military Deception”, 1982 Davies, W.J.K. “German Army Handbook 1932-1945”, 1973 Dawkins, Richard “The Selfish Gene”, 1976 Deichmann, D. Paul “German Air Force Operations in Support of the Army”, 1962 Des Pres, Terrence “The Survivor”, 1976 Despres, John; Dzirkals, Lilita; Whaley, Barton “Timely Lessons from History: The Manchurian Model for Soviet Strategy” Doughty, Robert A. “The Evolution of U.S. Army Tactical Doctrine, 1946-76” (Leavenworth Papers #1), August 1979 Downing, David “The Devil’s Virtuosos: German Generals at War 1940-45”, 1977 Dupuy, T.N. “The Military Life of Genghis, Khan of Khans”, 1969 Dupuy and Dupuy (R.E. and T.N.) “Encyclopedia of Military History”, 1977 Dupuy, T.N. “A Genius for War”, 1977 Durant, Will and Ariel “The Lessons of History”, 1968 Dyson, Freeman “Disturbing the Universe”, 1979 Dzirkals, Lilita F. “Lightning War in Manchuria: Soviet Military Analysis of the 1945 Far East Campaign”, July 1975 Earle, Edward Mead et al “Makers of Modern Strategy”, 1943 English, John A. “A Perspective on Infantry”, 1981 Fall, Barnard B. “Street Without Joy”, 1964 Fall, Barnard B. “Last Reflections on a War”, 1967 1 Falls, Cyril “The Art of War from the Age of Napoleon to the Present Day”, 1961 Farago, Ladislas “The Game of the Foxes”, 1971 Ferguson, Marilyn “The Aquarian Conspiracy”, 1980 Fitzgerald, Frances “Fire in the Lake”, 1972 Freytag-Loringhoven, Hugo von “The Power of Personality in War”, (translated by Army War College, 1938) , 1911 Fuller, J.F.C. “Grant and Lee”, 1932/1957 Fuller, J.F.C. “The Conduct of War, 1789-1961”, 1961 Gabriel, Richard A. and Savage, Paul L. “Crisis in Command”, 1978 Gabriel, Richard A, and Gal, Reuven “The IDF Officer: Linchpin in Unit Cohesion”, (Army) January 1984 Gardner, Howard “The Mind’s New Science”, 1985 Gardner, John W. “Morale”, 1978 Gardner, Martin “The Computer as Scientist” (Discover), June 1983 Georgescu-Roegen, Nicholas “The Entropy Law and the Economic Process”, 1970 Gleick, James “Exploring the Labyrinth of the Mind” (New York Times Magazine), 21 August 1983 Golenan, Daniel “Vital Lies, Simple Truths”, 1985 Goodenough, Simon and Deighton, Len “Tactical Genius in Battle”, 1979 Gribbin, John “In Search of Schrodinger’s Cat”, 1984 Griffith, Paddy “Forward into Battle”, 1981 Grigg, John “1943 The Victory That Never Was”, 1980 Guderian, Heinz “Panzer Leader”, 1952 Guevara, Che “Guerrilla Warfare”, 1961 Hall, Edward T. “Beyond Culture”, 1976 Handel, Michael I. “The Yom Kippur War and the Inevitability of Surprise” (International Studies Quarterly), September 1977 Handel, Michael I. “Clausewitz in the Age of Technology” (The Journal of Strategic Studies), June/Sept 1986 Heibroner, Robert L. “Marxism: For and Against”, 1980 Herrington,, Stuart A. “Silence Was a Weapon”, 1982 Hoffer, Eric “The True Believer”, 1951 Holmes, W.J. “Double-Edged Secrets”, 1979 Howard, Michael “The Causes of Wars”, 1983 Hoyt, Edwin P. “Guerilla”, 1981 Humble, Richard “Hitler’s Generals”, 1974 Irving, David “The Trail of the Fox”, 1977 Isby, David C. “Modern Infantry Tactics, 1.914-74” (Strategy and Tactics), Sept/Oct 1974 Jomini, “The Art of War” (translated by G.H. Mendell and W.P. Craigbill, 1862), 1836 Jomini, “Summary of the Art of War” (edited by J.D. Hittle, 1947), 1838 Jones, Roger S. “Physics As Metaphor”, 1982 Jones, R.V. “Intelligence and Deception” (Lecture), 29 November 1979 Kahn, David “The Codebreakers”, 1967 Kahn, David “Hitler’s Spies”, 1978 Karnow, Stanley “In Vietnam, the Enemy Was Right Beside Us” (Washington Star), 22 March 1981 Karnow, Stanley “Vietnam: A History”, 1983 Keegan, John “The Face of Battle”, 1977 Kennedy, Marilyn Moats “Powerbase: How to Build It; How to Keep It”, 1984 Kesslering, Albert, et al “Manual for Command and Combat Employment of Smaller Units” (Based on German Experiences in World War II), 1952 Kitson, Frank “Low Intensity Operations”, 1971 Kohn, Hans and Hazard, John N. “Communism” (EB), 1972 Krepinevich, Andrew F. Jr. “The Army and Vietnam”, 1986 Lamb, Harold “Genghis Khan”, 1927 Landauer, Carl “Marxism” (EB), 1972 Lanza, Conrad H. “Napoleon and Modern War, His Military Maxims”, 1943 Laqueur, Walter “Guerrilla”, 1976 Laqueur, Walter (editor) “The Guerrilla Reader”, 1977 Lawrence, T.E. “Seven Pillars of Wisdom”, 1935 Layzer, David “The Arrow of Time” (Scientific American), December 1975 LeBoeuf, Michael “GMP* The Greatest Management Principle in the World”, 1985 Leonard, George “The Silent Pulse”, 1978 Lewin, Ronald “Ultra Goes to War”, 1978 Liddell, Hart, B.H. “A Science of Infantry Tactics Simplified”, 1926 Liddell, Hart, B.H. “The Future of Infantry”, 1933 Liddell, Hart, B.H. “The Ghost of Napoleon”, 1934 Liddell, Hart, B.H. “The German Generals Talk”, 1948 Liddell, Hart, B.H. “Strategy”, 1967 Liddell, Hart, B.H. “History of the Second World War” (two volumes), 1970 Lorenz, Konrad “Behind the Mirror” (translated by Ronald Taylor, 1977), 1973 Lupfer, Timothy T. “The Dynamics of Doctrine: The Changes in German Tactical Doctrine During the First World War” (Leavenworth Papers #4), July 1981 Macksey, Kenneth “Panzer Division”, 1968 Macksey, Kenneth “Guderian: Creator of the Blitzkrieg”, 1976 Manstein, Erich von “Lost Victories”, 1958 Mao Tse-Tung “On Guerrilla Warfare”, (translated by S.B. Griffith, 1961), 1937 Mao Tse-Tung “Basic Tactics” (translated by Stuart R. Schram,, 1966), 1938 Mao Tse-Tung “Selected Military Writings”, 1963 Mao Tse-Tong “Four Essays on China and World Communism”, 1972 Marchetti, Victor and Marks, John “The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence”, 1974/1980 Marshall, S.L.A. “Men Against Fire”, 1947 Marshall, S.L.A. “The Soldiers Load and The Mobility of a Nation”, 1950 Martin, David C. “Wilderness of Mirrors”, 1980 Masterman, John C. “The Double-Cross System”, 1972 Matloff, Maurice “Strategy” (EB), 1972 May, Rollo “The Courage to Create”, 1975/1976 McWhiney, Grady and Jamieson, Perry D. “Attack and Die”, 1982 Mellenthin, F.W. von “Panzer Battles”, 1956 Mellenthin, F.W. von “German Generals of World War II”, 1977 Mellenthin, F.W. von “Armored Warfare in World War II” (conference), 10 May 1979 Mendel, Arthur P. (editor) “Essential Works of Marxism”, 1961 Messenger, Charles “The Blitzkrieg Story”, 1976 Mikheyev, Dmitry “A Model of Soviet Mentality” (Presentation before International Studies Association), March 1985 Miksche, F.O. “Blitzkrieg”, 1941 Miksche, F.O. “Atomic Weapons & Armies”, 1955 Miller, Russell “The Commandos” (Time-Life Books), 1981 Montross, Lynn “War Through the Ages”, 1960 Morris, Eric; Johnson, Curt; Chant, Christopher; Wilmott, H.P. “Weapons and Warfare of the 20th Century”, 1976 Musashi, Miyanbto “The Book of Five Rings” (translated by Victor Harris, 1974), 1645 Musashi, Miyamoto “The Book of Five Rings” (translated by Nihon Services, 1982), 1645 Oman, C.W.C. “The Art of War in the Middle Ages” (edited and revised by John H. Feeler, 1953), 1885 Ortega y Gasset, Jose, “The Revolt of the Masses” (anonymous translation, 1932), 1930 Ouchi, William “Theory Z”, 1981 Pagels, Heinz R. “The Cosmic Code”, 1982 Palmer, Bruce Jr. “The 25 Year War”, 1984 Pascale, Richard T. and Athos, Anthony G. “The Art of Japanese Management”, 1981 Patrick, Stephen B. “Combined Arms Combat Operations in the 20th Century” (Strategy and Tactics), Sept/Oct 1974 Pauker, Cry J. “Insurgency” (EB), 1972 Peters, Thomas J. and Waterman,, Robert H., Jr. “In Search of Excellence”, 1982 Phillips, T.R. (editor) “Roots of Strategy”, 1940/1985 Pike, Douglas “PAVN: Peoples Army of Vietnam”, 1986 Pincher, Chapman “Their Trade is Treachery”, 1982 Polanyi, Michael “Knowing and Being”, 1969 Pomeroy, William J. (editor) “Guerrilla Warfare and Marxism”, 1968 Powers, Thomas “The Man Who Kept the Secrets”, 1979 Prigogine, Ilya and Stengers, Isabelle “Order Out of Chaos”, 1984 Pustay, John S. “Counterinsurgency Warfare”, 1965 Reid, T.R. “Birth of a New Idea” (Washington Post Outlook), 25 July 1982 Rejai, M. “Mao Tse-Tung On Revolution and War”, 1976 Restak, Richard M. “The Brain: The Last Frontier”, 1980 Rifkin, Jeremy (with Ted Howard) “Entropy - A New World View”, 1980 Rominel, Erwin “Infantry Attacks” (translated by G.E. Kidde, 1944), 1937 Rosen, Ismond “Genesis”, 1974 Rothenberg, Gunther E. “The Art of Warfare in the Age of Napoleon”, 1978 Rucker, Rudy “Infinity and the Mind”, 1982 Rushbrooke, George Stanley “Statistical Mechanics” (EB), 1972 Russell, Francis “The Secret War” (Time Life Books), 1981 Satter, David “Soviet Threat is One of Ideas More Than Arms” (Wall Street Journal), 23 May 1983 Savkin, V. YE. “The Basic Principles of Operational Art and Tactics” (A Soviet View), 1972 Sella, Amnon “Barbarossa: Surprise Attack and Communication” (Journal of Contemporary History), 1978 Senger und Etterlin, Frido von “Neither Fear Nor Hope”, 1963 Shannon, Claude E. “Information Theory” (EB), 1972 Sidey, Hugh “Playing an Assassin Like a Fish” (Washington Star), 14 June 1981 Sidorenko, A.A. “The Offensive” (A Soviet View), 1970 Singh, Baljitt & Mei, Ko-Wang “Modern Guerrilla Warfare”, 1971 Sprey, P.M. “Taped Conversation with General Hermann Balck” (for Battelle), 12 January and 13 April 1979 Sprey, P.M. “Taped Conversation with Lt. General Heinz Gaedcke”, (for Battelle), 12 April 1979 Stevenson, William “A Man Called Intrepid”, 1976 Strausz-Hupe, Robert; Kintner, William R.; Dougherty, James E.; Cottrell, Alvin J. “Protracted Conflict”, 1959/1963 Summers, Harry G. Jr. “On Strategy: The Vietnam War in Context”, 1981 Sun Tzu “The Art of War” (translated by S.B. Griffith, 1971), about 400 B.C. Sun Tzu “The Art of War” (Edited by James Clavell, 1983), about 500 B.C. Taber, Robert “The War of the Flea”, 1965 Tang Zi-Chang “Principles of Conflict” (Recompilation of Sun Zi’s Art of War), 1969 Thayer, Charles W. “Guerrilla”, 1961 Thompson, R.W. “D-Day”, 1968 Thompson, William Irwin “Darkness and Scattered Light”, 1978 Toffler, Alvin “Future Shock”, 1970 Van Creveld, Martin “Supplying War”, 1977 Van Creveld, Martin “Fighting Power: German Military Performance, 1914-1945”, December 180 Van Creveld, Martin “Command”, 1982 Vigor, P.H. “Soviet Blitzkrieg Theory” (A British View), 1983 Vo Nguyen Giap “Peoples War Peoples Array”, 1962 Vo Nguyen Giap “How We Won the War”, 1976 Wallace, Mike “Inside Yesterday: Target USA” (for CBS News), 21 August 1979 Watts, Alan “Tao: The Watercourse Way”, 1975 Wernick, Robert "Blitzkrieg" (Time-Life Books), 1976 Whiting, Charles "Patton", 1970 Wilson, Edward O. “On Human Nature”, 1978 Winterbotham, F.W. “The Ultra Secret”, 1975 Wintringham, Tom “The Story of Weapons and Tactics”, 1943 Wolf, Eric R. “Peasant Wars of the Twentieth Century”, 1969 Wolf, Fred Alan “Taking the Quantum Leap”, 1981 Wylie, J.C. “Military Strategy”, 1967 Wynne, G.C. “If Germany Attacks”, 1940 Zukav, Gary “The Dancing Wu Li Masters”, 1979 ## Sources by institution BDM “Generals Balck and Von Mellinthin on Tactics: Implications for Military Doctrine”, 19 December 1980 German Army Regulation 100/100 “Command and Control in Battle”, September 1973 German Army Regulation 100/200 “Army Command and Control System”, August 1972 National Defense University “The Art and Practice of Military Strategy”, 1984 ORD/CIA, “Deception Maxims: Fact and Folklore”, April 1980 U.S. Army FM 100-5 “Operations”, July 1976 U.S. Army FM 100-5 “Operations”, 20 August 1982 U.S. Army FM 100-5 “Operations”, 5 May 1986 U.S. Army Pamphlet 20-233 “German Defense Tactics Against Russian Breakthroughs”, October 1951 U.S. Army Pamphlet 20-269 “Small Unit Actions During the German Campaign in Russia”, July 1953 Westinghouse “I Am the Punishment of God” (Westinghouse Integrated Logistic Support #5) West Point Department of Military Art and Engineering, “Jomini, Clausewitz and Schlieffen”, 1954 West Point Department of Military Art and Engineering, “Summaries of Selected Military Campaigns”, 1956 # About this edition This edition of “Patterns of Conflict” is our attempt to recreate the last version of the briefing actually presented by the late Col John Boyd, USAF (1927 – 1997). The last printed version known to exist carries the date December 1986. We have used that as the starting point, and then modified the text based on changes we received from Col Boyd, which continued until around 1991. By that time, he had moved on to other activities, such as “Conceptual Spiral,” his advice to then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney during the First Gulf War, and his interest in application to other forms of conflict, including business. In addition to specific textual changes, Col Boyd would routinely emphasize certain points during his briefings that he probably would have incorporated into the charts, but never did (this was pre-PowerPoint and so changes were becoming more difficult for him to obtain.) We have indicated some of these by “JRB comment:” The original 1986 version, with pen-and-ink changes as dictated by Col Boyd, is available in PDF format at http://www.d-n-i.net. ## About the Editors Chuck Spinney was a colleague of Boyd’s both in the Air Force and in the Office of the Secretary of Defense, where he participated in every edition of “Patterns.” Chuck is the author of Defense Facts of Life and numerous monographs and op-eds. His commentaries on defense issues appear from time to time and are archived at http://www.d-n-i.net. Chet Richards worked with Col Boyd on his first paper, “Destruction and Creation,” on various editions of “Patterns,” and near the end of Boyd’s life, on business applications. He is a retired colonel in the Air Force Reserve, and recently finished a book, Certain to Win, that applies Boyd’s concepts to business. Ginger Richards is co-owner and president of Kettle Creek Corporation, which owns Defense and the National Interest. She designed and maintains that site as well as its sister, http://www.belisarius.com, which is oriented more towards business.