The Principles of War for the Information Age by Robert Leonhard

Author:Robert Leonhard [Leonhard, Robert]
Language: eng
Format: epub
ISBN: 978-0-307-54274-8
Publisher: Random House Inc.
Published: 2012-05-16T04:00:00+00:00

EPISTEMOLOGY OF OBJECTIVE

The principle of objective was a late-comer to the lists of military principles. The student of military history can read the works of Sun-tzu, Machiavelli, Frederick the Great, Jomini, and others without finding much emphasis upon this principle. What little the classics of military theory have to add to our understanding of objective comes more from inference than from direct assertion. If we were to try to find the earliest traces of objective, we might begin in 1589 with Justus Lipsius, a professor at the University of Leiden, whose Politico-rum libri six proposed the idea that warfare should be rational and serve the interests of state. From Lipsius through Clausewitz and down to today, however, the principle of objective has been a minor actor. Why did the ancients not revere what some modern theorists believe is the most important of the principles of war?

First of all, the reader should by now understand that the principles of war, as they have evolved through the ages, began as principles of battle, not war. As citizens of a superpower, who think in global terms, the principles of war pertain mostly to our strategic thinking. But to the great writers, theorists, and soldiers of the past, these principles boiled down to winning battles on battlefields. As warfare changed and grew in terms of numbers of soldiers and technological complexity, the determinants of battlefield victory migrated off the battlefield and into campaigning, strategy, economy, and national policy. Battle would no longer be determined merely by the courage or virtue of individual heroes. The battle might still be the stage where the drama played out, but behind the curtain were an increasing number of team members involved in production, without which the play could not go on. The principles have had a difficult time keeping up with this complex movement. And when put to the test of rigorous critical analysis, they always reveal their tactical roots.

On the battlefield, in the midst of fighting, the principle of objective is about as relevant as a sutler’s wagon. It’s something we can attend to later. In the meantime, mass, maneuver, and surprise are much more important. We find that many of the great writers of the past have little or nothing to say about objective, because it is an idea that has little application to battle tactics, because in battle the objective is obvious: Kill the enemy!

Objective also suffered ignominy in the past, because of the political dynamics of “heroic” warfare. The heroic paradigm, simply stated, is this: Political issues will be decided based on the outcome of a decisive battle. This battle may unfold between two armies or even two individuals. But whatever the outcome, both political authorities and subject populations will acquiesce to the decision by arms.

War fought in accordance with the heroic idea tends to feature one or at most a few decisive battles. Because of this, the distinction between the war and the battle fades: War is viewed as pretty much synonymous with battle, and tactical victory becomes equal to strategic success.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.