The Principles Of War In The 21st Century

The US is considered the world's sole superpower. However, America has recently suffered setbacks and faces dangerous foes intent on its destruction. Many strategists regard the Principles of War as the bedrock of US military doctrine; others suggest that they should be discarded. Some aspects of the 21st Century battlefields have changed considerably, while others aspects remain unchanged since time immemorial. Is there an immutable nature to the Principles of War as well - or should they be discarded? This SRP offers a historical campaign analysis of three major amphibious operations that had unique and distinctly different outcomes because of commanders' applications of the Principles of War. Current battles are then analyzed with the same methodology to discern if there are recurring trends in present day warfare, if there are distinguishable developing trends, and whether the Principles of War are still applicable.

Throughout history, military practitioners, philosophers, and historians have struggled to comprehend the complexities of warfare.1 Most of these efforts produced long, complicated treatises that did not lend themselves to rapid or easy understanding.2 This, in turn, spurred efforts to condense the "lessons" of war into a short list of aphorisms that practitioners of the military art could use to guide the conduct of warfare.3 The culmination of these labors, from the perspective of the U.S. Armed Forces, may be found in what are called the principles of war.4 (See Appendix A.) Currently contained in Joint and Service doctrines, "the principles of war guide warfighting at the strategic, operational, and tactical levels. They are the enduring bedrock of US military doctrine."5 But, how solid is that foundation? While the principles have been thoroughly scrutinized at the tactical and operational levels of warfare, the study of their applicability at the strategic level has been less exhaustive.6 Moreover, the principles of war were derived predominantly from the study of Napoleonic and Industrial Age warfare.7 Whether or how these principles apply at the strategic level of war under the conditions of rapid technological change that many are calling the "Information Age" and its military offspring, the Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA), is an open-ended question.8 Because war at the strategic level is an intellectual process9 and the development and implementation of strategy is a creative activity, some form of intellectual framework is required to shape the strategist's thought processes. The principles of war provide such a structure. At the same time, because theory and creativity have limits, they offer a guide to understanding those restrictions. A good strategist-possessed of a comprehensive understanding of the principles-will be able, therefore, to expand creatively upon them, and will also be able to determine if one or more of them can or must be disregarded.10 Finally, a thorough grasp of the intent behind each principle 2 allows the crafting of strategies that reflect the best possible balance among the principles for a particular strategic challenge.11 Once thoroughly understood, the principles of war also may be used as a decisionmaking aid during formulation, planning, and execution of strategy. They can be used to assess current strategic plans, or as an analytic tool to shape new strategies and plans as they are developed. Further, they can be used to examine past strategic activities to derive insights from success or failure, and to extract the pertinent "lessons" that can be applied to future endeavors. It is, of course, always easier to use the principles in retrospect to critique plans and activities than to incorporate them when creating strategies--but those who can do the latter will be hailed as geniuses by future historians. In fact, the principles of war are important exactly because, short of war, it is difficult to identify potential "Napoleons" in our midst. A proper focus on the linkages and tensions among the principles can avoid the stultifying, dogmatic, pro forma use of "checklists" which inevitably creates vulnerabilities to be exploited by a more imaginative opponent. At the same time, innovative application of the principles in simulations and war games can provide a useful education for future generals and strategists, who may be called upon to practice their craft with little or no notice. They are aids, too, in the life-long development of patterns of thought found in the true strategist.

For nearly two centuries, the principles of war have guided practitioners of the military art. During the last 55 years the principles of war have been a key element of U.S. Army doctrine, and recently they have been incorporated into other Service and Joint doctrines. The turn of the 21st century and the dawn of what some herald as the "Information Age," however, may call into question whether principles originally derived in the 19th century and based on the experience of "Industrial Age" armed forces still hold. Moreover, despite their long existence, the applicability of the principles of war at the strategic level of warfare has not been the subject of detailed analysis or assessment. The purpose of this study, therefore, is to stimulate a debate on the importance of the principles of war at the strategic level of warfare and on their continued relevancy in the Information Age. To this end, the study proposes a revised set of the nine principles of war that may be applied at the strategic level of warfare and are believed to conform to the conditions and demands of the 21st century. This study represents a first examination of a complex and relatively unexplored field of study. Many may differ with the ideas presented or quarrel with a particular phrase or choice of words. Additionally, each of the principles undoubtedly merits a more detailed investigation than present length constraints allow. We encourage readers, therefore, to take up the debate and contribute to an exchange of views on this important subject.

Throughout history, military practitioners, philosophers, and historians have struggled to comprehend the complexities of warfare. Most of these efforts produced long, complicated treatises that did not lend themselves to rapid or easy understanding. This, in turn, spurred efforts to condense the "lessons" of war into a short list of aphorisms that practitioners of the military art could use to guide the conduct of warfare. The culmination of these labors, from the perspective of the U.S. Armed Forces, may be found in what are called the principles of war. (See Appendix A.) Currently contained in Joint and Service doctrines, "the principles of war guide warfighting at the strategic, operational, and tactical levels. They are the enduring bedrock of US military doctrine." But, how solid is that foundation? While the principles have been thoroughly scrutinized at the tactical and operational levels of warfare, the study of their applicability at the strategic level has been less exhaustive. Moreover, the principles of war were derived predominantly from the study of Napoleonic and Industrial Age warfare. Whether or how these principles apply at the strategic level of war under the conditions of rapid technological change that many are calling the "Information Age" and its military offspring, the Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA), is an open-ended question. Because war at the strategic level is an intellectual process and the development and implementation of strategy is a creative activity, some form of intellectual framework is required to shape the strategist's thought processes. The principles of war provide such a structure. At the same time, because theory and creativity have limits, they offer a guide to understanding those restrictions. A good strategist?possessed of a comprehensive understanding of the principles?will be able, therefore, to expand creatively upon them, and will also be able to determine if one or more of them can or must be disregarded.Finally, a thorough grasp of the intent behind each principle allows the crafting of strategies that reflect the best possible balance among the principles for a particular strategic challenge.

For nearly two centuries, the principles of war have guided practitioners of the military art. During the last 55 years the principles of war have been a key element of U.S. Army doctrine, and recently they have been incorporated into other Service and Joint doctrines. The turn of the 21st century and the dawn of what some herald as the "Information Age," however, may call into question whether principles originally derived in the 19th century and based on the experience of "Industrial Age" armed forces still hold. Moreover, despite their long existence, the applicability of the principles of war at the strategic level of warfare has not been the subject of detailed analysis or assessment. The purpose of this study is to stimulate a debate on the importance of the principles of war at the strategic level of warfare and on their continued relevancy in the Information Age. To this end, the study proposes a revised set of the nine principles of war that may be applied at the strategic level of warfare and are believed to conform to the conditions and demands of the 21st century.

The authors examine the concepts, philosophy, and theory of strategy, as well as the nature of land warfare. They analyze how the principles of war may apply at the strategic level of warfare under the conditions of the 21st century. The authors conclude that there is considerable utility in maintaining a set of principles to act as a guide--but not a prescription--for the creative process of strategy formulation and execution. Then they offer a revision of the existing principles of war to conform to the strategic level of warfare and to bring them in line with the anticipated conditions of the so-called "Information Age". (AN).

The US is considered the world's sole superpower. However, America has recently suffered setbacks and faces dangerous foes intent on its destruction. Many strategists regard the principles of war as the bedrock of US military doctrine; others suggest that they should be discarded. Some aspects of the 21st century battlefields have changed considerably, while others aspects remain unchanged since time immemorial. Is there an immutable nature to the principles of war as well - or should they be discarded? This SRP offers a historical campaign analysis of three major amphibious operations that had unique and distinctly different outcomes because of commanders' applications of the principles of war. Current battles are then analyzed with the same methodology to discern if there are recurring trends in present day warfare, if there are distinguishable developing trends, and whether the principles of war are still applicable.

This book examines the importance of "military ethics" in the formulation and conduct of contemporary military strategy. Clausewitz’s original analysis of war relegated ethics to the side-lines in favor of political realism, interpreting the proper use of military power solely to further the political goals of the state, whatever those may be. This book demonstrates how such single-minded focus no longer suffices to secure the interest of states, for whom the nature of warfare has evolved to favor strategies that hold combatants themselves to the highest moral and professional standards in their conduct of hostilities. Waging war has thus been transformed in a manner that moves beyond Clausewitz’s original conception, rendering political success wholly dependent upon the cultivation and exercise of discerning moral judgment by strategists and combatants in the field. This book utilizes a number of perspectives and case studies to demonstrate how ethics now plays a central role in strategy in modern armed conflict. This book will be of much interest to students of just war, ethics, military strategy, and international relations.