Although some scholars of the Prusso-German school begin their discussion of German operational art as early as Frederick the Great, all highlight Helmuth von Moltke as the preeminent operational artist of the 19th century. Scholars frequently begin their study of operational art by discussing 19th century theorists such as Carl von Clausewitz and Jomini (see Clausewitz 1976 and Jomini 1971), but the specific mention of operations and operational theory begins with the rapid increase in the size of armies in the last half of the 19th century. Researchers looking for the primary sources establishing the origin and evolution of operational art will find the following works essential. This recent interest peaked due to US counterinsurgency operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Theorists, practitioners, and historians have wrestled with the concept of operational art in small wars and counterinsurgency. Although the origins and practice of operational art have long been linked to large-scale conventional military operations, the advent of irregular warfare since 1945 has sparked a debate about the role of operational art in irregular warfare. In general, the study of operational art may be divided into the various schools of thought on the development of operational art, theory, and practice. A much smaller number of scholars point to the United States contribution to operational art. Other historians emphasize the Soviet interwar theorists as the preeminent authors of the concept. Some historians assert that the roots of operational art lay with the development of the Prusso-German school in the 19th century. Scholarship on operational art generally falls into several categories that include current military theorists, schools of thought on the development of operational art, and campaign studies. Historians have largely overlooked the operational level of war, but to the extent it has been studied, there is a good deal of debate on when, how, and why operational art developed. The roots of modern operational art can be traced back to World War I in which the conduct of operations in three dimensions became necessary. During the interwar years, practitioners and theorists from several countries began to formalize theories of operational art. The armies were simply too large for single decisive battles to provide political results, and so campaigns designed to arrange a series of battles became necessary. By World War I, it was clear that single battles could not yield strategic results. During the Napoleonic Wars the aim of this maneuver was the pursuit of the decisive battle, such as Austerlitz and Waterloo. The maneuver of large armies or multiple armies required commanders to orchestrate large-scale maneuvers in the theater of war. Strategy and tactics have long been studied and described, but the third level of war, the operational level, began to emerge only in the 19th century as nations began to field ever-larger armies. Operational art is inextricably linked to the planning and conduct of military campaigns in specific theaters of war, which distinguishes it from tactics and strategy. Operational art refers to the military commander’s employment of force in a theater of operations to achieve strategic objectives. The art of warfare is practiced in three levels: the strategic, operational, and tactical.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |