Decoding Military Strategy: How Operational Level Analysis Shapes Modern Warfare

Operational level analysis examines the planning and execution of military campaigns, bridging the gap between grand strategy and tactical execution. It focuses on how divisions, corps, and armies are coordinated to achieve strategic goals within a theater of operations. Its importance lies in providing a comprehensive understanding of how military campaigns are planned and executed, offering insights into the decisions, challenges, and leadership qualities that determine success or failure. By studying operational art, we can better grasp the complexities of modern warfare and understand the systemic difficulties inherent in war-making, as highlighted by the insights from military historian Robert M. Citino.

Operational level analysis occupies the middle ground between tactics and grand strategy. Tactics focus on individual battles and engagements, such as the specific maneuvers of units on the battlefield. Grand strategy, on the other hand, sets the overall objectives of a war and analyzes the overarching goals and policies. Operational art, however, focuses on the campaigns, which involve a series of maneuvers and battles using large units like divisions, corps, and armies to achieve the strategic goals within a specific theater of operations. This perspective allows for a deeper understanding of how strategic objectives are translated into on-the-ground actions.

A great example is the Wehrmacht's victory in France in 1940, also known as Case Yellow. While French tanks and British aircraft were often superior to their German counterparts, and Germany faced strategic disadvantages, the Germans devised a daring campaign plan. They sent their panzers through the Ardennes Forest, surprising their enemies and achieving a swift victory. This demonstrates the power of operational art: even with tactical and strategic challenges, a well-executed campaign plan can lead to success.

From an operational level perspective, the outcomes of military campaigns are shaped by a combination of factors. While tactics and strategy play crucial roles, the coordination and execution of campaigns, including the movement of large units like divisions and corps, are critical. Logistical challenges, leadership decisions, and systemic factors such as friction, fog of war, and culmination points, as highlighted by Robert M. Citino, also significantly influence the success or failure of a campaign. Understanding these factors is crucial for comprehending the complexities of warfare.

Robert M. Citino emphasizes the significance of studying military history, particularly through operational level analysis, because it offers valuable insights into the complexities of warfare. By examining campaigns, leadership decisions, and logistical challenges, we gain a deeper appreciation for the strategic thinking that shapes global conflicts. Citino highlights that military history is essential for understanding the systemic difficulties inherent in war-making, providing lessons that remain relevant in the modern era. It moves beyond simplistic narratives of success and failure, encouraging a more nuanced understanding of the factors that influence military outcomes.