Academic literature on the topic 'Principles of war'

Thesis (M.S. in Defense Analysis)--Naval Postgraduate School, June 2009.<br>Thesis Advisor(s): Arquilla, John. "June 2009." Description based on title screen as viewed on July 13, 2009. DTIC Identifiers: Principles of war, information age, contemporary militaries. Author(s) subject terms: Principles of war, Information Age, military history, military doctrine, military strategy. Includes bibliographical references (p. 127-130). Also available in print.

Thesis (M.S. in Joint Campaign Planning and Strategy)--Joint Forces Staff College, Joint Advanced Warfighting School, 2006.<br>Vita. "26 May 2006." "National Defense Univ Norfolk VA"--DTIC cover. Includes bibliographical references (p. 68-73). Also available via the Internet.

ABSTRACT: The aim of this essay is to analyze whether the development of the Principles of War in small states´ doctrine has been influenced by the doctrinal development of alliances after the start of an international cooperation. The author suggests that the development of the Principles of War can be understood through theories of doctrinal development. The theory used for this analysis states that small states depend on alliances, such as NATO, and therefore adapt their doctrine to better match the doctrine of the alliance. Since the Principles of War are the foundation of doctrine, such an adaption should lead to an adaption of the Principles of War as well. The analysis will be made using Swedish Army field manuals as a basis. These will be compared to NATO´s, in order to see whether or not Sweden has adapted its Principles of War following its membership of the Partnership for Peace. The results show that today the Swedish Principles of War are more similar to NATO´s than they were in 1982, which suggests that they have been adapted to better match those used by NATO. Although this essay does not analyze the reasons why, the results imply that theories of doctrinal development also include the development of principles of war. Analysis of the reasons why could be used as a basis for further research.<br>SAMMANFATTNING: Syftet med denna uppsats är att analysera huruvida utvecklingen av krigföringens principer i småstaters doktriner har influerats av den doktrinära utvecklingen i allianser efter ett påbörjat internationellt samarbete.   Författaren föreslår att utvecklingen av krigföringens principer kan förstås genom teorier avseende doktrinutveckling. Teorin som används för uppsatsens analys anger att små stater är beroende av allianser med exempelvis NATO, och därför måste anpassa sina doktriner så att de bättre matchar alliansens doktriner. Eftersom krigföringsprinciperna är en stor del av doktriner, bör en sådan doktrinanpassning leda till en anpassning av krigföringens principer också.   Analysen kommer att göras utifrån svenska arméreglementen, vilka kommer att jämföras med NATOs, för att undersöka huruvida Sverige har anpassat sina krigföringsprinciper till att bättre matcha NATOs efter dess medlemskap i Partnership for Peace.   Resultaten visar att de svenska krigföringsprinciperna är mer lika NATOs idag än vad de var 1982, vilket tyder på att de har anpassats för att bättre matcha de som används av Nato. Även då denna uppsats inte analyserar orsakerna till varför, så indikerar resultaten att teorier om doktrinutveckling även omfattar utvecklingen av krigföringens principer. Analys av anledningar till varför skulle kunna användas som en grund för vidare forskning.

Since the dawn of military thinking, theorists have been trying to find the key to victory in armed conflict. theories of classic thinkers like Jomini and Carl von Clausewitz represented two positions in the debate regarding the principles of war as universally applicable rules for battle, or as a tool for planning not capable of fully overcoming the complex reality of war. In the wake of the first world war the principles of war as formulated by Fuller following his experiences of the war, found its way into doctrine. Naval theory on the principles of war developed under the influence of these thinkers through Alfred Mahan and Julian Corbett and is still found in naval doctrine.  The debate of the validity of the principles however, is still enduring. In a world of constant technological innovation and increasing complexity their relevance is questioned. Despite of this, modern theories on principles for warfare are still emerging from theorists like Geoffrey Till. The purpose of this study is to test the applicability of Till´s modern naval principles of war against historical battles, and thus, the timeless claim of the theory.  The study examines the theoretical reach of Till´stheory regarding principles of war, intended for naval warfare. This theory, much like its precursors, have adopted the Jominian school of thought, sharing the ambition of universal applicability. Geoffrey Tills Creating Decisive Victorywas tested against three historical cases of naval warfare.  The results of the study partially support the universal and timeless claim of Till´s theory by being represented, though not wholly, in every case. Additionally, the result indicates that the theory partially suffers from its modern design, impeding its timeless applicability. This claim, however, must be supported by further research.

<p>Idag är krigföringens principer en vedertagen del av svensk doktrin. Så har det inte alltid varit. För ungefär ett sekel sedan tvistade militära tänkare i väst om det överhuvudtaget fanns något som kunde kallas för krigföringens principer. Det finns än idag de som hävdar att det inte finns några principer, eller att krigföring är en konst och inte en vetenskap. I Försvarsmaktens doktriner är dessa principer dock en väsentlig komponent. Detta arbete skildrar hur principerna gradvis tog sig in i Försvarsmaktens reglementen och doktriner för armén samt belyser hur de olika principerna dök upp, byttes ut och fick olika innebörd sedan de först implementerats i ett svenskt reglemente 1924.</p><br><p>The aim of this essay is to outline how the principles of war were implemented in Swedish army regulations and doctrines. The essay attempts to answer the following questions: What trends can be identified with regards to the importance of different principles? How have the principles been understood historically? The material used consists mainly of regulations and doctrine for the Swedish army from different parts of the 20th century. The method of the author is to analyze and compare the different regulations to come to conclusions about the importance of the principles of war in Swedish military history. The results of the essay indicate that surprise is the principle that has been a part of Swedish regulations the longest. This in turn could indicate that surprise is the principle that is the least susceptible to change in tactics and modernization.</p>

I juli 2006 utbröt krig mellan Israel och Hizbollah i södra Libanon. Erfarenheterna från historien visade på att Israel borde kunna gå segrande ur kriget, men utgången blev en annan. Hizbollah nådde framgång och Israel misslyckades med sin militära kampanj trots övertag i luften och i militära resurser. För att förstå hur Hizbollah nådde framgång i kriget utifrån militärteoretiskt perspektiv så har denna uppsats till syfte att analysera det faktiska agerandet genom tre av krigföringens grundprinciper kraftsamling, överraskning, handlingsfrihet och doktrinen ”Hizbollahs 13 punkter för krigföring” genom krigföringens samtliga sju grundprinciper. Analysens resultat visar på att genom sitt agerande så uppnådde Hizbollah krigföringens grundprinciper kraftsamling, överraskning¸ handlingsfrihet och i sin doktrin finns samtliga sju av krigföringens grundprinciper representerade. Dessa visar att Hizbollahs framgång i kriget kan vara ett resultat av att de planerat och agerat efter krigföringens grundprinciper.<br>In July 2006, war broke out between Israel and Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. The experience showed that Israel should be able to emerge victorious from the war, but the outcome was different. Hezbollah achieved success and Israel failed in their military campaign despite superiority in the air and military resources. To understand how Hezbollah achieved success in the war on the basis of military theory perspective, this essay aims to analyze the actual conduct of warfare by three basic principles; concentration, surprise, flexibility. Hezbollah’s doctrine "Hezbollah's 13  principles of war" will be analyzed through all of the seven basic principles of war. Analysis results show that through their actions, Hezbollah used three of the principles of warfare and their doctrine contains all of the seven basic principles of warfare. These results suggest that Hezbollah's success in the war may be a result of the basic principles of warfare.

Background: The principles of war have a central but debated role in modern doctrine with heritage dating back to Sun Tzu. Despite that the principles are used in several modern doctrines, there is surprisingly little research to be found on these principles. The principles of security and surprise, are both argued as being key components in amphibious operations, though can also be seen as contradictory. Method: This thesis explores the principles of war by studying the theory of security, developing a theory with a set of success factors. These factors consist of physical protection, information supremacy and reserves. Hypothetically, the presence of these factors explains the outcome of amphibious raids. The theory is examined in a qualitative text analysis on two case studies on the raids on St Nazaire and Makin Island where the success factors are tested by a deductive dihedral design. The results open for a final discussion in comparison with Jimmy Johansson’s research of the principle of surprise previously made on the same raids. Results: The results show that security, through the presence of success factors, is positively affecting the outcome of amphibious raids, though further research is necessary. Security and surprise although contradictory can work in synergy with a successful surprise element leading to increased security and information supremacy a prerequisite for surprise.

Due to the new demands put upon combat vehicles of today the development quickly strives for-ward. With developers and experts across the globe working to meet the needs of tomorrows armies. The question we ask ourselves is what will be the characteristics of these vehicles. In order to be able to categorize combat vehicle and analyze its characteristics we use the principles of war. Based on J.F.C Fullers theory from the early 19 hundreds that anything can be analysed using these principles, through a modern interpretation of the Swedish army, we can categorise the present and future abilities of combat vehicles. This interpretation includes lethality, mobility, protection, sustainability, command and intelligence. The future is represented by several articles regarding upcoming projects and future plans of vehicle developers and customers. This is some-thing witch has never been done before and gives us new ways of interpreting the role of the ar-moured fighting vehicle in the future of land warfare. The essay identifies lethality, mobility and protection as the most important principles of todays armoured fighting vehicles, witch diverts from the judgment that the most important principles of armoured fighting vehicles of the future will be mobility, protection, sustainability and command.<br>På grund av nya krav på stridsfordon så sker utvecklingen snabbt och offensivt. Experter och industrier världen över gör sitt yttersta för att möta behoven av framtidens arméer. Frågan som här ställs är hur dessa fordon kommer att se ut och vilka egenskaper kommer de ha. För att kunna kategorisera och analysera stridsfordonets och dess egenskaper används uppdragstaktikens grund-läggande förmågor. Detta baseras på J.F.C. Fullers teori om att förmågorna är tillämpbara på allt som gäller krigföring. Enligt svensk doktrin består de grundläggande förmågorna av verkan, rör-lighet, skydd, uthållighet, ledning och underrättelser/information. Det som undersöks är synsättet på framtidens stridsfordon i ett antal artiklar. Detta har aldrig gjorts tidigare i samma omfattning och ger oss möjlighet att se stridsfordonets roll i framtidens konflikter i nytt ljus. I uppsatsen identifieras verkan, rörlighet och skydd som de viktigaste förmågorna för dagens stridsfordon, vilket skiljer sig från resultatet att de viktigaste förmågorna för framtidens stridsfor-don kommer att vara rörlighet, skydd, uthållighet och ledning.