This paper examines the argument that World War I warfare is fundamentally similar to modern warfare practices. Through a review of relevant military and historical literature, the paper establishes that despite significant innovations in military weaponry and technology, the core purpose of war—to compel an adversary to accept one's will—remains unchanged. The paper demonstrates that successful military operations in both eras require ground forces, coordinated strategy, and the destruction of enemy forces. While technological improvements have made modern warfare more sophisticated, the underlying principles of warfare strategy, tactics, and objectives have remained constant from the World War I era to the present day.
World War I witnessed the introduction of a wide range of innovations in military weaponry that fundamentally changed the face of warfare, including the use of airplanes for the first time in history. Other innovations prior to and during World War I likewise improved existing munitions to the point where they became even more efficient and deadly. As a result, in many ways, World War I provided a portent of what war would be like in the future. This paper reviews the relevant literature to provide evidence in support of the argument that World War I is fundamentally similar to warfare as it is practiced today. A summary of the research and important findings concerning the similarity of warfare in World War I as it is practiced today are provided in the conclusion.
According to the definition provided by Black's Law Dictionary, war is "The hostile contention by means of armed forces, carried on between nations, states, or rulers, or between their citizens."[1] This definition distinguishes war from other types of military operations, including raids, rescue operations, counter-drug and anti-terror operations, peace-keeping missions, military occupations, shows of force, and a wide range of other activities which involve the use of a nation's armed forces.[2] Because it takes at least "two to tango" in order for a war to occur, the fundamental purpose of war has always been the same throughout history. In this regard, Clausewitz described war as "nothing more than a duel on a larger scale ... an act of force to compel the enemy to do our will."[3]
The belligerents in World War I inherited the bloody legacy of numerous innovations in military ordnance that took place during and following the U.S. Civil War, but the purpose of the warfare practiced on the field of battle in World War I is fundamentally similar to the purpose of warfare as it is practiced today for a number of reasons. For example, New reports that "The purpose of war is to achieve an end state different and hopefully better than the beginning state—the reason for fighting."[4] There are also some similarities between the manner in which the military operations of World War I were conducted and the conduct of war today. In this regard, New notes that "The conduct of war refers to the tactics, operations, and strategies of the war—the how of fighting."[5]
Certainly, it is reasonable to suggest that there have been some doctrinal changes implemented since World War I that take advantage of improvements in command, communications, and control. However, military commanders today still array their forces on the battlefield to take advantage of natural terrain and to achieve the optimal tactical fighting conditions to improve their chances of destroying the enemy. Indeed, destroying the enemy remains the nature of war, which is unchanged from World War I. As New points out, "The absolute nature of war refers to its horror. War is about people and property being destroyed, damaged, and captured."[6] In virtually all cases, successful military operations in World War I, just as today, require "boots on the ground" in addition to a coordinated military campaign.[7]
This principle applies regardless of technological advancement. Whether in 1917 or the present day, controlling territory, protecting populations, and achieving lasting military objectives cannot be accomplished by airpower or remote weapons alone. The need for ground forces to hold territory, conduct direct engagement with enemy forces, and establish control represents a fundamental continuity between WWI warfare and contemporary operations. The soldiers on the ground, whether in the trenches of the Western Front or in modern counterinsurgency campaigns, remain the ultimate guarantors of military success.
"Weapons evolve but war's fundamental aim persists"
Although the face of modern warfare has changed in substantive ways since World War I due to innovations in military weaponry, the research indicated that World War I was fundamentally similar to warfare as it is practiced today for a number of reasons. Among the most compelling of these reasons is the similarity between the purpose of war during the "War to End All Wars" and the type of wars that are being prosecuted today: the expectation that a better world, from the perspective of the respective belligerents, will result from the armed conflict. In the final analysis, it is reasonable to conclude that wars in the future will be characterized by even more technologically sophisticated munitions systems, but the purpose for which they are deployed against enemy forces will remain unchanged.
You’re 75% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 1 section.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.