In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

ChApTeR 1 The evolution of Warfare, Conflict, and Strategy To place leaderless resistance in context, a discussion of previous generations of warfare and conflict is instructive. To be effective, strategy must evolve to reflect the current operational environment. Throughout history, modes of warfare have been influenced by a number of social, political, economic, and technological factors . Earlier observers of warfare, such as Marquis de Vauban (1633–1707), understood the importance of science and technology and their implications for warfare.1 Likewise, in his Art of War, Niccolò Machiavelli (1469–1527) observed the links between changes in military organization and developments in the social and political spheres. Such trends transformed warfare.2 In a seminal 1989 Marine Corps Gazette article, “The Changing Face of War: Into the Fourth Generation,” William S. Lind and others identified four generations of warfare.3 The advance from one generation of warfare to the next requires changes in various aspects of society, including politics, economics, and technology.4 The starting point for Lind’s schema was the era of the Napoleonic Wars in the early nineteenth century, during which first-generation warfare came into being. First-Generation Warfare Several developments allowed first-generation warfare to develop.The wealth of nations increased, which meant more resources for war were available. Improvements in agriculture freed up more farmworkers to be used as soldiers. The emergence of nationalism led to the mobilization of entire countries, and patriotism became a potent force that instilled greater enthusiasm in national armies. The increasing power of the state enabled the administration of such an ambitious undertaking. An innovation in communications introduced in 1794—the optical telegraph, or the semaphore—meant that messages could more quickly cross great distances, which let Napoleon keep in touch with Paris when he was in the battlefield.5 The Napoleonic Wars were characterized by a near-total mobilization of the resources of France. In 1793 the Committee of Public Safety, led by Robespierre, issued a decree—the levée en masse—which conscripted all human and material resources . In the face of the collapse of the Old Royal Army, the French Assembly 7 made the bold decision to permanently requisition all citizens for national service.6 This monumental action transformed the nature of war by involving an entire nation . With the entire economic and human resources of France behind him, Napoleon was able to wage a new style of warfare: total war. Previously war had often been considered the “sport of kings,” and usually aroused little interest in the majority of the population.7 The son of a minor Corsican noble family, Napoleon Bonaparte rose to high command while still in his twenties, because of the French Revolution. As a citizen army replaced the professional army, the morale of the French soldier added a new element that Napoleon fully understood and cultivated. To inspire his army, he effectively united his men around a cause, the principles of the French Revolution, and later the glory of France as a growing empire.8 One of Napoleon’s major innovations was the separation of field troops into self-contained divisions.9 Napoleon divided his army into corps, which were further subdivided into divisions, brigades, regiments, and battalions that operated as autonomous units, but moved and fought together as a single entity.10 He combined military leadership with political leadership, thus eliminating friction at the top and attaining a unity of command. An absence of checks and balances in this one-man rule, however, resulted in critical errors that ultimately brought down Napoleon’s empire.11 Tactically, in first-generation war, adversaries sought to amass huge armies that confronted each other on the battlefield, each attempting to win a decisive victory.12 In battle Napoleon always favored the offensive, with the central objective of annihilating an enemy’s field forces. Everything else was secondary. To that end, he emphasized firepower. France’s industrial and scientific infrastructure allowed the creation of heavy artillery, and Napoleon once opined that “God is on the side with the best artillery.”13 Having little respect for the sensibilities of European royal dynasties , he was not loath to annihilate opposing forces, fully understanding that the currency of politics is power. Eventually Napoleon’s adversaries adapted to his strategy by avoiding the decisive battles he so eagerly sought. Although his armies operated on a huge scale with unprecedented speed, his desire for hegemony in Europe led him to a strategic overreach that finally brought about his downfall.14 The...

Share