Military Strategy and Tactics: Past, Present, and Future

Introduction

Military tactics and strategies are essential in warfare. Without the right tactics and strategy, it is impossible to win wars. By definition, military strategy is the planning, coordination, and implementation of military operations to meet a set of objectives. Tactics can be defined as short-term military strategies in the field of operations — covering the equipment to use, how to use it, and troop movement. According to renowned Carl von Clausewitz, a distinguished military strategist and theorist, strategy is how to utilize battles to win wars, while tactics is how to utilize troops and weaponry in battles (Phifer, 2012). Both tactics and strategies have, however, been theorized, defined, and utilized in different ways at different points in history. This paper argues that the United States military needs to adopt tactics and strategies suited to the modern-day challenges and threats the army and the country face, as well as those that will prove beneficial in the future.

History of Strategy and Tactics

Before the eighteenth century, military strategies focused on overcoming challenges such as supply logistics, maneuvers, and fortifications. Between the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, however, larger armies began to emerge, massive alliances started forming, and more complicated weaponry appeared on battlefields. These developments made it difficult to continue relying on older strategies. They also led to the formation of grand plans that took into account all resources available to societies — including political, economic, technological, and military support (Tzu, 2008).

Tactics have also undergone significant changes over time. Initially, they involved relatively straightforward, though sometimes intricate, battlefield maneuvers. They grew more complex as battles themselves became more complicated. Today, tactics mostly involve the use of various technologies to collect information. They have also become increasingly difficult to distinguish from strategies because the two have grown more interdependent (Phifer, 2012).

Principles of Warfare and Classic Maneuvers

Military theorists and commanders have throughout history formulated what they regarded as the most important tactical and strategic principles of war. Napoleon, for example, committed 115 principles of conflict to writing. Nathan Forrest, a Confederate general, also articulated a tactical principle: battles are usually won by the combatants who reach the battlefield first and with the most soldiers (Henry, 2016). Over time, certain strategic and tactical principles have been adopted as standard principles of warfare. These include the objective, the offensive, surprise, security, unity of command, economy of force, mass, and maneuver — all of which are highly interdependent.

Military forces of any size must have a clear objective to prevent distraction and keep everyone focused on what matters most. Only offensive moves ultimately determine whether objectives are achieved. Those offensive moves must account for security (the protection of forces) and surprise (deception and stealth) to be maximally effective. Unity of command is equally important when pursuing objectives. The economy of force — the ability to utilize troops effectively — and the concentration of better-armed and better-trained forces at critical points (mass) are also vital. Maneuver, finally, is concerned with how to coordinate troop movement to achieve the offensive, surprise, and mass (Phifer, 2012). As these principles demonstrate, modern standard principles of warfare are far more interdependent than most principles employed in the past.

It is important to note that new weapons and technologies have not significantly altered several classic offensive maneuvers, including penetration, defensive-offensive maneuvers, turning movements, and envelopment. The penetration maneuver — centuries old — involves concentrating military resources to break through the enemy's main line. It is usually accompanied by secondary attacks on the enemy to prevent them from freeing up reserves or additional weapons for their defense.

Defensive-offensive maneuvers often entail waiting for an enemy to attack in strength and then striking from a robust defensive position once the enemy is exhausted or is pausing before the next wave. These maneuvers sometimes include feigned withdrawals designed to make enemy forces believe they have the upper hand and to lure them into a battlefield or area where they are vulnerable without realizing it (Phifer, 2012). Such maneuvers were employed successfully by military commanders including Napoleon (Phifer, 2012).

Turning maneuvers, perfected by Napoleon, are designed to force enemy troops to turn and retreat or to abandon favorable positions — for example, by moving behind enemy lines and cutting communication and supply routes. Robert E. Lee, a Confederate general, also used turning maneuvers extensively during the American Civil War (Phifer, 2012).

The envelopment maneuver, also of ancient origin, involves engaging and occupying an enemy's center while other forces simultaneously attack one or both flanks, with the aim of pushing the enemy back or compelling them to fight on multiple fronts (Phifer, 2012; Willoughby, 1939).

The Historical and Theoretical Development of Strategy and Tactics

Strategies and tactics date back to the very beginnings of human warfare, though they were most systematically developed as empires and kingdoms expanded and grew more powerful. One of the earliest recorded tactics of war was the phalanx formation, in which troops arranged themselves so that their shields overlapped to protect one another. This formation was in use as early as 3000 BC and was later refined by the Romans (Phifer, 2012). Strategies and tactics have continued to develop alongside the growth of civilizations. Major wars and clashes have spurred improvements in both, as have the rise of nationalism, competing ideologies, and the evolution of state power.

Conclusion

Military strategies and tactics have been important since time immemorial, yet they have continuously evolved. Some of the forces driving these changes include the development of strong nation-states, new technologies, more destructive weapons, and the experience of total wars. The tactics and strategies of the U.S. military have similarly evolved over time. To ensure the U.S. military remains capable of fighting modern and future wars, it must continue to prepare aggressively. The military is already moving in this direction through the Joint Operations doctrine, which provides a framework for readiness, modernization, reform, and alliance-building suited to the demands of contemporary and future conflict.

References

Grieco, K. A. (2018). The 2018 national defense strategy: Continuity and competition. Strategic Studies Quarterly, 12(2), 3–8.

Henry, R. S. (2016). "First with the most" Forrest. Pickle Partners Publishing.

Hundley, R. O. (1999). Past revolutions, future transformations: What can the history of revolutions in military affairs tell us about transforming the US military? (No. RAND-MR-1029-DARPA). RAND Corp.

Noel, E. (1905). Gustaf Adolf (King of Sweden): The father of modern war. Bale & Danielsson.

Parrot, D. A. (1985). Strategy and tactics in the Thirty Years' War: The "military revolution." Militärgeschichtliche Zeitschrift, (2), 7.

Phifer, M. (2012). A handbook of military strategy and tactics. Vij Books India Pvt Ltd.

RisCassi, R. W. (1997). Doctrine for joint operations in a combined environment: A necessity. Military Review, 77(1), 103.

Steele, B. (2005). Military reengineering between the world wars. RAND National Defense Research Institute.

Tzu, S. (2008). The art of war. In Strategic studies (pp. 63–91). Routledge.

Von Clausewitz, C. (1956). On war (Vol. 2). Jazzybee Verlag.

Willoughby, C. A. (1939). Maneuver in war. U.S. Marine Corps.