filename stringclasses 1 value | title stringlengths 3 66 | text stringlengths 41 12.8k ⌀ |
|---|---|---|
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Mechanized warfare | These ideas culminated in the "PU-36" or the 1936 Field Service Regulations.
Wartime: At the start of the Second World War much of the Red Army, including its armoured forces, was in transition and recovering from the 1937 repression of the officer corps. The Red Army ignored the lessons from Nomonhan, which had been successfully conducted by General Zhukov, and relied instead on lessons from politically selected officers who were veterans of the Spanish Civil War. The result was a poor showing during the Winter War. The Red Army tank fleet was extremely large, consisting of some 24,000 vehicles, but many were obsolete or unfit for service due to difficulties with supplying spare parts and lack of qualified support staff.
One important development took place shortly before the war, which influenced Soviet armoured doctrine and tank design for a decade: the creation of the T-34. Developed on the Christie suspension chassis and using sloped armour for the first time, the T-34 proved a shock to the German forces in the first German encounter of Soviet T-34 and KV tanks. The T-34 had an excellent combination of mobility, protection and firepower. Using wide tracks, the T-34 was also able to negotiate terrain in difficult weather conditions, something that persistently dogged the German designs.
Assessing the success of the German Blitzkrieg strategy, operational methods and tactics, the Red Army concluded that it should return to the use of operational methods developed before the war, so the Tank Armies were eventually created. To complement the T-34, heavy tanks, self-propelled artillery, and tank destroyers were also designed. The Red Army's armoured forces were used in concentrations during all strategic operations of the Red Army in World War II, initiated under strict secrecy and using the Principle of Surprise.
Germany: In Germany, in-depth research through theoretical approaches, wargaming and exercises developed a confidence within the Panzertruppe itself (and political support by Hitler) in the armoured formation as the key battlefield formation – although this view was before 1940 not shared by the other Arms of Service. A key part of this doctrine was improved communications by having radios in all tanks, although this ideal suffered from technical limits as most tanks had receiver sets only.
At the outbreak of World War II, the German armoured forces benefited from a much more profound and more flexible training than that of the Allies on the tactical and operational level. German tanks operated while directed by radio communication, which allowed tank commanders to take greater advantage of the manoeuvrability of their vehicles.
Even after the conquest of Poland, "Blitzkrieg" was not defined on the strategic level. Guderian and von Manstein devised a strategy that entailed what later would be seen as the essence of Blitzkrieg: concentrated panzer divisions performing swift deep penetrations. This strategy was not initially accepted by German High Command. Nevertheless, the final plans for the invasion of France in 1940 hinged on the element of a Schwerpunkt at Sedan, and was assigned to such forces. The great success of this operation led to Blitzkrieg being integrated with strategic planning for the rest of the war.
German tanks could carry with them enough fuel and supplies to go almost two hundred kilometers, and enough food to last three to nine days. This relative independence from supply lines proved effective, and allowed them to advance on critical targets much faster and without hesitation. Another factor was the ability of commanders to make strategic decisions in the field and without much consultation with their headquarters, the orders of which were often simply ignored. A prime example is Erwin Rommel's lead-from-the-front approach while commanding 7.Panzer-Division which allowed him a flexible response to the battlefield situation, an instance of the Auftragstaktik (reliance on subordinates to make their own decisions).
The effect of German Panzer's speed, mobility, and communication shocked the French, and ultimately were the deciding factors in the battle. It overcame their inferiority in armour and armament relative to the main French materiel such as the Char B1 bis. The superior tactical and operational praxis, combined with an appropriate strategic implementation, enabled the Germans to defeat forces superior in armour (both quantitatively and qualitatively) in the battles of 1940, but just as Blitzkrieg became a deliberate military doctrine, in 1941, it ultimately failed on the eastern front, though initially attaining spectacular successes.
Before the war, Heinz Guderian had in his Achtung–Panzer! propounded a thorough mechanisation of the German forces. By 1942, increased AFV-production allowed a fuller implementation of this ideal. Now extensive armoured combined arms team could be formed, distinct from a purely infantry or cavalry formation. The panzer divisions integrated tanks with mechanised infantry (riding in halftracks to be protected from small-arms fire while being transported) and self-propelled artillery (howitzers fitted on a tank chassis). This allowed the panzer division to become an independent combat force, in principle able to overcome the problems of attaining a breakthrough against entrenched enemy infantry, equipped with large numbers of antitank-guns, with the potential to completely halt tank assaults inflicting devastating losses to armoured units without infantry support. However, much of the AFV production was increasingly diverted away from the Panzertruppe. The Artillery formed its own Sturmgeschütz units and infantry divisions were given their own Panzerjäger companies. Despite lowering their formal organic strength, from the summer of 1943 onwards, the armoured divisions were structurally short of tanks.
United States: Though the U.S. had established the Tank Corps in World War I using French Renault FT light tanks and British Mark V and Mark V* heavy tanks, and some officers like Dwight D. Eisenhower and George S. Patton, Jr. emerged from that war initially as avid proponents of continuing and developing an American armoured force, the rapid reduction of the forces and apathy and even antipathy towards funding and maintaining armed forces in the inter-war years led to relative stagnation of armoured doctrine in the United States. Adna R. Chaffee, Jr., virtually alone, advocated for the future of armoured warfare and the development of appropriate training, equipment and doctrine during the late 1920s through the 1930s.
The United States Army regarded the French Army as the best army in Europe, and consequently the U.S. Army frequently copied French uniforms (the American Civil War) and aeroplanes. Only when France was rapidly overrun in 1940 did the U.S. Army become "shocked" into re-thinking the influences by the perceived actions of German tanks in the 1939 Polish Campaign. Its Armored Combat Arm was not created until 1940 when the Armored Force was born on 10 July 1940, with the Headquarters, Armor Force and the Headquarters, I Armored Corps established at Fort Knox. On July 15, 1940, the 7th Cavalry Brigade (Mechanised) became the 1st Armored Division; the 7th Provisional Tank Brigade, an infantry tank unit at Fort Benning, became the 2nd Armored Division". The Tank Battalion was established at Fort Meade, Md., and a small Armored Force School was also established.
Under this doctrine, U.S. tank crews of both armoured divisions and GHQ tank battalions were taught to fight tanks in tank on tank engagements. Armoured force personnel during and after the war criticised the infantry for using the GHQ tank battalions assigned to infantry divisions strictly as infantry support.
Tank destroyers: The U.S. combined arms team included air support, artillery, engineers, and a tank component supplemented by tank destroyers formed into independent tank destroyer battalions. The latter is most closely identified with the Chief of Army Ground Forces, Lesley J. McNair. Having studied the early German successes McNair came under the belief that U.S. forces would be faced with fast moving enemy forces who would seek to bypass, isolate and reduce U.S. forces in a replay of the Fall of France. To stem the flood of marauding panzers, fast moving powerfully armed tank destroyer battalions were created to be held back and used in the counter-attack.
It was also calculated that U.S. interests would be better served by large numbers of reliable (battle-worthiness) medium tanks rather than a smaller number of unreliable heavy tanks. It was decided therefore to slow the production of the U.S. heavy tank designs such as the M26 Pershing and concentrate resources on mass-producing the M4 Sherman and tank destroyers such as the M18 Hellcat.
To be able get into position to counter-attack, the tank destroyers had to be fast. To achieve the desired mobility and agility from the engines available the armour protection was sacrificed, a measure of protection coming from being nimble and hopefully from being able to knock out the enemy before they could get a shot in. Although they usually had guns of either 75 mm or 76 mm calibre (the M36 used a 90mm calibre gun), the tank destroyer units were issued with the ancestor of the modern armour-piercing discarding sabot, rounds which made their guns much more powerful than a simple comparison of calibres would suggest.
Japan: The Japanese doctrine was mainly French in concept but with some purely Japanese elements. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Mechanized warfare | It was decided therefore to slow the production of the U.S. heavy tank designs such as the M26 Pershing and concentrate resources on mass-producing the M4 Sherman and tank destroyers such as the M18 Hellcat.
To be able get into position to counter-attack, the tank destroyers had to be fast. To achieve the desired mobility and agility from the engines available the armour protection was sacrificed, a measure of protection coming from being nimble and hopefully from being able to knock out the enemy before they could get a shot in. Although they usually had guns of either 75 mm or 76 mm calibre (the M36 used a 90mm calibre gun), the tank destroyer units were issued with the ancestor of the modern armour-piercing discarding sabot, rounds which made their guns much more powerful than a simple comparison of calibres would suggest.
Japan: The Japanese doctrine was mainly French in concept but with some purely Japanese elements. Due to Japan's naval priorities in warship construction and inter-service feuds (the marine branch of the IJN favoured all-around protective armour) IJA tanks were lightly armoured. As with most armour during the 1930s, the main guns were small in calibre: 37 mm for their Type 95 light tanks and 47 mm for the Type 97 medium tank, but this was sometimes compensated by a high muzzle velocity. The IJA's use of tanks in China exemplifies its doctrine: light tanks were used for scouting or acted as mobile infantry support, while medium tanks supported the infantry and assaulted deeper objectives, but did not fight en masse.
In 1939, the Japanese Army engaged Soviet armour at Nomonhan. During the three-month-long war, Japanese armour had shown their weakness against Soviet tanks; and the resulting Japanese defeat prompted a series of complaints by the Imperial Army to incorporate improvements in future Japanese armour. This is the primary reason IJA tanks were not as successful while being used with IJA tactics. The tank forces of the U.S. Army consisted of the M2A4 and M3 Stuart light tanks up until 1941, although these vehicles were five years newer than the 1935 built Type 95's, the IJA and U.S. light tanks were comparable to each other, and seemingly performed well for their respective forces during jungle combat operations; during their phase of World War II.
As with all armour, maintenance was a continuous challenge; especially in tropical environments. When IJA and SNLF (Imperial marines) tanks did clash with the enemy they were quickly destroyed by concealed anti-tank guns or overwhelming numbers of hostile tanks. Japan was a naval power, and concentrated its production on warships, thus placing a low priority on armoured vehicle development, its tanks becoming quickly obsolete during the later years of the war. A number of designs that were equal to heavier foreign types were on the drawing board at the beginning of the war, but would only be built in small numbers towards the end, being placed in reserve, to be deployed for the defence of Japan itself.
China: The Republic of China's National Revolutionary Army's 200th Division was the country's only mechanised division during the war. The 200th used pre-war tanks acquired from Italy, Germany, and the Soviet Union.
After 1945:
Indo-Pakistani wars:
Arab–Israeli wars: The conflict between Arab nations in the East Mediterranean region and Israel in particular would serve to become a testing ground for development in armoured warfare during the decades of the Cold War. Both sides in the Arab–Israeli series of conflicts made heavy use of tanks and other armoured vehicles due to the practicality of tanks in the desert environment these conflicts largely took place in.
During the 1956 Suez War and Six-Day War (1967), Israeli armoured units typically had the advantage, mainly due to good tactics and unit cohesion.
Conversely, the Yom Kippur War (1973) illustrated the problems that can arise if armoured and infantry units do not work closely together. Israeli tanks, operating independently in large numbers, were decimated by Egyptian anti-tank teams, well-distributed amongst regular infantry, and often equipped with new, first-generation portable anti-tank guided missiles. This is an extreme example but exemplifies what has been fairly thoroughly documented since the Second World War: tanks and infantry work best by taking advantage of each other's strengths and combining to minimise the weaknesses.
In many conflicts, it was usual to see infantry riding on the back of tanks, ready to jump off and provide support when necessary. Unfortunately, the design of many modern tanks makes this a dangerous practice. The turboshaft-powered M1 Abrams, for example, has such hot exhaust gas that nearby infantry have to be careful where they stand. Tanks can also be very vulnerable to well aimed artillery; well-coordinated air support and counter-battery artillery units can help overcome this.
Emergence of guided missiles: While attempts to defeat the tank were made before and during the Second World War, through the use of conventional high velocity anti-tank artillery, this proved increasingly difficult in the post-war period due to increased armour protection and mobility of tanks.
In response, the Soviet Union, the country with the largest armoured fleet in the world, strove to incorporate some anti-tank capability into almost every infantry weapon. By the 1960s, Soviet defense scientists were designing portable anti-tank guided missiles. These new weapons were to be either carried by infantry, or fired from the newly developed BMP-1 infantry fighting vehicle. They were in use with Soviet forces before the end of the decade.
In 1973, the Israeli Army failed to anticipate the importance of these new weapon systems. Hundreds of AT-3 Sagger man-portable anti-tank guided missiles (ATGMs), supplied to Egypt by the Soviet Union and could be operated by infantry without having extensive training, inflicted heavy losses on the Israeli armoured formations. Since then, ATGMs have played an important role within the Israeli Army, having developed advanced domestic-made versions (see Spike/Gil missile), which have been widely exported throughout the world.
In the recent 2006 conflict with Hezbollah, while Israeli infantry were able to easily defeat opposing ATGM teams, tanks operating on their own suffered several hits from the latest advanced Russian tandem-warhead types (such as the Kornet). This highlighted that tanks operating solely, in the era of ATGMs, are extremely vulnerable.
Responding to the serious tank losses suffered against Hezbollah, Rafael Advanced Defense Systems in cooperation with Israel Aircraft Industries developed a missile defence system for tanks, called Trophy, to intercept and destroy anti tank missiles. The system was successfully deployed in combat on March 1, 2011, when it intercepted an anti tank missile during an engagement on the Gaza border.
NATO: During the Cold War, NATO assumed armoured warfare to be a dominant aspect of conventional ground warfare in Europe. Although the use of light tanks was largely discontinued, and heavy tanks were also mostly abandoned, the medium tank design evolved into heavier models due to increase in armour and larger sized main weapon resulting in the main battle tank (MBT) which came into existence, combining most of the different types of tanks during World War II.
For the most part the NATO armoured doctrine remained defensive, and dominated by use of nuclear weapons as deterrence. Although most NATO nations began the Cold War period with a large number of U.S.-designed tanks in their fleets, there was a considerable degree of disagreement on the design of future MBTs among the NATO major nations. Both the U.S. and Germany experimented with, but abandoned the missile-armed MBT-70. The M26 Pershing basic design of the United States would evolve until the M60 main battle tank was replaced with the gas-turbine powered M1 Abrams in the 1980s. The British Army also retained a World War II tank design, the Centurion, which proved to be highly successful and was not fully replaced until the 1970s.
The West German Bundeswehr decided to develop their own tank in the 1960s, and in the 1970s produced the Leopard I, which was a somewhat lighter design, conforming to German doctrine that emphasised speed over protection. From the same initial collaborative project as the Leopard I, the French series of AMX tanks also emphasised manoeuvre over protection. By the 21st century, most advanced western main battle tanks were built around powerful engines, large 120 mm guns and composite armour.
Warsaw Pact: The Warsaw Pact armoured doctrine was substantially influenced by the developments in the Soviet Army which sought to adopt its existing doctrine evolved during World War II to the nuclear battlefield. In the early 1960s this led to a number of important developments in the armoured forces and their supporting Arms. One important development was the transition of the Second World War use of Cavalry-Mechanised Group (CMG) into the Cold War Operational Manoeuvre Group (OMG) that was designed to exploit breakthroughs to penetrate NATO's defences in depth. This was a culmination of the Deep Battle theory dating to the 1930s.
In 1964 a significant breakthrough in tank design was achieved in the Soviet Union when the T-64 was produced which for the first time used an automatic loader, reducing the crew of the tank to three crewmen. Subsequently, this model, and the later T-72 and T-80 tanks introduced further innovations that influenced armoured warfare by introducing guided missiles into the tank ammunition mix, allowing ATGW fire from standard tank guns. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Mechanized warfare | In the early 1960s this led to a number of important developments in the armoured forces and their supporting Arms. One important development was the transition of the Second World War use of Cavalry-Mechanised Group (CMG) into the Cold War Operational Manoeuvre Group (OMG) that was designed to exploit breakthroughs to penetrate NATO's defences in depth. This was a culmination of the Deep Battle theory dating to the 1930s.
In 1964 a significant breakthrough in tank design was achieved in the Soviet Union when the T-64 was produced which for the first time used an automatic loader, reducing the crew of the tank to three crewmen. Subsequently, this model, and the later T-72 and T-80 tanks introduced further innovations that influenced armoured warfare by introducing guided missiles into the tank ammunition mix, allowing ATGW fire from standard tank guns. The Soviet Union was also one of the countries that used two Main Battle Tanks: The high-quality T-80s and lower quality T-72s. Modern Soviet tanks, like the ones mentioned, are typically armed with 125 mm (5 in) smooth bore guns. Advancements in Soviet tanks include improved Fire Control Systems, strong armour protected by ERA, and defensive countermeasures (such as Shtora-1 and Arena). The most advanced Soviet tank, up until the end of the Cold War, was the T-80U, which shared similar characteristics with the M1A1(Turbine engine, advanced Fire Control Systems, strong armour, and firepower)
Infantry fighting vehicles were first developed in the 1960s with the Soviet Union's BMP-1, for the first time allowing supporting infantry to accompany tanks on a battlefield when nuclear weapon use was expected.
The T-64s and BMP-1s were also joined by the self-propelled guns and more importantly Mi-24 Rotary-wing aircraft capable of firing anti-tank missiles entering production in 1970 which were built and theorised as "flying tanks".
The Soviet tank troops, as they were known in the USSR, included armoured units, armoured training regiments and other formations and units.
Vietnam War: M113 armoured personnel carriers proved effective in the terrain of Vietnam against enemy forces which, until 1968, rarely deployed their armour. Though they were soon countered with mines and RPGs, M-113's continued service during the war, primarily evolving into infantry fighting vehicles, known as the ACAV (Armoured Cavalry Assault Vehicle); and functioning as a "light tank."
More heavily armed infantry fighting vehicles such as the M2/M3 Bradley Fighting Vehicle would be based on experience with the M113. Gun trucks were also introduced as M35 trucks fitted with armour and guns to protect convoys. In 1968, Communist forces primarily deployed the Soviet built PT-76 light tank.
By 1971, the larger T-54 medium tanks were fielded, proving themselves susceptible to the M-72 LAW rocket, ARVN M41 Walker Bulldog light tanks, as well as the larger M48A3 Pattons. In January 1969, U.S. armoured cavalry units began exchanging their M48A3 Patton tanks for the M551 Sheridan Armoured Airborne Reconnaissance Assault Vehicles; by 1970 over 200 Sheridan tanks were operating in Vietnam.
21st century: Tanks rarely work alone; the usual minimum unit size is a platoon (a platoon is the smallest U.S. Army/Marine unit led by an officer, and a component of a company or troop) of three to five tanks. The tanks of the platoon work together providing mutual support: two might advance while covered by the others then stop and provide cover for the remainder to move ahead.
Normally, multiple platoons coordinate with mechanised infantry and use their mobility and firepower to penetrate weak points in enemy lines. This is where the powerful engines, tracks and turrets come into play. The ability to rotate the turret by a full 360° allows coordinated movement within and between platoons, while defending against attacks from multiple directions and engaging troops and vehicles without stopping or slowing down.
When on the defensive, they wait in prepared positions or use any natural terrain elements (such as small hills) for cover. A tank sitting just behind a hill crest ("hull-down") exposes only the top of its turret, with the gun and sensors, to the enemy, leaving the smallest possible target while allowing it to engage the enemy on the other side of the hill. Tanks are usually able to depress the main gun below the horizontal since modern kinetic energy (KE) rounds have nearly flat trajectories. Without this they would be unable to exploit such positions. However, upon cresting a hill, the tank may expose its thinly armoured underside to enemy weapons.
The disposition of armour around a tank is not uniform; the front is typically better armoured than the sides or rear. Accordingly, normal practice is to keep the front towards the enemy at all times; the tank retreats by reversing instead of turning around. Driving backwards away from an enemy is even safer than driving forwards towards them since driving forwards over a bump can throw the front of the tank up in the air, exposing the thin armour of the underside and taking the gun off the target due to its limited angle of depression.
The tracks, wheels and suspension of a tank are outside the armoured hull and are some of the most vulnerable spots. The easiest way to disable a tank (other than a direct hit in a vulnerable area with a full-power anti-tank weapon) is to target the tracks for a "mobility kill" (m-kill), or target all external visual aids with rubbery cohesive substances such as melted rubber or blackened high viscosity epoxy resins. Once a tank is disabled it is easier to destroy. This is why side-skirts are an important feature; they can deflect heavy machine-gun bullets and trigger the detonation of high-explosive anti-tank (HEAT) rounds before they strike the running gear. Other vulnerable parts of a typical tank include the engine deck (with air intakes, radiators, etc.) and the turret ring, where the turret joins the hull.
When used defensively, tanks are often sunk into trenches or placed behind earth berms for increased protection. The tanks can fire off a few shots from their defensive position, then retreat (reversing) to another prepared position further back and drive behind the berms or into the trenches there. These positions can be constructed by the tank crews, but preparations are better and quicker if carried out by combat engineers with bulldozers. Overhead protection, even if it is fairly thin, can also be very useful since it can help pre-detonate artillery shells and avoid direct hits from above which can be deadly to tanks, by striking them at their thinnest armour. In short, tank crews find as many ways as possible to augment the armour on their vehicles.
Tanks usually go into battle with a round in the gun, ready to fire, to minimise reaction time when encountering an enemy. The US doctrine calls for this round to be a kinetic energy (KE) round, as the reaction time is most important when meeting enemy tanks, to get the first shot (and possibly the first kill). If troops or light vehicles are encountered, the usual response is to fire this round at them, despite it not being ideal—it is difficult and time-consuming to remove a round which is already in the breech. In this case, after the KE round is fired, a HEAT round would normally be loaded next to continue the engagement.
Tanks can be decisive in city fighting, with the ability to demolish walls and fire medium and heavy machine guns in several directions simultaneously. However, tanks are especially vulnerable in urban combat. It is much easier for enemy infantry to sneak up behind a tank or fire at its sides, where it is most vulnerable. In addition, firing down from multi-story buildings allows shots at the thin upper turret armour and even basic weapons like Molotov cocktails, if aimed at the engine air intakes, can disable a tank. Because of these limits, tanks are difficult to use in city conflicts where civilians or friendly forces might be nearby, since their firepower can't be used effectively.
Some analysts argue that recent conflicts, like the Russian invasion of Ukraine, highlight the growing vulnerability of tanks. Estimates from early 2024 indicate that Russia has lost around 3,000 tanks in the first two years of the conflict, with the actual number likely being higher. In contrast, during the Israel-Hamas war, Israeli tanks equipped with active protection systems (APS) showed improved survivability against anti-tank missiles. Additionally, using tanks in pairs with overlapping APS provided extra defense and enhanced their overall effectiveness.
Airborne threats: Tanks and other armoured vehicles are vulnerable to attack from the air for several reasons. One is that they are easily detectable—the metal they are made of shows up well on radar, and is especially obvious if they are moving in formation. A moving tank also produces a lot of heat, noise and dust. The heat makes seeing them on a forward-looking infra-red system easy and the dust is a good visual cue during the day.
The other major reason is that most armoured vehicles have thinner armour on the roof of the turret and on the engine deck, so an anti-tank guided missile or bomb (from an attack helicopter, unmanned combat aerial vehicle, ground-attack jet or small drone) hitting them from the top can be deadly even if it has a small warhead. Even a small automatic cannon is powerful enough to penetrate the rear and top sections of the engine compartment of a tank. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Mechanized warfare | Airborne threats: Tanks and other armoured vehicles are vulnerable to attack from the air for several reasons. One is that they are easily detectable—the metal they are made of shows up well on radar, and is especially obvious if they are moving in formation. A moving tank also produces a lot of heat, noise and dust. The heat makes seeing them on a forward-looking infra-red system easy and the dust is a good visual cue during the day.
The other major reason is that most armoured vehicles have thinner armour on the roof of the turret and on the engine deck, so an anti-tank guided missile or bomb (from an attack helicopter, unmanned combat aerial vehicle, ground-attack jet or small drone) hitting them from the top can be deadly even if it has a small warhead. Even a small automatic cannon is powerful enough to penetrate the rear and top sections of the engine compartment of a tank. Loitering munition (suicide drone) is also used to attack tanks in modern warfare.
Certain aircraft have been developed to attack armoured vehicles. Most notable is the purpose-built Fairchild-Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II, also known as the "Warthog". Although able to carry a number of different missiles and bombs (including anti-tank ordnance such as the AGM-65 Maverick), the A-10's main weapon is a 30 mm GAU-8/A Avenger Gatling gun which is capable of firing 3,900 depleted uranium armour-piercing rounds per minute. The Russian equivalent is the SU-25.
Similarly, a number of helicopter gunships have been designed mainly to engage enemy armoured vehicles. The AH-1Z Viper, AH-64 Apache, HAL Light Combat Helicopter, Denel Rooivalk, Eurocopter Tiger, Ka-50 Black Shark, Mi-28 Havoc, A129 Mangusta and Westland Lynx are examples. Helicopters are very effective against armoured vehicles for many reasons. The AH-64D Longbow Apache, for example, is equipped with an improved sensor suite and weapon systems and the AN/APG-78 Longbow Fire Control Radar dome installed over the main rotor.
Airborne threats can be countered in several ways. One is air supremacy. This is what the United States relies on most, which is demonstrated by their distinct lack of effective short-range, mobile air defence vehicles to accompany armoured units. Most other countries accompany their armoured forces with highly mobile self-propelled anti-aircraft guns such as the German Gepard or the Soviet 9K22 Tunguska, short and medium-range surface-to-air missile systems such as the SA-6, SA-8 and SA-11, or combine both on the same vehicle (the Tunguska for example can also host SA-19 SAM missiles). The usage of anti-aircraft rounds fired from the main gun of a tank has been increasing over the years. An example is the HE-FRAG round from the T-90 which can be detonated at a set distance as determined by its laser range finder.
Engineering support: Armoured warfare is mechanically and logistically intensive and requires extensive support mechanisms. Armoured fighting vehicles require armoured vehicles capable of working in the same terrain to support them. These are operated by the appropriate branches of the army, e.g. recovery and maintenance vehicles by the REME and combat engineering vehicles by the RE in the British Army. These include:
Armoured recovery vehicles (ARV)—many of these are based on the chassis for the vehicle they support. E.g. the ARV for the UK Challenger tank is a Challenger hull onto which a winch is added.
Armoured supply vehicles
Combat engineering vehicles (CEV), e.g. bulldozers
For transporting tracked AFVs over highways, heavy transporters are used, since AFVs are prone to malfunction and their tracks also ruin the highways.
Light tanks and tank destroyers: While tanks are integral to armoured warfare, when power projection is required, the inability to perform rapid deployment has always been a limit of heavy main battle tanks.
It takes a few weeks to transfer tanks and their supporting equipment by air or sea. Some tanks and armoured vehicles can be dropped by parachute, or carried by cargo airplanes or helicopters. The largest transports can only carry one or two main battle tanks. Smaller transports can only carry or air drop light tanks and APCs such as the M113.
The desire to create air-portable armoured vehicles that can still take on conventional MBTs has usually resulted in ATGM-armed light vehicles or in self-propelled gun style vehicles. The lack of armour protection is offset by the provision of a first-look/first-hit/first-kill capability through the mating of a powerful gun to superior targeting electronics, a concept similar to that of the US tank destroyers of World War II.
Vehicles which have put such considerations into practice include the Stingray light tank, AMX 10 RC and B1 Centauro. Most such US projects to create such vehicles have been abortive, e.g. the M8 Armored Gun System. The most common was the flawed M551 Sheridan light tank. This was an air-portable tank capable of destroying heavier tanks using the revolutionary (for the time) 152 mm CLGP launcher. The combat effectiveness of this tank was limited by the unreliable MGM-51 missile. The latest iteration of the mobile anti-tank gun platform in American service is the M1134 anti-tank guided missile vehicle, a Stryker variant equipped with TOW missiles; most modern militaries operate comparable vehicles.
Though limited conflicts (such as the insurgency in Iraq) rarely involve direct combat between armoured vehicles, the need to defend against insurgent attacks and IEDs has resulted in the application of armour to light vehicles and the continued use of armoured transports, fighting vehicles and tanks.
See also:
Theorists and practitioners:
Notes:
References:
External links: Tanks Encyclopedia
Japanese Tanks and Tank Tactics Chapter II: Tactics
Historic films showing tank warfare during the First World War at europeanfilmgateway.eu
Educational video of how armored vehicles are used on the battlefield. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Medical corps | List of medical corps: The following organizations are examples of medical corps:
In the British Armed Forces and Commonwealth of Nations:
Royal Army Medical Corps, a specialist corps of the Army Medical Services that provides medical care to British Army personnel
Royal Australian Army Medical Corps, the branch of the Australian Army responsible for providing medical care to Army personnel
Royal New Zealand Army Medical Corps, a corps of the New Zealand Army that is responsible for medical care to Army personnel
Sri Lanka Army Medical Corps, a corps of the Sri Lanka Army that is responsible for medical care to Army personnel
In the United States military:
Medical Corps (United States Army), a corps that consists of all physicians of the U.S. Army Medical Department
Medical Corps (United States Navy), a staff corps of the United States Navy consisting of doctors in a variety of specialties
United States Air Force Medical Service, a corps that consists of all physicians of the U.S. Air Force Medical Service
In the Indian Armed Forces
AFMS(Armed Forces Medical Services), known as Army Medical Corps that is responsible for medical care to Indian Armed Forces(Army, Navy, Air Force, Coast Guard) personnel. It is tri-service organization. It provides medical support to the Armed Forces during war as well as comprehensive health care to all service personnel, ex-servicemen and their dependents during peace. Army Medical Corps provides medical aid during natural calamities both at national and international levels. AFMS has a common pool which allows officers to migrate from one service to another depending on the requirement.
In the French Armed Forces:
Defence Health Service
In the Irish Defence Forces:
Medical Corps (Ireland)
In the Israel Defense Forces:
Medical Corps (Israel)
In the Myanmar Armed Forces:
Myanmar Army Medical Corps
In the Bangladesh Armed Forces:
Army Medical Corps (Bangladesh)
In the Polish Armed Forces:
Military Health Service, part of the Polish Armed Forces providing a comprehensive full-scale military health service to them
In the Singapore Armed Forces:
SAF Medical Corps, a tri-service organization part of the Singapore Armed Forces that provides medical support for the Singapore Army, Navy and Air Force.
In the South African National Defence Force:
South African Military Health Service, a distinct Arm of Service (as opposed to Army, Navy or Air Force), providing a comprehensive full-scale military health service to the South African National Defence Force
In the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation:
Main Military Medical Directorate
In the German Armed Forces (Bundeswehr):
Zentraler Sanitätsdienst
Dental corps: A dental corps is a specialist military unit, generally including dentists and dedicated to maintaining the dental health of service personnel. Dental corps are therefore a kind of medical corps, and are typically either within the medical corps of their military organization, or closely associated with it.
List of dental corps: Royal Army Dental Corps, a specialist corps of the British Army Medical Services
Royal Australian Army Dental Corps
Royal Canadian Dental Corps
Royal New Zealand Army Dental Corps
United States Army Dental Corps, a special branch of the Army Medical Department (United States)
United States Navy Dental Corps
Army Dental Corps (India)
Army Dental Corps (Pakistan)
Army Dental Corps (Bangladesh)
See also: Medical Reserve Corps, a civilian program in the United States
International Medical Corps (IMC), a global humanitarian nonprofit organization
Medical Cadet Corps, a Seventh-day Adventist organization
SS Medical Corps, of the SS in the Nazi Germany |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Medieval fortification | Fortification types:
Archer towers: Towers of medieval castles were usually made of stone, wood or a combination of both (with a stone base supporting a wooden loft). Often toward the later part of the era they included battlements and arrow loops. Arrow loops were vertical slits in the wall through which archers inside shot arrows at the attackers, but made it extremely difficult for attackers to get many arrows back through at the defenders.
Siege Defenses: Sieges were common during the Middle Ages and because of this many cities fortified their walls and castles to defend against the use of siege engines by their attackers1. Many cities utilized catapults that would hurl stones and other missiles at enemy siege engines and soldiers. The most commonly used catapult for defense was the trebuchet, a torsion powered catapult that dominated the Middle Ages both offensively and defensively. The trebuchet was known for its considerable force but required a longer loading time compared to other siege engines, sometimes taking up to an hour, which lead to some cities using catapults such as the mangonel and onager instead, which could put projectiles downrange much faster than the trebuchet. The trebuchet’s destructive force caused engineers to thicken walls, round out towers, and to redesign fortifications so that they could employ trebuchets for defense. The Ayyubids between 1196 and 1218 built towers mounted with massive trebuchets, which hypothetically would use their height advantage to take out opposing siege engines. Ballistas were another type of catapult utilized as a defensive weapon, however they were not often used. This is because their missiles sometimes lacked the force to dismantle enemy siege engines and their immobility confined them to the top of a city's towers were they could easily be taken out by enemy catapults, including offensive ballistas which were usually employed for the very reason of dismantling defenses on the top of towers and keeping defenders off of a wall's battlements. After the invention of cannons near the beginning of 12th century CE, many torsion powered catapults became largely obsolete and cannons became commonplace medieval siege engines by the 15th century. While mostly used for offensive purposes, the first recorded use of a cannon in Europe was to defend the city of Algeciras during the siege of 1343-44. However slow to load, cannons proved to be devastating weapons that could level a city's walls or destroy siege engines with only a single projectile.
City walls: An exact nature of the walls of a medieval town or city would depend on the resources available for building them, the nature of the terrain, and the perceived threat. In northern Europe, early in the period, walls were likely to have been constructed of wood and proofed against small forces. Especially where stone was readily available for building, the wood will have been replaced by stone to a higher or lower standard of security. This would have been the pattern of events in the Five Boroughs of the Danelaw in England.
In many cases, the wall would have had an internal and an external pomoerium. This was a strip of clear ground immediately adjacent the wall. The word is from the late medieval, derived from the classical Latin post murum ("behind the wall").
An external pomoerium, stripped of bushes and building, gave defenders a clear view of what was happening outside and an unobstructed field of shot. An internal pomoerium gave ready access to the rear of the curtain wall to facilitate movement of the garrison to a point of need. By the end of the sixteenth century, the word had developed further in common use, into pomery.
Also by that time, the medieval walls were no longer secure against a serious threat from an army, as they were not designed to be strong enough to resist cannon fire. They were sometimes rebuilt, as at Berwick on Tweed, or retained for use against thieves and other threats of a lower order. Very elaborate and complex schemes for town defenses were developed in the Netherlands and France, but these belong mainly to the post-medieval periods. By 1600, the medieval wall is likely to have been seen more as a platform for displaying hangings and the pomery as a gathering ground for spectators, or as a source of building stone and a site for its use, respectively. However, a few, such as those of Carcassonne and Dubrovnik, survived fairly well and have been restored to a nearly complete state.
Medieval walls that were no longer adequate for defending were succeeded by the star fort. After the invention of the explosive shell, star forts became obsolete as well.
Harbors: Harbors or some sort of water access were often essential to the construction of medieval fortifications. It was a direct route for trading and fortification. Having direct access to a body of water provided a route for resupply in times of war, an additional method of transportation in times of peace, and potential drinking water for a besieged castle or fortification. The concept of rivers or harbors coming directly up to the walls of fortifications was especially used by the English as they constructed castles throughout Wales.
There is evidence that harbors were fortified, with wooden structures in the water creating a semi-circle around the harbor, or jetties, as seen in an artist's reconstruction of Hedeby, in Denmark, with an opening for ships to access the land. Usually, these wooden structures would have small bases at either end, creating a 'watch' and defense platform.
Churches and monasteries: Religion was a central part of the lives of medieval soldiers, and churches, chapels, monasteries, and other buildings of religious function were often included within the walls of any fortification, be it temporary or permanent. A place to conduct religious services was usually essential to the morale of the soldiers.
Mottes and baileys: Motte-and-bailey was the prevalent form of castle during 11th and 12th centuries. A courtyard (called a bailey) was protected by a ditch and a palisade (strong timber fence). Often the entrance was protected by a lifting bridge, a drawbridge or a timber gate tower. Inside the bailey were stables, workshops, and a chapel.
The motte was the final refuge in this type of castle. It was a raised earth mound, and varied considerably, with these mounds being 3 metres to 30 metres in height (10 feet to 100 feet), and from 30 to 90 metres (98 to 295 ft) in diameter. There was a tower on top of the motte. In most cases, the tower was made of timber, though some were also made of stones. Stone towers were found in natural mounds, as artificial ones were not strong enough to support stone towers. Larger mottes had towers with many rooms, including the great hall. Smaller ones had only a watch tower.
Construction: Construction could sometimes take decades. The string of Welsh castles Edward I of England had built were an exception in that he focused much of the resources of his kingdom on their speedy construction. In addition to paid workers, forced levies of labourers put thousands of men on each site and shortened construction to a few years.
Location: Nature could provide very effective defenses for the castle. For this reason many castles were built on larger hills, cliffs, close to rivers, lakes or even caves.
Materials: Materials that were used in the building of castles varied through history. Wood was used for most castles until 1066. They were cheap and were quick to construct. The reason wood fell into disuse as a material is that it is quite flammable. Soon stone became more popular.
Stone castles took years to construct depending on the overall size of the castle. Stone was stronger and of course much more expensive than wood. Most stone had to be quarried miles away, and then brought to the building site. But with the invention of the cannon and gunpowder, castles soon lost their power.
Costs: Costs for the walls depended on the material used. Wood would cost very little and was quick to build, but was weak. Stone was strong but very expensive and time-consuming to construct.
Manpower: Manpower in the medieval era in Europe consisted mainly of serfs.
Walls: The height of walls varied widely by castle, but were often 2.5–6 m (8.2–19.7 ft) thick. They were usually topped with crenellation or parapets that offered protection to defenders. Some also featured machicolations (from the French machicoulis, approximately "neck-crusher") which consisted of openings between a wall and a parapet, formed by corbelling out the latter, allowing defenders to throw stones, boiling water, and so forth, upon assailants below. Some castles featured additional inner walls, as additional fortifications from which to mount a defense if outer walls were breached.
Gates: Any entrance through a wall, being an opening, forms an obvious weak point. To be practical, the entryway would have to accommodate supplies being brought through, yet difficult for attackers to breach. For example, passage over ditches or moats would have to be withdrawn to deny attackers. The use of multiple walls or ditches around an entrance would also make it difficult for defenders to use the entrance practically, necessitating better methods of control. Gates came in many forms, from the simple stone buttress and timber blocks, to the massive and imposing stone archways and thick wooden doors most associated with medieval citadels. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Medieval fortification | Some castles featured additional inner walls, as additional fortifications from which to mount a defense if outer walls were breached.
Gates: Any entrance through a wall, being an opening, forms an obvious weak point. To be practical, the entryway would have to accommodate supplies being brought through, yet difficult for attackers to breach. For example, passage over ditches or moats would have to be withdrawn to deny attackers. The use of multiple walls or ditches around an entrance would also make it difficult for defenders to use the entrance practically, necessitating better methods of control. Gates came in many forms, from the simple stone buttress and timber blocks, to the massive and imposing stone archways and thick wooden doors most associated with medieval citadels.
Killing fields: A killing field was an area between the main wall and a secondary wall, so when the first wall was breached the attackers would run into the killing field to be confronted by another wall from which soldiers bombarded them. Soldiers would be positioned atop the second wall and armed with any variety of weapons, ranging from bows to crossbows to simple rocks.
Moats: A moat was a common addition to medieval fortifications, and the principal purpose was to simply increase the effective height of the walls and to prevent digging under the walls. In many instances, natural water paths were used as moats, and often extended through ditches to surround as much of the fortification as possible. Provided this was not so unnaturally contrived as to allow an attacker to drain the system, it served two defensive purposes. It made approaching the curtain wall of the castle more difficult and the undermining of the wall virtually impossible. To position a castle on a small island was very favorable from a defensive point of view, although it made deliveries of supplies and building materials more cumbersome and expensive.
Keeps: A keep is a strong central tower which normally forms the heart of a castle. Often the keep is the most defended area of a castle, and as such may form the main habitation area for a noble or lord, or contain important stores such as the armoury or the main well.
Stairs: Stairs were also constructed to contain trick or stumble steps. These were steps that had different rise height or tread depth from the rest and would cause anyone running up the stairs to stumble or fall, so slowing down the attackers' progress.
Doors: A typical exterior wooden door might be made out of two or more layers of oak planks. The grain of the wood would run vertically on the front layer and horizontally on the back, like a simple form of plywood. The two layers would be held together by iron studs, and the structure might be strengthened and stiffened with iron bands.
The studs themselves were pointed on the front so that attackers would damage their weapons (swords, axes, etc.) while trying to break through.
Transition to modern fortification: From the mid-15th century onwards, the power of cannons grew and medieval walls became obsolete as they were too thin to offer any realistic protection against prolonged bombardment. As a consequence of this, medieval walls were often upgraded with the addition of artillery platforms or bastions, and battlements were replaced by thick parapets with embrasures. In many cases, the medieval walls were dismantled and their stonework, which was still valuable as construction material, was reused in the construction of the new fortifications. The resulting space is often seen in old city centers of Europe even to this day, as broader streets often outline where the old wall once stood (evident for example in Prague and Florence, Italy).
The transition between medieval and early modern fortification can be seen in the fortifications of Rhodes in Greece and the fortifications of Famagusta in Cyprus.
Defensive obstacles: Just as modern military engineers enhance field fortifications with obstacles such as barbed wire, medieval engineers used a number of obstacle types including abatis, caltrops, cheval de frise, and trou de loup.
Siegecraft: Trebuchet
Cannon
Mangonel
Ballista
Catapult
See also: Medieval warfare
Siege engine
Guédelon Castle - from 1996 to 2020 they will build a 13th-century castle exclusively using methods of that time. A lot of information regarding castrametation and castellology had already surfaced thanks to this project.
Star fort replaced medieval fortifications.
Encastellation
Rocca di Manerba del Garda
Castle Site of Montbazon
Notes: These defenses were not only used as counter-measures against siege engines and were effective defenses against many other forms of attack including the dispatchment of attackers unshielded by siege engines.
References:
Bibliography: Toy, Sidney. (1985) Castles: Their Construction and History. ISBN 978-0-486-24898-1. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Medieval warfare | Organization: The medieval knight was usually a mounted and armoured soldier, often connected with nobility or royalty, although (especially in north-eastern Europe) knights could also come from the lower classes, and could even be enslaved persons. The cost of their armour, horses, and weapons was great; this, among other things, helped gradually transform the knight, at least in western Europe, into a distinct social class separate from other warriors. During the crusades, holy orders of Knights fought in the Holy Land (see Knights Templar, the Hospitallers, etc.).
The light cavalry consisted usually of lighter armed and armoured men, who could have lances, javelins or missile weapons, such as bows or crossbows. In much of the Middle Ages, light cavalry usually consisted of wealthy commoners. Later in the Middle Ages, light cavalry would also include sergeants who were men who had trained as knights but could not afford the costs associated with the title. Light cavalry was used as scouts, skirmishers or outflankers. Many countries developed their styles of light cavalries, such as Hungarian mounted archers, Spanish jinetes, Italian and German mounted crossbowmen and English currours.
The infantry was recruited and trained in a wide variety of manners in different regions of Europe all through the Middle Ages, and probably always formed the most numerous part of a medieval field army. Many infantrymen in prolonged wars would be mercenaries. Most armies contained significant numbers of spearmen, archers and other unmounted soldiers.
Recruiting: In the earliest Middle Ages, it was the obligation of every noble to respond to the call to battle with his equipment, archers, and infantry. This decentralized system was necessary due to the social order of the time but could lead to motley forces with variable training, equipment and abilities. The more resources the noble had access to, the better his troops would typically be.
Typically the feudal armies consisted of a core of highly skilled knights and their household troops, mercenaries hired for the time of the campaign and feudal levies fulfilling their feudal obligations, who usually were little more than rabble. They could, however, be efficient in disadvantageous terrain. Towns and cities could also field militias.
As central governments grew in power, a return to the citizen and mercenary armies of the classical period also began, as central levies of the peasantry began to be the central recruiting tool. It was estimated that the best infantrymen came from the younger sons of free land-owning yeomen, such as the English archers and Swiss pikemen. England was one of the most centralized states in the Late Middle Ages, and the armies that fought the Hundred Years' War were mostly paid professionals.
In theory, every Englishman had an obligation to serve for forty days. Forty days was not long enough for a campaign, especially one on the continent. Thus the scutage was introduced, whereby most Englishmen paid to escape their service and this money was used to create a permanent army. However, almost all high medieval armies in Europe were composed of a great deal of paid core troops, and there was a large mercenary market in Europe from at least the early 12th century.
As the Middle Ages progressed in Italy, Italian cities began to rely mostly on mercenaries to do their fighting rather than the militias that had dominated the early and high medieval period in this region. These would be groups of career soldiers who would be paid a set rate. Mercenaries tended to be effective soldiers, especially in combination with standing forces, but in Italy, they came to dominate the armies of the city-states. This made them problematic; while at war they were considerably more reliable than a standing army, at peacetime they proved a risk to the state itself like the Praetorian Guard had once been.
Mercenary-on-mercenary warfare in Italy led to relatively bloodless campaigns which relied as much on manoeuvre as on battles, since the condottieri recognized it was more efficient to attack the enemy's ability to wage war rather than his battle forces, discovering the concept of indirect warfare 500 years before Sir Basil Liddell Hart, and attempting to attack the enemy supply lines, his economy and his ability to wage war rather than risking an open battle, and manoeuvre him into a position where risking a battle would have been suicidal. Machiavelli understood this indirect approach as cowardice.
Fortifications: In Europe, breakdowns in centralized power led to the rise of several groups that turned to large-scale pillage as a source of income. Most notably the Vikings, Arabs, Mongols, Huns, Cumans, Tartars, and Magyars raided significantly. As these groups were generally small and needed to move quickly, building fortifications was a good way to provide refuge and protection for the people and the wealth in the region.
These fortifications evolved throughout the Middle Ages, the most important form being the castle, a structure which has become almost synonymous with the Medieval era in the popular eye. The castle served as a protected place for the local elites. Inside a castle they were protected from bands of raiders and could send mounted warriors to drive the enemy from the area, or to disrupt the efforts of larger armies to supply themselves in the region by gaining local superiority over foraging parties that would be impossible against the whole enemy host.
Fortifications were a very important part of warfare because they provided safety to the lord, his family, and his servants. They provided refuge from armies too large to face in open battle. The ability of the heavy cavalry to dominate a battle on an open field was useless against fortifications. Building siege engines was a time-consuming process, and could seldom be effectively done without preparations before the campaign. Many sieges could take months, if not years, to weaken or demoralize the defenders sufficiently. Fortifications were an excellent means of ensuring that the elite could not be easily dislodged from their lands – as Count Baldwin of Hainaut commented in 1184 on seeing enemy troops ravage his lands from the safety of his castle, "they can't take the land with them".
Siege warfare: In the Medieval period besieging armies used a wide variety of siege engines including: scaling ladders; battering rams; siege towers and various types of catapults such as the mangonel, onager, ballista, and trebuchet. Siege techniques also included mining in which tunnels were dug under a section of the wall and then rapidly collapsed to destabilize the wall's foundation. Another technique was to bore into the enemy walls, however, this was not nearly as effective as other methods due to the thickness of castle walls.
Advances in the prosecution of sieges encouraged the development of a variety of defensive counter-measures. In particular, Medieval fortifications became progressively stronger – for example, the advent of the concentric castle from the period of the Crusades – and more dangerous to attackers – witness the increasing use of machicolations, as well the preparation of hot or incendiary substances. Arrow slits, concealed doors for sallies, and deep water wells were also integral to resisting siege at this time. Designers of castles paid particular attention to defending entrances, protecting gates with drawbridges, portcullises and barbicans. Wet animal skins were often draped over gates to repel fire. Moats and other water defences, whether natural or augmented, were also vital to defenders.
In the Middle Ages, virtually all large cities had city walls – Dubrovnik in Dalmatia is a well-preserved example – and more important cities had citadels, forts or castles. Great effort was expended to ensure a good water supply inside the city in case of siege. In some cases, long tunnels were constructed to carry water into the city. In other cases, such as the Ottoman siege of Shkodra, Venetian engineers had designed and installed cisterns that were fed by rain water channeled by a system of conduits in the walls and buildings. Complex systems of tunnels were used for storage and communications in medieval cities like Tábor in Bohemia. Against these would be matched the mining skills of teams of trained sappers, who were sometimes employed by besieging armies.
Until the invention of gunpowder-based weapons (and the resulting higher-velocity projectiles), the balance of power and logistics favoured the defender. With the invention of gunpowder, the traditional methods of defence became less and less effective against a determined siege.
Relics: The practice of carrying relics into battle is a feature that distinguishes medieval warfare from its predecessors or early modern warfare and possibly inspired by biblical references. The presence of relics was believed to be an important source of supernatural power that served both as a spiritual weapon and a form of defence; the relics of martyrs were considered by Saint John Chrysostom much more powerful than "walls, trenches, weapons and hosts of soldiers"
In Italy, the carroccio or carro della guerra, the "war wagon", was an elaboration of this practice that developed during the 13th century. The carro della guerra of Milan was described in detail in 1288 by Bonvesin de la Riva in his book on the "Marvels of Milan". Wrapped in scarlet cloth and drawn by three yoke of oxen that were caparisoned in white with the red cross of Saint Ambrose, the city's patron, it carried a crucifix so massive it took four men to step it in place, like a ship's mast.
Naval warfare: The waters surrounding Europe can be grouped into two types which affected the design of craft that traveled and therefore the warfare. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Medieval warfare | The carro della guerra of Milan was described in detail in 1288 by Bonvesin de la Riva in his book on the "Marvels of Milan". Wrapped in scarlet cloth and drawn by three yoke of oxen that were caparisoned in white with the red cross of Saint Ambrose, the city's patron, it carried a crucifix so massive it took four men to step it in place, like a ship's mast.
Naval warfare: The waters surrounding Europe can be grouped into two types which affected the design of craft that traveled and therefore the warfare. The Mediterranean and Black Seas were free of large tides, generally calm, and had predictable weather. The seas around the north and west of Europe experienced stronger and less predictable weather. The weather gauge, the advantage of having a following wind, was an important factor in naval battles, particularly to the attackers. Typically westerlies (winds blowing from west to east) dominated Europe, giving naval powers to the west an advantage. Medieval sources on the conduct of medieval naval warfare are less common than those about land-based war. Most medieval chroniclers had no experience of life on the sea and generally were not well informed. Maritime archaeology has helped provide information.
Early in the medieval period, ships in the context of warfare were used primarily for transporting troops. In the Mediterranean, naval warfare in the Middle Ages was similar to that under late Roman Empire: fleets of galleys would exchange missile fire and then try to board bow first to allow marines to fight on deck. This mode of naval warfare remained the same into the early modern period, as, for example, at the Battle of Lepanto. Famous admirals included Roger of Lauria, Andrea Doria and Hayreddin Barbarossa.
Late medieval maritime warfare was divided in two distinct regions. In the Mediterranean, galleys were used for raiding along coasts, and in the constant fighting for naval bases. In the Atlantic and Baltic there was greater focus on sailing ships that were used mostly for troop transport, with galleys providing fighting support. Galleys were still widely used in the north and were the most numerous warships used by Mediterranean powers with interests in the north, especially the French and Iberian kingdoms.
Bulkier ships were developed which were primarily sail-driven, although the long lowboard Viking-style rowed longship saw use well into the 15th century. Their main purpose in the north remained the transportation of soldiers to fight on the decks of the opposing ship (as, for example, at the Battle of Svolder or the Battle of Sluys).
Late medieval sailing warships resembled floating fortresses, with towers in the bows and at the stern (respectively, the forecastle and aftcastle). The large superstructure made these warships quite unstable, but the decisive defeats that the more mobile but considerably lower boarded longships suffered at the hands of high-boarded cogs in the 15th century ended the issue of which ship type would dominate northern European warfare.
Introduction of guns: The introduction of guns was the first step towards major changes in naval warfare, but it only slowly changed the dynamics of ship-to-ship combat. The first guns on ships were introduced in the 14th century and consisted of small wrought-iron pieces placed on the open decks and in the fighting tops, often requiring only one or two men to handle them. They were designed to injure, kill or simply stun, shock and frighten the enemy before boarding.
As guns were made more durable to withstand stronger gunpowder charges, they increased their potential to inflict critical damage to the vessel rather than just their crews. Since these guns were much heavier than the earlier anti-personnel weapons, they had to be placed lower in the ships, and fire from gunports, to avoid ships becoming unstable. In Northern Europe the technique of building ships with clinker planking made it difficult to cut ports in the hull; clinker-built (or clench-built) ships had much of their structural strength in the outer hull. The solution was the gradual adoption of carvel-built ships that relied on an internal skeleton structure to bear the weight of the ship.
The first ships to actually mount heavy cannon capable of sinking ships were galleys, with large wrought-iron pieces mounted directly on the timbers in the bow. The first example is known from a woodcut of a Venetian galley from 1486. Heavy artillery on galleys was mounted in the bow which fit conveniently with the long-standing tactical tradition of attacking head-on and bow-first. The ordnance on galleys was quite heavy from its introduction in the 1480s, and capable of quickly demolishing medieval-style stone walls that still prevailed until the 16th century.
This temporarily upended the strength of older seaside fortresses, which had to be rebuilt to cope with gunpowder weapons. The addition of guns also improved the amphibious abilities of galleys as they could assault supported with heavy firepower, and could be even more effectively defended when beached stern-first. Galleys and similar oared vessels remained uncontested as the most effective gun-armed warships in theory until the 1560s, and in practice for a few decades more, and were considered a grave risk to sailing warships.
Rise of infantry: In the Medieval period, the mounted cavalry long held sway on the battlefield. Heavily armoured mounted knights represented a formidable foe for reluctant peasant draftees and lightly armoured freemen. To defeat mounted cavalry, infantry used swarms of missiles or a tightly packed phalanx of men, techniques honed in antiquity by the Greeks.
Swiss pikemen: The use of long pikes and densely packed foot troops was not uncommon in the Middle Ages. The Flemish footmen at the Battle of the Golden Spurs met and overcame French knights in 1302, as the Lombards did in Legnano in 1176 and the Scots held their own against heavily armoured English cavalry. During the St. Louis crusade, dismounted French knights formed a tight lance-and-shield phalanx to repel Egyptian cavalry. The Swiss used pike tactics in the late medieval period. While pikemen usually grouped and awaited a mounted attack, the Swiss developed flexible formations and aggressive manoeuvring, forcing their opponents to respond. The Swiss won at Morgarten, Laupen, Sempach, Grandson and Murten, and between 1450 and 1550 every leading prince in Europe (except the English and Scottish) hired Swiss pikemen, or emulated their tactics and weapons (e.g., the German Landsknechte).
Welsh and English longbowmen: The Welsh and English longbowmen used a single-piece longbow (but some bows later developed a composite design) to deliver arrows that could penetrate contemporary mail and damage/dent plate armour. The longbow was a difficult weapon to master, requiring long years of use and constant practice. A skilled longbowman could shoot about 12 shots per minute. This rate of fire was far superior to competing weapons like the crossbow or early gunpowder weapons. The nearest competitor to the longbow was the much more expensive crossbow, used often by urban militias and mercenary forces. The crossbow had greater penetrating power and did not require the extended years of training. However, it lacked the rate of fire of the longbow.
At Crécy and Agincourt bowmen unleashed clouds of arrows into the ranks of knights. At Crécy, even 5,000 Genoese crossbowmen could not dislodge them from their hill. At Agincourt, thousands of French knights were brought down by armour-piercing bodkin point arrows and horse-maiming broadheads. Longbowmen decimated an entire generation of the French nobility.
Transition to gunpowder warfare: In 1326 the earliest known European picture of a gun appeared in a manuscript by Walter de Milemete. In 1350, Petrarch wrote that the presence of cannons on the battlefield was 'as common and familiar as other kinds of arms'.
Early artillery played a limited role in the Hundred Years' War, and it became indispensable in the Italian Wars of 1494–1559, marking the beginning of early modern warfare. Charles VIII, during his invasion of Italy, brought with him the first truly mobile siege train: culverins and bombards mounted on wheeled carriages, which could be deployed against an enemy stronghold immediately after arrival.
Strategy and tactics: Medieval campaigns were planned with strategy in mind, such as maintaining unity in morale, planning troop movements, and mount offensives with numerical advantages. Medieval armies used strategic deception, such as misleading troop movements, to take opposing armies by surprise. They would also spread misinformation regarding army size and provisions.
One common tactic used in medieval warfare was raiding; this benefitted the attacking army by with new supplies and wealth while damaging the target's resources.
De re militari: Publius Flavius Vegetius Renatus wrote De re militari (Concerning Military Matters) possibly in the late 4th century. Described by historian Walter Goffart as "the bible of warfare throughout the Middle Ages", De re militari was widely distributed through the Latin West. While Western Europe relied on a single text for the basis of its military knowledge, the Byzantine Empire in Southeastern Europe had a succession of military writers. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Medieval warfare | Strategy and tactics: Medieval campaigns were planned with strategy in mind, such as maintaining unity in morale, planning troop movements, and mount offensives with numerical advantages. Medieval armies used strategic deception, such as misleading troop movements, to take opposing armies by surprise. They would also spread misinformation regarding army size and provisions.
One common tactic used in medieval warfare was raiding; this benefitted the attacking army by with new supplies and wealth while damaging the target's resources.
De re militari: Publius Flavius Vegetius Renatus wrote De re militari (Concerning Military Matters) possibly in the late 4th century. Described by historian Walter Goffart as "the bible of warfare throughout the Middle Ages", De re militari was widely distributed through the Latin West. While Western Europe relied on a single text for the basis of its military knowledge, the Byzantine Empire in Southeastern Europe had a succession of military writers. Though Vegetius had no military experience and De re militari was derived from the works of Cato and Frontinus, his books were the standard for military discourse in Western Europe from their production until the 16th century.
De re militari was divided into five books: who should be a soldier and the skills they needed to learn, the composition and structure of an army, field tactics, how to conduct and withstand sieges, and the role of the navy. According to Vegetius, infantry was the most important element of an army because it was cheap compared to cavalry and could be deployed on any terrain. One of the tenets he put forward was that a general should only engage in battle when he was sure of victory or had no other choice. As archaeologist Robert Liddiard explains, "Pitched battles, particularly in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, were rare."
Although his work was widely reproduced, and over 200 copies, translations, and extracts survive today, the extent to which Vegetius affected the actual practice of warfare as opposed to its concept is unclear because of his habit of stating the obvious. Historian Michael Clanchy noted "the medieval axiom that laymen are illiterate and its converse that clergy are literate", so it may be the case that few soldiers read Vegetius' work. While their Roman predecessors were well-educated and had been experienced in warfare, the European nobility of the early Medieval period were not renowned for their education, but from the 12th century, it became more common for them to read.
Some soldiers regarded the experience of warfare as more valuable than reading about it; for example, Geoffroi de Charny, a 14th century knight who wrote about warfare, recommended that his audience should learn by observing and asking advice from their superiors. Vegetius remained prominent in medieval literature on warfare, although it is uncertain to what extent his work was read by the warrior class as opposed to the clergy. In 1489, King Henry VII of England commissioned the translation of De re militari into English, "so every gentleman born to arms and all manner of men of war, captains, soldiers, victuallers and all others would know how they ought to behave in the feats of wars and battles".
Supplies and logistics: Medieval warfare largely predated the use of supply trains, which meant that armies had to acquire food supplies from the territory they were passing through. This meant that large-scale looting by soldiers was unavoidable, and was actively encouraged in the 14th century with its emphasis on chevauchée tactics, where mounted troops would burn and pillage enemy territory in order to distract and demoralize the enemy while denying them their supplies.
Through the medieval period, soldiers were responsible for supplying themselves, either through foraging, looting, or purchases. Even so, military commanders often provided their troops with food and supplies, but this would be provided instead of the soldiers' wages, or soldiers would be expected to pay for it from their wages, either at cost or even with a profit.
In 1294, the same year John II de Balliol of Scotland refused to support Edward I of England's planned invasion of France, Edward I implemented a system in Wales and Scotland where sheriffs would acquire foodstuffs, horses and carts from merchants with compulsory sales at prices fixed below typical market prices under the Crown's rights of prise and purveyance. These goods would then be transported to Royal Magazines in southern Scotland and along the Scottish border where English conscripts under his command could purchase them. This continued during the First War of Scottish Independence which began in 1296, though the system was unpopular and was ended with Edward I's death in 1307.
Starting under the rule of Edward II in 1307 and ending under the rule of Edward III in 1337, the English instead used a system where merchants would be asked to meet armies with supplies for the soldiers to purchase. This led to discontent as the merchants saw an opportunity to profiteer, forcing the troops to pay well above normal market prices for food.
As Edward III went to war with France in the Hundred Years' War (starting in 1337), the English returned to a practice of foraging and raiding to meet their logistical needs. This practice lasted throughout the war, extending through the remainder of Edward III's reign into the reign of Henry VI.
Regional examples:
Arabs: The initial Muslim conquests began in the 7th century after the death of the Islamic prophet Muhammad, and were marked by a century of rapid Arab expansion beyond the Arabian Peninsula under the Rashidun and Umayyad Caliphates. Under the Rashidun, the Arabs conquered the Persian Empire, along with Roman Syria and Roman Egypt during the Byzantine-Arab Wars, all within just seven years from 633 to 640. Under the Umayyads, the Arabs annexed North Africa and southern Italy from the Romans and the Arab Empire soon stretched from parts of the Indian subcontinent, across Central Asia, the Middle East, North Africa, and southern Italy, to the Iberian Peninsula and the Pyrenees.
The early Arab army mainly consisted of camel-mounted infantry, alongside a few Bedouin cavalry. Constantly outnumbered by their opponent, they did, however, possess the advantage of strategic mobility, their camel-borne nature allowing them to constantly outmaneuver larger Byzantine and Sassanid armies to take prime defensive positions. The Rashidun cavalry, while lacking the number and mounted archery skill of their Roman and Persian counterparts was for the most part skillfully employed, and played a decisive role in many crucial battles such as Battle of Yarmouk. During the 7th century, Arab armies employed weapons such as swords, spears, iron mace and lances. For protection, they used shields and wore helmets and coats of mail, although the latter was extremely rare. The bow and arrow was also utilized. Also, after the naval siege of Constantinople in the 670s, they started to employ greek fire.
In contrast to the Roman and Persian army at the time both had large numbers of heavy infantry and heavy cavalry (cataphracts and clibanarii) that were better equipped, heavily protected, and were more experienced and disciplined. The Arab invasions came at a time when both ancient powers were exhausted from the protracted Byzantine–Sassanid Wars, particularly the bitterly fought Byzantine–Sassanid War of 602–628 which had brought both empires close to collapse. Also, the typically multi-ethnic Byzantine force was always wracked by dissension and lacked a unity of command, a similar situation also being encountered among the Sassanids who had been embroiled in a bitter civil war for a decade before the coming of the Arabs. In contrast, the Ridda Wars which preceded the Arab conflicts with both the Sasanids and the Byzantines, had forged the Caliphate's army into a united and loyal fighting force.
Vikings: The Vikings were a feared force in Europe because of their savagery and speed of their attacks. Whilst seaborne raids were nothing new at the time, the Vikings refined the practice to a science through their shipbuilding, tactics and training. Unlike other raiders, the Vikings made a lasting impact on the face of Europe. During the Viking age, their expeditions, frequently combining raiding and trading, penetrated most of the old Frankish Empire, the British Isles, the Baltic region, Russia, and both Muslim and Christian Iberia. Many served as mercenaries, and the famed Varangian Guard, serving the Emperor of Constantinople, was drawn principally of Scandinavian warriors.
Viking longships were swift and easily manoeuvered; they could navigate deep seas or shallow rivers, and could carry warriors that could be rapidly deployed directly onto land due to the longships being able to land directly. The longship was the enabler of the Viking style of warfare that was fast and mobile, relying heavily on the element of surprise. The usual method was to approach a target with the element of surprise and then retire swiftly using guerrilla-style fighting. The fully armoured Viking raider would wear an iron helmet and a mail hauberk, and fight with a combination of axe, sword, shield, spear or great "Danish" two-handed axe, although the typical raider would be unarmoured, carrying only a bow and arrows, a seax, a shield and spear. European countries with a weak system of government would be unable to organize a suitable response and would naturally suffer the most to Viking raiders. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Medieval warfare | Viking longships were swift and easily manoeuvered; they could navigate deep seas or shallow rivers, and could carry warriors that could be rapidly deployed directly onto land due to the longships being able to land directly. The longship was the enabler of the Viking style of warfare that was fast and mobile, relying heavily on the element of surprise. The usual method was to approach a target with the element of surprise and then retire swiftly using guerrilla-style fighting. The fully armoured Viking raider would wear an iron helmet and a mail hauberk, and fight with a combination of axe, sword, shield, spear or great "Danish" two-handed axe, although the typical raider would be unarmoured, carrying only a bow and arrows, a seax, a shield and spear. European countries with a weak system of government would be unable to organize a suitable response and would naturally suffer the most to Viking raiders. Viking raiders always had the option to fall back in the face of a superior force or stubborn defence and then reappear to attack other locations or retreat to their bases. As time went on, Viking raids became more sophisticated, with coordinated strikes involving multiple forces and large armies, as the "Great Heathen Army" that ravaged Anglo-Saxon England in the 9th century. In time, the Vikings began to hold on to the areas they raided, first wintering and then consolidating footholds for further expansion later.
After the Vikings consolidated their kingdoms of Denmark, Norway, and Sweden, this period marks the end of significant raider activity both for plunder or conquest; adapting a more continental European tradition of warfare, whilst retaining an emphasis on naval power – the "Viking" clinker-built warship was used in the war until the 14th century. However, developments in shipbuilding elsewhere removed the advantage they previously enjoyed at sea, whilst castle building throughout frustrated and eventually ended Viking raids.
The Scandinavian armies of the High Middle Ages followed the usual pattern of the Northern European armies, but with a stronger emphasis on infantry. The terrain of Scandinavia favoured heavy infantry, and whilst the nobles fought mounted in the continental fashion, the Scandinavian peasants formed a well-armed and well-armoured infantry, of which approximately 30% to 50% would be archers or crossbowmen. The crossbow, the flatbow and the longbow were especially popular in Sweden and Finland. The chainmail, the lamellar armour and the coat of plates were the usual Scandinavian infantry armour before the era of plate armour.
Mongols: By 1241, having conquered large parts of Russia, the Mongols continued the invasion of Europe with a massive three-pronged advance, following the fleeing Cumans, who had established an uncertain alliance with King Bela IV of Hungary. They first invaded Poland, and finally, Hungary, culminating in the crushing defeat of the Hungarians in the Battle of Mohi. The Mongol aim seems to have consistently been to defeat the Hungarian-Cuman alliance. The Mongols raided across the borders to Austria and Bohemia in the summer when the Great Khan died, and the Mongol princes returned home to elect a new Great Khan.
The Golden Horde would frequently clash with Hungarians, Lithuanians and Poles in the thirteenth century, with two large raids in the 1260s and 1280s respectively. In 1284 the Hungarians repelled the last major raid into Hungary, and in 1287 the Poles repelled a raid against them. The instability in the Golden Horde seems to have quieted the western front of the Horde. Also, the large scale invasions and raiding that had previously characterized the expansion of the Mongols was cut short probably in some part due to the death of the last great Mongol leader, Tamerlane.
The Hungarians and Poles had responded to the mobile threat by extensive fortification-building, army reform in the form of better-armoured cavalry, and refusing battle unless they could control the site of the battlefield to deny the Mongols local superiority. The Lithuanians relied on their forested homelands for defence and used their cavalry for raiding into Mongol-dominated Russia. When attacking fortresses they would launch dead or diseased animals into fortresses to help spread disease.
Turks and Central Asia: An early Turkic group, the Seljuks, were known for their cavalry archers. These fierce nomads were often raiding empires, such as the Byzantine Empire, and they scored several victories using mobility and timing to defeat the heavy cataphracts of the Byzantines.
One notable victory was at Manzikert, where conflict among the generals of the Byzantines gave the Turks the perfect opportunity to strike. They hit the cataphracts with arrows, and outmanoeuvred them, then rode down their less mobile infantry with light cavalry that used scimitars (in use since the 9th century). When gunpowder was introduced, the Ottoman Turks of the Ottoman Empire hired the mercenaries that used the gunpowder weapons and obtained their instruction for the Janissaries. Out of these Ottoman soldiers rose the Janissaries (yeni ceri; "new soldier"), from which they also recruited many of their heavy infantry. Along with the use of cavalry and early grenades, the Ottomans mounted an offensive in the early Renaissance period and attacked Europe, taking Constantinople by massed infantry assaults.
Like many other nomadic peoples, the Turks featured a core of heavy cavalry from the upper classes. These evolved into the Sipahis (feudal landholders similar to western knights and Byzantine pronoiai) and Qapukulu (door slaves, taken from youth like Janissaries and trained to be royal servants and elite soldiers, mainly cataphracts).
Already by the late 13th century, the Khilji dynasty utilized several siege technologies such as trebuchets, ballistas and wooden parapets by their war engineers. In order to breach a fortification's curtain walls, long earthen-ramps were used to fill up moats. In ranged military techniques, they used the powerful war-horses from Central Asia with mounted archers.
Equipment: Weapons
Medieval weapons consisted of many different types of ranged and hand-held objects:
Melee
Battleaxe
Horseman's pick
Blades
Arming sword
Dagger
Knife
Longsword
Messer
Blunt weapons
Club
Mace
War hammer
Polearm
Halberd
Lance
Military fork, the weaponized Pitchfork
Pollaxe
Spear
Ranged
Bow
Longbow
Crossbow
Throwing axe
Throwing spear and Javelin
Sling
Armour
Body armour
Leather
Fabric
Chain mail
Brigandine
Plate
Shield
Helmet
Artillery and Siege engine
Battering ram
Catapult
Trebuchet
Ballista
Siege tower
Animals
Camels in warfare
Dogs in warfare
Horses in warfare and Horses in the Middle Ages
War elephant
War pigs
See also:
Notes:
References: Archdeacon, Thomas of Split (2006). History of the Bishops of Salona and Split – Historia Salonitanorum atque Spalatinorum pontificum (in Latin and English). Budapest: Central European University Press. ISBN 978-963-7326-59-2.
DeVries, Kelly (1992), Military Medieval Technology, Broadview Press, ISBN 0-921149-74-3
Fernández-Armesto, Felipe (1999), "Naval Warfare after the Viking Age, c. 1100–1500", in Keen, Maurice (ed.), Medieval Warfare: A History, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 230–252, ISBN 0-19-820639-9
Gillingham, John (1992), "William the Bastard at War", in Strickland, Matthew (ed.), Anglo-Norman warfare: Studies in Late Anglo-Saxon and Anglo-Norman Military Organization and Warfare, Woodbridge: The Boydell Press, pp. 143–160, ISBN 0-85115-327-5
Glete, Jan, Warfare at Sea, 1500–1650: Maritime Conflicts and the Transformation of Europe. Routledge, London. 2000. ISBN 0-415-21455-6
Goffart, Walter (1977), "The date and purpose of Vegetius' De Re Militari", Traditio, xxxiii: 65–100, doi:10.1017/S0362152900009077, JSTOR 27831025, S2CID 151406462
Guilmartin, John Francis, Gunpowder and Galleys: Changing Technology and Mediterranean Warfare at Sea in the Sixteenth Century. Cambridge University Press, London. 1974.
Hattendorf, John B. & Unger, Richard W. (editors), War at Sea in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. Woodbridge, Suffolk. 2003. ISBN 0-85115-903-6 [1]
Liddiard, Robert (2005), Castles in Context: Power, Symbolism and Landscape, 1066 to 1500, Macclesfield: Windgather Press Ltd, ISBN 0-9545575-2-2
Lehmann, L. Th., Galleys in the Netherlands. Meulenhoff, Amsterdam. 1984. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Medieval warfare | Cambridge University Press, London. 1974.
Hattendorf, John B. & Unger, Richard W. (editors), War at Sea in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. Woodbridge, Suffolk. 2003. ISBN 0-85115-903-6 [1]
Liddiard, Robert (2005), Castles in Context: Power, Symbolism and Landscape, 1066 to 1500, Macclesfield: Windgather Press Ltd, ISBN 0-9545575-2-2
Lehmann, L. Th., Galleys in the Netherlands. Meulenhoff, Amsterdam. 1984. ISBN 90-290-1854-2
Marsden, Peter, Sealed by Time: The Loss and Recovery of the Mary Rose. The Archaeology of the Mary Rose, Volume 1. The Mary Rose Trust, Portsmouth. 2003. ISBN 0-9544029-0-1
Nicholson, Helen (2004), Medieval Warfare: Theory and Practice of War in Europe, 300–1500, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, ISBN 0-333-76330-0
Publius Flavius Vegetius Renatus (1996), Milner, N. P. (ed.), Vegetius: epitome of military science, Translated Texts for Historians, vol. xvi, Liverpool: Liverpool University Press
Rodger, Nicholas A. M., "The Development of Broadside Gunnery, 1450–1650." Mariner's Mirror 82 (1996), pp. 301–324.
Rodger, Nicholas A. M., The Safeguard of the Sea: A Naval History of Britain 660–1649. W.W. Norton & Company, New York. 1997. ISBN 0-393-04579-X
Laury Sarti, "Perceiving War and the Military in Early Christian Gaul (ca. 400–700 A.D.)" (= Brill's Series on the Early Middle Ages, 22), Leiden/Boston 2013, ISBN 978-9004-25618-7.
Further reading:
External links: Medieval Warfare Siege warfare, open battles, weapons, armour and fighting techniques.
Database of thousands of English soldiers during the later medieval period
Medieval History Database (MHDB), which includes medieval military records
Guide to researching records of medieval soldiers, from the British National Archives site |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Mercenary | International and national laws of war: Protocol Additional GC 1977 (APGC77) is a 1977 amendment protocol to the Geneva Conventions. Article 47 of the protocol provides the most widely accepted international definition of a mercenary, though it is not endorsed by some countries, including the United States. The Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977 states:
Art 47. Mercenaries
All the criteria, as listed in 2(a) through 2(f), must be met, according to the Geneva Convention, for a combatant to be considered a mercenary. While mercenaries do not enjoy the same protection as prisoners of war do, they must still be treated humanely according to the rules of the Protocol and they may not be punished without a trial.
On 4 December 1989, the United Nations passed resolution 44/34, the International Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries. It entered into force on 20 October 2001 and is usually known as the UN Mercenary Convention. Article 1 of the UN Mercenary Convention contains the definition of a mercenary. Article 1.1 is similar to Article 47 of Protocol I. Article 1.2 broadens the definition to include a non-national recruited to overthrow a "Government or otherwise undermin[e] the constitutional order of a State; or Undermin[e] the territorial integrity of a State"; and "Is motivated to take part therein essentially by the desire for significant private gain and is prompted by the promise or payment of material compensation". Under Article 1.2, a person does not have to take a direct part in the hostilities in a planned coup d'état to be a mercenary.
Austria: If a person is proven to have worked as a mercenary for any other country while retaining Austrian citizenship, their Austrian citizenship will be revoked.
France: In 2003, France criminalized mercenary activities, as defined by the protocol to the Geneva convention for French citizens, permanent residents, and legal entities (Penal Code, L436-1, L436-2, L436-3, L436-4, L436-5). This law does not prevent French citizens from serving as volunteers in foreign forces. The law applies to military activities with a specifically mercenary motive or with a mercenary level of remuneration. However, due to jurisdictional loopholes several French companies provide mercenary services.
The French state owns 50% of Défense conseil international, which it founded, a private military company (PMC) which does not supply any fighters but is used to export military training services. It realised a profit of €222 million in 2019.
Germany: It is an offence "to recruit" German citizens "for military duty in a military or military-like facility in support of a foreign power" (§109h StGB).
Furthermore, a German citizen who enlists in the armed forces of a state they are also a citizen of risks the loss of their citizenship
(§28 StAG).
South Africa: In 1998, South Africa passed the Foreign Military Assistance Act that banned citizens and residents from any involvement in foreign wars, except for humanitarian operations, unless a government committee approved deployment. In 2005, the legislation was reviewed by the government because:
South African citizens were working as security guards in Iraq during the American occupation of Iraq;
consequences of the mercenary soldier sponsorship case against Mark Thatcher for the "possible funding and logistical assistance in relation to an alleged attempted coup in Equatorial Guinea" organized by Simon Mann.
As of 2010, South Africa forbids citizens from fighting in foreign wars unless they are under the direct control of their own national armed forces.
United Kingdom: In the United Kingdom, the Foreign Enlistment Act 1819 and the Foreign Enlistment Act 1870 make it unlawful for British subjects to join the armed forces of any state warring with another state at peace with Britain. During the Greek War of Independence, British volunteers fought with the Greek rebels, which could have been unlawful per the Foreign Enlistment Act. It was unclear whether or not the Greek rebels constituted a 'state', but the law was later clarified to indicate that they were.
The British government considered using the Act against British subjects fighting for the International Brigades in the Spanish Civil War and the FNLA in the Angolan Civil War, but on both occasions chose not to do so.
United States: Civilians with the US Armed Forces lose their law of war protection from direct attack if, and for such time as, they directly participate in hostilities.
The Anti-Pinkerton Act of 1893 (5 U.S.C. § 3108) forbids the US government from using Pinkerton National Detective Agency employees or similar private police companies.
In 1977, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit interpreted the Anti-Pinkerton Act as forbidding the U.S. government from employing companies offering "mercenary, quasi-military forces" for hire (United States ex rel. Weinberger v. Equifax, 557 F.2d 456, 462 (5th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1035 (1978)). There is disagreement over whether this proscription is limited to strikebreakers only, because Weinberger v. Equifax states the following:
The purpose of the Act and the legislative history reveal that an organization was "similar" to the Pinkerton Detective Agency only if it offered for hire mercenary, quasi-military forces as strikebreakers and armed guards. It had the secondary effect of deterring any other organization from providing such services lest it be branded a "similar organization." The legislative history supports this view and no other.
In the 7 June 1978 Letter to the heads of Federal Departments and Agencies, the Comptroller General interpreted this decision in a way that carved out an exemption for "Guard and Protective Services".
A United States Department of Defense (DoD) interim rule revised DoD Instruction 3020.41 to authorize contractors, other than private security contractors, to use deadly force against enemy armed forces only in self-defense (71 Fed. Reg. 34826), effective 16 June 2006. Per that interim rule, private security contractors were authorized to use deadly force when protecting their client's assets and persons, consistent with their contract's mission statement. One interpretation is that this authorized contractors to engage in combat on behalf of the US government. It is the combatant commander's responsibility to ensure that private security contract mission statements do not authorize performance of inherently governmental military functions, i.e. preemptive attacks, assaults, or raids, etc.
On 18 August 2006, the US Comptroller General rejected bid protest arguments that the United States Army contracts violated the Anti-Pinkerton Act by requiring that contractors provide armed convoy escort vehicles and labor, weapons, and equipment for internal security operations at Victory Base Complex in Iraq. The Comptroller General reasoned the act was unviolated because the contracts did not require contractors to provide quasi-military forces as strikebreakers.
In 2007, the US Army was temporarily barred from awarding a $475 million security contract in Iraq, the largest one at that time, because of a lawsuit filed by a US citizen alleging violation of the Anti-Pinkerton Act of 1893. Three of the candidates under final consideration for the contract (to include intelligence services and security for reconstruction work by the United States Army Corps of Engineers) included British firms Aegis Defence Services and Erinys Iraq, as well as Blackwater of North Carolina. The case was later dismissed.
Foreign national servicemen: The better-known combat units in which foreign nationals serve in another country's armed forces are the Gurkha regiments of the British Army and Indian Army, the French Foreign Legion, the Spanish Legion and the Ukraine Foreign Legion.
Recruits from countries of the Commonwealth of Nations in the British Army swear allegiance to the British monarch and are liable to operate in any unit. Gurkhas, however, operate in dedicated Gurkha units of the British Army (specifically units that are administered by the Brigade of Gurkhas) and the Indian Army. Although they are nationals of Nepal, a country that is not part of the Commonwealth, they still swear allegiance (either to the Crown or the Constitution of India) and abide by the rules and regulations under which all British or Indian soldiers serve. French Foreign Legionnaires serve in the French Foreign Legion, which deploys and fights as an organized unit of the French Army. This means that as members of the armed forces of Britain, India, and France these soldiers are not classed as mercenary soldiers per APGC77 Art 47.e and 47.f. Volunteers for the Ukraine Foreign legion have three-year contracts, and are eligible for Ukrainian citizenship (the probation period being the duration of the war).
Private military companies: The private military company (PMC) is a private company providing armed combat or security services for financial gain. PMCs refer to their personnel as security contractors or private military contractors. PMC contractors are civilians (in governmental, international, and civil organizations) authorized to accompany an army to the field; thus, the term civilian contractor. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Mercenary | French Foreign Legionnaires serve in the French Foreign Legion, which deploys and fights as an organized unit of the French Army. This means that as members of the armed forces of Britain, India, and France these soldiers are not classed as mercenary soldiers per APGC77 Art 47.e and 47.f. Volunteers for the Ukraine Foreign legion have three-year contracts, and are eligible for Ukrainian citizenship (the probation period being the duration of the war).
Private military companies: The private military company (PMC) is a private company providing armed combat or security services for financial gain. PMCs refer to their personnel as security contractors or private military contractors. PMC contractors are civilians (in governmental, international, and civil organizations) authorized to accompany an army to the field; thus, the term civilian contractor. PMCs may use armed force, defined as: "legally established enterprises that make a profit, by either providing services involving the potential exercise of [armed] force in a systematic way and by military means, and/or by the transfer of that potential to clients through training and other practices, such as logistics support, equipment procurement, and intelligence gathering".
Private paramilitary forces are functionally mercenary armies, though they may serve as security guards or military advisors; however, national governments reserve the right to control the number, nature, and armaments of such private armies, arguing that, provided they are not pro-actively employed in front-line combat, they are not mercenaries. In February 2002, a British Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) report about PMCs noted that the demands of the military service from the UN and international civil organizations might mean that it is cheaper to pay PMCs than use soldiers. PMC "civilian contractors" tend to have poor reputations among professional government soldiers and officers—the U.S. Military Command has questioned their war zone behavior.
In September 2005, Brigadier General Karl Horst, deputy commander of the Third Infantry Division charged with Baghdad security after the 2003 invasion of Iraq, said of DynCorp and other PMCs:
These guys run loose in this country and do stupid stuff. There's no authority over them, so you can't come down on them hard when they escalate force... They shoot people, and someone else has to deal with the aftermath. It happens all over the place.
In 2004, the US and Coalition governments hired PMCs for security in Iraq. In March 2004, four Blackwater employees escorting food supplies and other equipment were attacked and killed in Fallujah in a videotaped attack; the killings and subsequent dismemberments were a cause for the First Battle of Fallujah.
Afghan war operations also boosted the business. The United States has made extensive use of PMCs in Afghanistan since 2001, mostly in a defensive role. PMC teams have been used to guard bases and to protect VIPs from Taliban assassins, but almost never in offensive operations. One mercenary stated about his work in Afghanistan: "We are there purely to protect the principals and get them out, we're not there to get into huge firefights with the bad guys". One team from DynCorp provided bodyguards for President Hamid Karzai.
Colombia: In 2006, a US congressional report listed a number of PMCs and other enterprises that have signed contracts to carry out anti-narcotics operations and related activities as part of Plan Colombia. Referring to the use of American PMCs in Colombia, the former US Ambassador to Colombia Myles Frechette has said: "Congress and the American people don't want any servicemen killed overseas. So it makes sense that if contractors want to risk their lives, they get the job".
Not only have foreign PMCs worked in Colombia, but a disproportionate number of the mercenaries with PMCs are Colombian, as Colombia's long history of civil war has led to a surplus of experienced soldiers. Also, Colombian soldiers are much cheaper than soldiers from developed countries. PMCs from several Middle Eastern countries have signed contracts with the Colombian Defense Ministry to carry out security or military activities.
UN concerns over legality of PMCs: The United Nations questions whether PMC soldiers are sufficiently accountable for their war zone actions. A common argument for using PMCs (used by the PMCs themselves), is that PMCs may be able to help combat genocide and civilian slaughter where the UN or other countries are unwilling or unable to intervene. Yet, after considering using PMCs to support UN operations, Kofi Annan, the Secretary-General of the United Nations, decided against it.
In October 2007, the United Nations released a two-year study that stated, that although hired as "security guards", private contractors were performing military duties. The report found that the use of contractors such as Blackwater was a "new form of mercenary activity" and illegal under international law.
Most countries, including the United States and the United Kingdom, are not signatories to the 1989 United Nations Mercenary Convention banning the use of mercenaries. A spokesman for the U.S. Mission to U.N. denied that Blackwater security guards were mercenaries, saying "Accusations that U.S. government-contracted security guards, of whatever nationality, are mercenaries is inaccurate and demeaning to men and women who put their lives on the line to protect people and facilities every day."
History:
Europe:
Classical era:
Greek mercenaries in Persian Empire: Xerxes I, King of Persia, employed Arcadian mercenaries during his invasion of Greece.
In Anabasis, Xenophon recounts how Cyrus the Younger hired a large army of Greek mercenaries (the "Ten Thousand") in 401 BC to seize the throne of Persia from his brother, Artaxerxes II. Though Cyrus' army was victorious at the Battle of Cunaxa, Cyrus himself was killed in battle and the expedition rendered moot. Stranded deep in enemy territory, the Spartan general Clearchus and most of the other Greek generals were subsequently killed by treachery. Xenophon played an instrumental role in encouraging "The Ten Thousand" Greek army to march north to the Black Sea in an epic fighting retreat.
The Sileraioi were a group of ancient mercenaries most likely employed by the tyrant Dionysius I of Syracuse.
In 378 BC the Persian Empire hired the Athenian general Iphicrates with his mercenaries in the Egyptian campaign.
The Mania, who was a sub-satrap, used Greek mercenaries in order to capture other cities in the region.
Memnon of Rhodes (380–333 BC) was the commander of the Greek mercenaries working for the Persian King Darius III when Alexander the Great of Macedonia invaded Persia in 334 BC and won the Battle of the Granicus River. Alexander also employed Greek mercenaries during his campaigns. These were men who fought for him directly and not those who fought in city-state units attached to his army.
Greek mercenaries in ancient India: Tamil poems described the Greek soldiers who served as mercenaries for Indian kings as: "The valiant-eyed Yavanas (Greeks), whose bodies were strong and of terrible aspect".
Alfred Charles Auguste Foucher said that some of the troops of Mara in the Gandhara sculptures may represent Greek mercenaries.
Stephanus of Byzantium wrote about a city called Daedala or Daidala (Ancient Greek: Δαίδαλα) in India, which he called Indo-Cretan, most probably because it was a settlement of Cretan mercenaries.
Carthage: Carthage contracted Balearic Islands shepherds as slingers during the Punic Wars against Rome. The vast majority of the Carthaginian military – except the highest officers, the navy, and the home guard – were mercenaries.
Xanthippus of Carthage was a Spartan mercenary general employed by Carthage.
Greek mercenaries were hired by Carthage to fight against the Dionysius I of Syracuse. Dionysius made Carthage pay a very high ransom for the Carthaginian prisoners, but he left the Greek mercenaries prisoners free without any ransom. This made the Carthaginians suspicious of their Greek mercenaries and discharged them all from their service. With this trick Dionysius did not have to fight again against the Greek mercenaries of Carthage who were very dangerous enemies.
Byzantine Empire: In the late Roman Empire, it became increasingly difficult for Emperors and generals to raise military units from the citizenry for various reasons: lack of manpower, lack of time available for training, lack of materials, and, inevitably, political considerations. Therefore, beginning in the late 4th century, the empire often contracted whole bands of barbarians either within the legions or as autonomous foederati. The barbarians were Romanized and surviving veterans were established in areas requiring population. The Varangian Guard of the Byzantine Empire is the best known formation made up of barbarian mercenaries (see next section).
Other: Members of independent Thracian tribes such as the Bessi and Dii often joined the ranks of large organized armies as mercenaries.
The Sons of Mars were Italian mercenaries used by the Greek kings of Syracuse until after the Punic Wars.
A figure in oral legend, Milesius was given the princess Scota after conducting a successful campaign for Ancient Egypt.
Mithridates VI Eupator recruited a large number of Iranians along with the Galatians into the Pontic army during the Mithridatic Wars against Rome, using the Leucosyri, Persians and Scythians.
Illyrians were hired across the Balkans and further. They were known for their unreliability. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Mercenary | The barbarians were Romanized and surviving veterans were established in areas requiring population. The Varangian Guard of the Byzantine Empire is the best known formation made up of barbarian mercenaries (see next section).
Other: Members of independent Thracian tribes such as the Bessi and Dii often joined the ranks of large organized armies as mercenaries.
The Sons of Mars were Italian mercenaries used by the Greek kings of Syracuse until after the Punic Wars.
A figure in oral legend, Milesius was given the princess Scota after conducting a successful campaign for Ancient Egypt.
Mithridates VI Eupator recruited a large number of Iranians along with the Galatians into the Pontic army during the Mithridatic Wars against Rome, using the Leucosyri, Persians and Scythians.
Illyrians were hired across the Balkans and further. They were known for their unreliability.
Medieval warfare: Byzantine emperors followed the Roman practice and contracted foreigners especially for their personal corps guard called the Varangian Guard. They were chosen among war-prone peoples, of whom the Varangians (Norsemen) were preferred. Their mission was to protect the Emperor and Empire and since they did not have links to the Greeks, they were expected to be ready to suppress rebellions. One of the most famous guards was the future king Harald III of Norway, also known as Harald Hardrada ("Hard-counsel"), who arrived in Constantinople in 1035 and was employed as a Varangian Guard. He participated in eighteen battles and was promoted to akolythos, the commander of the Guard, before returning home in 1043. He was killed at the Battle of Stamford Bridge in 1066 when his army was defeated by an English army commanded by King Harold Godwinson. The point at which the Varangians ceased to be in the service of the Roman Empire remains unclear.
In England at the time of the Norman Conquest, Flemings (natives of Flanders) formed a substantial mercenary element in the forces of William the Conqueror with many remaining in England as settlers under the Normans. Contingents of mercenary Flemish soldiers were to form significant forces in England throughout the time of the Norman and early Plantagenet dynasties (11th and 12th centuries). A prominent example of these were the Flemings who fought during the English civil wars, known as the Anarchy or the Nineteen-Year Winter (AD 1135 to 1154), under the command of William of Ypres, who was King Stephen's chief lieutenant from 1139 to 1154 and who was made Earl of Kent by Stephen.
In Italy, the condottiero was a military chief offering his troops, the condottieri, to Italian city-states. The condottieri were extensively used by the Italian city-states in their wars against one another. At times, the condottieri seized control of the state, as one condottiero, Francesco Sforza, made himself the Duke of Milan in 1450. During the ages of the Taifa kingdoms of the Iberian peninsula, Christian knights like El Cid could fight for a Muslim ruler against his Christian or Muslim enemies. The Almogavars originally fought for the counts of Barcelona and kings of Aragon, but as the Catalan Company, they followed Roger de Flor in the service of the Byzantine Empire. In 1311, the Catalan Great Company defeated at the Battle of Halmyros their former employer, Walter V, Count of Brienne, after he refused to pay them, and took over the Duchy of Athens. The Great Company ruled much of central and southern Greece until 1388–1390 when a rival mercenary company, the Navarrese Company were hired to oust them. Catalan and German mercenaries also had prominent role in the Serbian victory over Bulgarians in the Battle of Velbuzd in 1330.
During the later Middle Ages, Free Companies (or Free Lances) were formed, consisting of companies of mercenary troops. Nation-states lacked the funds needed to maintain standing forces, so they tended to hire free companies to serve in their armies during wartime. Such companies typically formed at the ends of periods of conflict, when men-at-arms were no longer needed by their respective governments. The veteran soldiers thus looked for other forms of employment, often becoming mercenaries. Free Companies would often specialize in forms of combat that required longer periods of training that was not available in the form of a mobilized militia.
The Routiers formed a distinctive subculture in medieval France who alternated between serving as mercenaries in wartime and bandits in peacetime. The routiers were very destructive and became a significant social problem. After the Treaty of Brétigny ended the war between England and France in 1360, the French countryside was overrun by Free Companies of routiers while the French Crown lacked the necessary military and economic strength to put an end to their activities. To rid France of the rampaging mercenaries and to overthrow the pro-English King Pedro the Cruel of Castile, Marshal Bertrand du Guesclin was directed by King Charles V of France to take the Free Companies into Castile with the orders to put the pro-French Enrique de Trastámara on the Castilian throne. Guesclin's mercanaries were organized into the Big Companies and French Companies and placed a decisive role in putting Enrique on the Castilian throne in 1369, who styled himself King Enrique II, the first Castilian monarch of the House of Trastámara.
The White Company commanded by Sir John Hawkwood is the best known English Free Company of the 14th century. Between the 13th and 17th centuries the Gallowglass fought within the Islands of Britain and also mainland Europe. A Welshman Owain Lawgoch (Owain of the Red Hand) formed a free company and fought for the French against the English during the Hundred Years' War, before being assassinated by a Scot named Jon Lamb, under the orders of the English Crown, during the siege of Mortagne in 1378.
15th and 16th centuries: Swiss mercenaries were sought during the late 15th and early 16th centuries as being an effective fighting force, until their somewhat rigid battle formations became vulnerable to arquebuses and artillery being developed at the same time. The Swiss Guard in particular were employed by the Papal States from 1506 (continuing to serve today as the military of Vatican City).
It was then that the German landsknechts, colourful mercenaries with a redoubtable reputation, took over the Swiss forces' legacy and became the most formidable force of the late 15th and throughout the 16th century, being hired by all the powers in Europe and often fighting at opposite sides. Sir Thomas More in his Utopia advocated the use of mercenaries in preference to citizens. The barbarian mercenaries employed by the Utopians are thought to be inspired by the Swiss mercenaries.
A class of mercenaries known as the Gallowglass dominated warfare in Ireland and Scotland between the 13th and 16th centuries. They were a heavily armed and armored elite force that often doubled as a chieftain's bodyguard.
At approximately the same period, Niccolò Machiavelli argued against the use of mercenary armies in his book of political advice The Prince. His rationale was that since the sole motivation of mercenaries is their pay, they will not be inclined to take the kind of risks that can turn the tide of a battle, but may cost them their lives. He also noted that a mercenary who failed was obviously no good, but one who succeeded may be even more dangerous. He astutely pointed out that a successful mercenary army no longer needs its employer if it is more militarily powerful than its supposed superior. This explained the frequent, violent betrayals that characterized mercenary/client relations in Italy, because neither side trusted the other. He believed that citizens with a real attachment to their home country will be more motivated to defend it and thus make much better soldiers.
The Stratioti or Stradioti (Italian: Stradioti or Stradiotti; Greek: Στρατιώτες, Stratiotes) were mercenary units from the Balkans recruited mainly by states of southern and central Europe from the 15th until the middle of the 18th century. The stradioti were recruited in Albania, Greece, Dalmatia, Serbia and later Cyprus. Most modern historians have indicated that the Stratioti were mostly Albanians. According to a study by a Greek author, around 80% of the listed names attributed to the stradioti were of Albanian origin while most of the remaining ones, especially those of officers, were of Greek origin; a small minority were of South Slavic origin. Among their leaders there were also members of some old Byzantine Greek noble families such as the Palaiologoi and Comneni. The stratioti were pioneers of light cavalry tactics during this era. In the early 16th century heavy cavalry in the European armies was principally remodeled after Albanian stradioti of the Venetian army, Hungarian hussars and German mercenary cavalry units (Schwarzreitern). They employed hit-and-run tactics, ambushes, feigned retreats and other complex maneuvers. In some ways, these tactics echoed those of the Ottoman sipahis and akinci. They had some notable successes also against French heavy cavalry during the Italian Wars. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Mercenary | Among their leaders there were also members of some old Byzantine Greek noble families such as the Palaiologoi and Comneni. The stratioti were pioneers of light cavalry tactics during this era. In the early 16th century heavy cavalry in the European armies was principally remodeled after Albanian stradioti of the Venetian army, Hungarian hussars and German mercenary cavalry units (Schwarzreitern). They employed hit-and-run tactics, ambushes, feigned retreats and other complex maneuvers. In some ways, these tactics echoed those of the Ottoman sipahis and akinci. They had some notable successes also against French heavy cavalry during the Italian Wars. They were known for cutting off the heads of dead or captured enemies, and according to Commines they were paid by their leaders one ducat per head.
In Italy, during inter-family conflicts such as the Wars of Castro, mercenaries were widely used to supplement the much smaller forces loyal to particular families. Often these were further supplemented by troops loyal to particular duchies which had sided with one or more of the belligerents.
17th and 18th centuries: During the 17th and 18th centuries, extensive use was made of foreign recruits in the now regimented and highly drilled armies of Europe, beginning in a systematized way with the Thirty Years' War. Historian Geoffrey Parker notes that 40,000 Scotsmen (about fifteen percent of the adult male population) served as soldiers in Continental Europe from 1618 to 1640.
After the signing of the Treaty of Limerick (1691) the soldiers of the Irish Army who left Ireland for France took part in what is known as the Flight of the Wild Geese. Subsequently, many made a living from fighting in continental armies, the most famous of whom was Patrick Sarsfield, who, having fallen mortally wounded at the Battle of Landen fighting for the French, said "If this was only for Ireland".
The brutality of the Thirty Years' War, in which several parts of Germany were ransacked by the mercenary troops, and left almost unpopulated, led to the formation of standing armies of professional soldiers, recruited locally or abroad. These armies were active also in peacetime. The formation of these armies in the late 18th century led to professionalization and standardization of clothing (uniforms), equipment, drill, weapons, etc. Since smaller states like the Dutch Republic could afford a large standing army, but could not find enough recruits among its own citizens, recruiting foreigners was common. Prussia had developed a form of conscription, but relied in wartime also on foreign recruits, although the regulations stated that no more than one third of the recruits were to be foreign. Prussian recruiting methods were often aggressive, and resulted more than once in conflicts with neighbouring states. The term mercenary gained its notoriety during this development, since mercenaries were—and now are—often seen as soldiers who fight for no noble cause, but only for money, and who have no loyalty than to the highest bidder, as opposed to the professional soldiers who takes an oath of loyalty and who is seen as the defender of the nation.
The mercenary soldiers thus fell out of favour and was replaced by the professional soldier. To augment the army, major European powers like France, Britain, the Dutch Republic and Spain contracted regiments from Switzerland, the Southern Netherlands (modern day Belgium), and several smaller German states. About a third of the infantry regiments of the French Royal Army prior to the French Revolution were recruited from outside France. The largest single group were the twelve Swiss regiments (including the Swiss Guard). Other units were German and one Irish Brigade (the "Wild Geese") had originally been made up of Irish volunteers. By 1789 difficulties in obtaining genuinely Irish recruits had led to German and other foreigners making up the bulk of the rank and file. The officers however continued to be drawn from long established Franco-Irish families. During the reign of Louis XV there was also a Scottish (Garde Écossaise), a Swedish (Royal-Suédois), an Italian (Royal-Italien) and a Walloon (Horion-Liegeois) regiment recruited outside the borders of France. The foreign infantry regiments comprised about 20,000 men in 1733, rising to 48,000 at the time of the Seven Years' War and being reduced in numbers thereafter.
The Dutch Republic had contracted several Scots, Swiss and German regiments in the early 18th century, and kept three Scots, one Walloon, and six Swiss regiments (including a Guard regiment raised in 1749) throughout the 18th century. The Scots regiments were contracted from Great Britain, but as relations between Britain and the Republic deteriorated, the regiments could no longer recruit in Scotland, leading to the regiments being Scots in name only until they were nationalized in 1784. Patrick Gordon, a Scottish mercenary fought at various times for Poland and Sweden, constantly changing his loyalty based on who could pay him the best, until he took up Russian service in 1661. In August 1689, during a coup d'état attempt in Moscow against co-tsar Peter the Great led by the Sophia Alekseyevna in the name of the other co-tsar, the intellectually disabled Ivan V, Gordon played the decisive role in defeating the coup and ensuring Peter's triumph. Gordon remained one of Peter's favorite advisers until his death.
The Spanish Army also made use of permanently established foreign regiments. These were three Irish regiments (Irlanda, Hiberni and Ultonia); one Italian (Naples) and five Swiss (Wimpssen, Reding, Betschart, Traxer and Preux). In addition one regiment of the Royal Guard including Irishmen as Patten, McDonnell and Neiven, was recruited from Walloons. The last of these foreign regiments was disbanded in 1815, following recruiting difficulties during the Napoleonic Wars. One complication arising from the use of non-national troops occurred at the Battle of Bailén in 1808 when the "red Swiss" (so-called from their uniforms) of the invading French Army clashed bloodily with "blue Swiss" in the Spanish service.
During the American Revolutionary War, the British government hired several regiments from German principalities to supplement the Army. They became known to revolutionaries as Hessians and were portrayed by propagandists as mercenaries. However, they were auxiliaries and do not meet the definition of mercenary.
19th–21st centuries: During the South American wars of independence from Spain, the British Legions from 1817 onward fought for General Simón Bolívar. Some of the British Legionaries were liberal idealists who went to South America to fight in a war for freedom, but others were the more classic mercenaries, mostly unemployed veterans of the Napoleonic wars, who fought for money. In South America, especially in Colombia, the men of the British Legions are remembered as heroes for their crucial role in helping end Spanish rule. During the First Carlist War, the British government suspended the Foreign Enlistment Act to allow the recruitment of a quasi-official British Auxiliary Legion under George de Lacy Evans, which went to Spain to fight for Queen Isabel II against the followers of Don Carlos, the pretender to the Spanish throne.
The Atholl Highlanders, a private Scottish infantry regiment of the Duke of Atholl, was formed in 1839 purely for ceremonial purposes. It was granted official regimental status by Queen Victoria in 1845 and is the only remaining legal private army in Europe.
Turkey and Azerbaijan have deployed Syrian mercenaries during the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war.
Syrian mercenaries are being deployed by Russia, with expected numbers ranging from hundreds to up to 40,000 fighters ultimately expected to take part. Wagner mercenaries are active in the Syrian civil war and sledgehammered a Syrian man to death. Mozart Group is also active in Ukraine.
East Asia:
Warring States: Mercenaries were regularly used by the kingdoms of the Warring States period of China. Military advisers and generals trained through the works of Mozi and Sun Tzu would regularly offer their services to kings and dukes.
After the Qin conquest of the Warring States, the Qin and later Han Empires would also employ mercenaries – ranging from nomadic horse archers in the Northern steppes or soldiers from the Yue kingdoms of the South. The 7th-century Tang dynasty was also prominent for its use of mercenaries, when they hired Tibetan and Uyghur soldiers against invasion from the Göktürks and other steppe civilizations.
15th to 18th centuries: The Saika mercenary group of the Kii Province, Japan, played a significant role during the Siege of Ishiyama Hongan-ji that took place between August 1570 to August 1580. The Saikashuu were famed for the support of Ikkō Buddhist sect movements and greatly impeded the advance of Oda Nobunaga's forces.
Ninja were peasant farmers who learned the art of war to combat the daimyō's samurai. They were hired out by many as mercenaries to perform capture, infiltration and retrieval, and, most famously, assassinations. Ninja possibly originated around the 14th century, but were not widely known or used till the 15th century and carried on being hired till the mid 18th century. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Mercenary | 15th to 18th centuries: The Saika mercenary group of the Kii Province, Japan, played a significant role during the Siege of Ishiyama Hongan-ji that took place between August 1570 to August 1580. The Saikashuu were famed for the support of Ikkō Buddhist sect movements and greatly impeded the advance of Oda Nobunaga's forces.
Ninja were peasant farmers who learned the art of war to combat the daimyō's samurai. They were hired out by many as mercenaries to perform capture, infiltration and retrieval, and, most famously, assassinations. Ninja possibly originated around the 14th century, but were not widely known or used till the 15th century and carried on being hired till the mid 18th century. In the 16th-17th centuries, the Spanish in the Philippines employed samurai mercenaries from Japan to help control the archipelago. Abroad the wreck of one Spanish galleon, the San Diego, that sunk in Filipino waters on 14 December 1600 were found numerous tsubas, the handguards of the katanas, the distinctive swords used by the samurai.
In 1615, the Dutch invaded Ai Island with Japanese mercenaries.
19th century: Between 1850 and 1864, the Taiping Rebellion raged as the Taiping (Heavenly Peace) Army led by Hong Xiuquan, the self-proclaimed younger brother of Jesus Christ, engaged in a bloody civil war against the forces loyal to the Qing emperor. As Hong and his followers, who numbered in the millions, were hostile to Western business interests, a group of Western merchants based in Shanghai created a mercenary army known as the Ever Victorious Army. During the Taiping Rebellion, the Qing came close to losing control of China. It was common for the financially hard-pressed Qing emperors to subcontract out the business of raising armies to fight the Taiping to the loyalist provincial gentry, which formed the origins of the warlords who were to dominate China after the overthrow of the Qing in 1912.
The rank and file of the Ever-Victorious Army were Chinese, but the senior officers were Westerners. The first commander was an American adventurer, Colonel Frederick Townsend Ward. After Ward was killed in action in 1862, command was assumed by another American adventurer, Henry Andres Burgevine, but the Chinese disliked him on the account of his racism and his alcoholism. Burgevine was replaced with a British Army officer seconded to Chinese service, Colonel Charles "Chinese" Gordon.
A highly successful commander, Gordon won thirty-three battles in succession against the Taipings in 1863–1864 as he led the Ever Victorious Army down the Yangtze river valley and played a decisive role in defeating the Taipings. Through technically not a mercenary as Gordon had been assigned by the British government to lead the Ever Victorious Army, the Times of London in a leader (editorial) in August 1864 declared: "the part of the soldier of fortune is in these days very difficult to play with honour...but if ever the actions of a soldier fighting in foreign service ought to be viewed with indulgence, and even with admiration, this exceptional tribute is due to Colonel Gordon".
During the French conquest of Vietnam, their most persistent and stubborn opponents were not the Vietnamese, but rather the Chinese mercenaries of the Black Flag Army commanded by Liu Yongfu, who been hired by the Emperor Tự Đức. In 1873, the Black Flags killed the French commander, Francis Garnier, attracting much attention in France. In 1883, Captain Henri Rivière, leading another French expedition into Vietnam was also killed by the Black Flags. When the French conquest of Vietnam was finally completed in 1885, one of the peace terms were the disbandment of the Black Flag Army. Chinese flag rebels also fought in the Haw wars in Laos and northern Thailand.
Philo McGiffin served as a naval mercenary in the Sino-French War and First Sino-Japanese War.
20th century: In the Warlord Era of China, some British mercenaries like Morris "Two Gun" Cohen, and Francis Arthur "One Armed" Sutton found employ in China.
Easily the largest group of mercenaries in China were the Russian emigres who arrived after 1917 and who hired themselves out to various Chinese warlords in the 1920s. Unlike the Anglo-American mercenaries, the Russians had no home to return to nor were any foreign nations willing to accept them as refugees, causing them to have a grim, fatalistic outlook as they were trapped in what they regarded as a strange land that was as far from home as imaginable. One group of Russians wore Tartar hats and the traditional dark greycoats, and fought for Marshal Zhang Zuolin, the "Old Marshal" who ruled Manchuria. White Russian mercenaries claimed that they had considerable effectiveness against ill-trained armies of the Chinese warlords; one White Russian claimed that when he and other Russians serving Marshal Zhang they "went through the Chinese troops like a knife through butter".
Chinese forces slaughtered most of a 350 strong White Russian forces in June 1921 under Colonel Kazagrandi in the Gobi desert, with only two batches of 42 men and 35 men surrendering separately as Chinese were wiping out White Russian remnants following the Soviet Red army defeat of Ungern Sternberg, and other Buryat and White Russian remnants of Ungern-Sternberg's army were massacred by Soviet Red Army and Mongol forces.
One group of Russian mercenaries led by General Konstantin Petrovich Nechaev were dressed in the uniform of Imperial Russian Army and fought for General Zhang Zongchang, the "Dogmeat General" who ruled Shangdong province. Zhang Zongchang had Russian women as concubines. Nechaev and his men were infamous for their ruthlessness, and on one occasion in 1926, rode three armored trains through the Chinese countryside, killing everybody they met. When the Chinese peasants tore up the rails to stop Nechaev's rampage, he and his men vented their fury by sacking in an especially brutal manner the nearest town. Nechaev suffered a huge defeat at the hands of Chinese, when he and one armoured train under his command were trapped near Suichzhou in 1925. Their Chinese adversaries had pulled up the rail, and took this opportunity to massacre almost all Russian mercenaries on board the train. Nechaev managed to survive this incident, but lost a part of his leg during the bitter fighting. In 1926 Chinese warlord Sun Chuanfang inflicted bloody death tolls upon the White Russian mercenaries under Nechaev's brigade in the 65th division serving Zhang Zongchang, reducing the Russian numbers from 3,000 to only a few hundred by 1927 and the remaining Russian survivors fought in armored trains. During the Northern Expedition Chinese Nationalist forces captured an armoured train of Russian mercenaries serving Zhang Zongchang and brutalized the Russian prisoners by piercing their noses with rope and marching them in public through the streets in Shandong in 1928, described as "stout rope pierced through their noses".
Alcoholic White Russian mercenaries defeated Muslim Uyghurs in melee fighting when Uyghurs tried to take Urumqi on 21 February 1933 in the Battle of Ürümqi (1933). Wu Aitchen mentioned that 600 Uyghurs were slaughtered in a battle by White Russian mercenaries in the service of the Xinjiang clique warlord Jin Shuren. Jin Shuren would take Russian women as hostages to force their husbands to serve as his mercenaries.
Hui Muslims fought brutal battles against White Russians and Soviet Red Army Russians at the Battle of Tutung and Battle of Dawan Cheng inflicting heavy losses on the Russian forces.
Chinese forces killed many White Russian soldiers and Soviet soldiers in 1944-1946 when the White Russians of Ili and Soviet Red Army served in the Second East Turkestan Republic Ili national army during the Ili Rebellion.
During the early stages of the Second Sino-Japanese War, a number of foreign pilots served in the Chinese Air Force, most famously in the 14th Squadron, a light bombardment unit often called the International Squadron, which was briefly active in February and March 1938.
India:
18th to 19th centuries: In the medieval period, Purbiya mercenaries from Bihar and Eastern Uttar Pradesh were a common feature in kingdoms in western and northern India. They were also later recruited by the Marathas and the British. In southern India, there is a caste/community of mercenaries in the state of Karnataka which is called Bunt. The word "bunt" itself translates to warrior or mercenary, this community later elevated itself as the rulers of the land, several powerful dynasties emerged from this community. The most notable dynasty being the Alupas of Dakshina Kannada, which reigned for 1,300 years. This community still survives and has adopted the surnames shetty, Rai, Alva, chowta etc. In Tamil Nadu, the three crowned empires used the Kongar pastro-peasantry tribes of the Kongunad region and the Kongar peasant tribes of the Erumainad region as their swordsman mercenaries, cavalry mercenaries, and as chariot soldier mercenaries, as well as personal guards. Kongars worked along with the three empires' warrior tribes such as the Kallar, Maravar, Aghamudaiyar, Parkavar, Valaiya-Mutharaiyar, and Mazhavar tribes. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Mercenary | The word "bunt" itself translates to warrior or mercenary, this community later elevated itself as the rulers of the land, several powerful dynasties emerged from this community. The most notable dynasty being the Alupas of Dakshina Kannada, which reigned for 1,300 years. This community still survives and has adopted the surnames shetty, Rai, Alva, chowta etc. In Tamil Nadu, the three crowned empires used the Kongar pastro-peasantry tribes of the Kongunad region and the Kongar peasant tribes of the Erumainad region as their swordsman mercenaries, cavalry mercenaries, and as chariot soldier mercenaries, as well as personal guards. Kongars worked along with the three empires' warrior tribes such as the Kallar, Maravar, Aghamudaiyar, Parkavar, Valaiya-Mutharaiyar, and Mazhavar tribes. During that time, these Kongar tribes were led only by the chiefs of their own tribe and would not come under the command of the emperor or his military general. Though these Kongar tribes of Kongunad were feudatories to the three crowned empires, Kongunad was divided into 24 subdivisions and was only ruled by Kongars. However, the Kongars (Gangars) of Erumainad established their own empire, the Western Ganga dynasty, and ruled over it for centuries. Kongar tribes still exist in the modern world, where they are referred as Kongu Vellala Gounder (Kongunadu) and Gangadhikar Vokkaliga Gowda (Erumainad).
The Mukkuvar clan of Malabar Coast and Sri Lankan coast did the role of soldiers in Kalinga Magha's invasion to Sri Lanka and in Nair's battle with the Dutch in the Battle of Colachel.
In the 18th and early 19th centuries, the imperial Mughal power was crumbling and other powers, including the Sikh Misls and Maratha chiefs, were emerging. At this time, a number of mercenaries, arriving from several countries found employment in India. Some of the mercenaries emerged to become independent rulers. The Sikh Maharaja, Ranjit Singh, known as the "Lion of the Punjab", employed Euro-American mercenaries such as the Neapolitan Paolo Avitabile; the Frenchmen Claude Auguste Court and Jean-François Allard; and the Americans Josiah Harlan and Alexander Gardner. The Sikh army, Dal Khalsa, was trained by Singh's French mercenaries to fight alone the lines used by the French in the Napoleonic era, and following French practice, Dal Khalsa had excellent artillery. Singh had a low opinion of his Euro-American mercenaries, once saying "German, French or English, all these European bastards are alike".
Until 1858, India was a proprietary colony that belonged to the East India Company, not the British Crown. The East India Company became the world's most influential corporation, having exclusive monopolies on trade with India and China. By the early 19th century, the East India Company in its proprietary colony of India ruled over 90 million Indians and controlled 70 million acres (280,000 km2) of land under its own flag, issued its own currency and maintained its own civil service and its own army of 200,000 men led by officers trained at its officer school, giving the company an army larger than that possessed by most European states. In the 17th century, the East India Company recruited Indian mercenaries to guard its warehouses and police the cities under its rule. However, these forces were ad hoc and disbanded as quickly as they were recruited.
Starting in 1746, the Company recruited Indian mercenaries into its own army. By 1765, the board of directors of the Company had come to accept it was necessary to rule its conquests to maintain a standing army, voting to maintain three presidency armies to be funded by taxes on Indian land. The number of Indians working for the Company's armies outnumbered the Europeans ten to one. When recruiting, the East India Company tended to follow Indian prejudices in believing the pale-skinned men from northern India made for better soldiers than the dark-skinned peoples of southern India, and that high-caste Hindus were superior to the low-caste Hindus. Despite these prejudices, the men of the Madras Army were from south India. The Bengal Army were largely high-cast Hindus from northern India while the Bombay Army prided itself on being a "melting pot".
Because the East India Company ultimately by the end of the 18th century came to offer higher pay than the Maharajahs did, and offered the novelty in India of paying a pension to veterans and their families, it came to attract the best of the Indian mercenaries. Initially, the mercenaries serving in the company's armies brought along their own weapons, which was the normal practice in India, but after the 1760s the company began to them arm with the standard British weapons. The East India Company, generally known in both Britain and in India as "the Company", had sufficient lobbying power in London to ensure that several British Army regiments were also stationed to work alongside the Company army, whose troops were mostly "Sepoys" (Indians). The Company never entirely trusted the loyalty of its sepoys. The company had its own officer training school at the Addiscombe Military Seminary. The company's armies were trained in the Western style and by the end of the 18th century its troops were ranked as the equal of any European army.
Latin America:
Nicaragua: In 1855, during a civil war in Nicaragua between the Conservatives and Liberals, the latter recruited an American adventurer named William Walker who promised to bring 300 mercenaries to fight for the Liberals. Through Walker only brought 60 mercenaries with him, to be joined by another 100 Americans together with the Belgian mercenary Charles Frederick Henningsen who were already in Nicaragua, he was able to defeat the Conservatives at the Battle of La Virgen on 4 September 1855 and by 13 October, Walker had taken Grenada, the Conservative capital. After his victories, Walker became the de facto dictator of Nicaragua, which many both inside and outside of the country soon started to call "Walkeragua".
At the time, Nicaragua was an extremely important transit point between the Western and Eastern United States. In the days before the Panama Canal and the first transcontinental railroad, ships from the Eastern United States would sail up the San Juan River to Lake Nicaragua, where passengers and goods were unloaded at the port of Rivas and then made the short journey via stagecoach to the Pacific coast, to be loaded onto ships that would take them to the west coast of the United States. One of the most important companies of the Nicaraguan stagecoach business was the Accessory Transit Company owned by Commodore Cornelius Vanderbilt of New York. Walker confiscated the Accessory Transit Company's assets in Nicaragua, which he handed over to the Morgan & Garrison company, owned by rivals of Vanderbilt. As Vanderbilt happened to be the richest man in the United States, he launched a lobbying campaign against Walker in Washington, D.C., and was able to pressure President Franklin Pierce into withdrawing American recognition of Walker's regime.
Once it was understood that the US government was no longer supporting Walker, Costa Rica invaded Nicaragua with the aim of deposing Walker, whose ambitions were felt to be a threat to all of Central America. The Costa Ricans defeated Walker at the Battle of Santa Rosa and the Second Battle of Rivas. The beleaguered Walker sought to appeal to support in his native South by restoring slavery in Nicaragua, making English the official language, changing the immigration law to favor Americans, and declaring his ultimate intention was to bring Nicaragua into the United States as a slave state. By this point, Walker had thoroughly alienated public opinion in Nicaragua while he was besieged in Grenada by a coalition of Guatemalan, Salvadorian, and Costa Rican troops. The decision by Henningsen to burn down Grenada enraged Nicaraguan people and in March 1857, Walker, with his dreams of an empire in tatters, fled Nicaragua.
In the 1980s, one of the Reagan administration's foreign policy was to overthrow the left-wing Sandinista government by arming guerrillas known as the Contras. Between 1982 and 1984, Congress passed the three Boland amendments which limited the extent of American aid to the Contra rebels. By the late 1970s, the popularity of magazines such as Soldier of Fortune, which glorified the mercenary subculture, led to the opening of numerous camps in the United States designed to train men to be mercenaries and also to serve as guerrillas in case of a Soviet conquest of the United States. The vast majority of the men who trained in these camps were white men who saw para-military training as a "reverse the previous twenty years of American history and take back all the symbolic territory that has been lost" as the possibility of becoming mercenaries gave them "the fantastic possibility of escaping their present lives, being reborn as warrior and remaking the world".
Owing to the legal problems posed by the Boland amendments, the Reagan administration turned to the self-proclaimed mercenaries to arm and train the Contra guerrillas. In 1984, the CIA created the Civilian Military Assistance (CMA) group to aid the Contras. The CMA were led by a white supremacist from Alabama named Tom Posey, who like all of the other members of the CMA were graduates of the mercenary training camps. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Mercenary | The vast majority of the men who trained in these camps were white men who saw para-military training as a "reverse the previous twenty years of American history and take back all the symbolic territory that has been lost" as the possibility of becoming mercenaries gave them "the fantastic possibility of escaping their present lives, being reborn as warrior and remaking the world".
Owing to the legal problems posed by the Boland amendments, the Reagan administration turned to the self-proclaimed mercenaries to arm and train the Contra guerrillas. In 1984, the CIA created the Civilian Military Assistance (CMA) group to aid the Contras. The CMA were led by a white supremacist from Alabama named Tom Posey, who like all of the other members of the CMA were graduates of the mercenary training camps. John Negroponte, the American ambassador to Honduras, arranged for permission to be given for the CMA to operate from Honduran territory. However, the operation collapsed later in 1984 when the Nicaraguans shot down a CMA plane carrying arms to the Contras, killing two Americans. Sam Hall, a self proclaimed mercenary hero and "counter-terrorist" who joined the CMA entered Nicaragua with the aim of performing sabotage operations. In 1986, Hall was captured by the Sandinistas, who held him for four months before releasing him under the grounds that he was not a mercenary, but rather a mercenary imposer. John K. Singlaub who worked alongside Hall described him as suffering from a "Walter Mitty type complex".
Colombia: In 1994, President César Gaviria of Colombia signed Decree 356, which allowed wealthy landowners to recruit private armies of their own and liberalised the law on settling up PMCs in order to fight the Communist FARC (Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia – Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia) guerrillas. As a result of Decree 356, by 2014 Colombia had 740 PMCs operating, more than anywhere else in the world. Increasingly Colombian mercenaries have been hired by American PMCs as being cheaper than American mercenaries. The government of the United Arab Emirates has hired Colombian mercenaries to fight its war in Yemen.
Africa:
Ancient Africa: An early recorded use of foreign auxiliaries dates back to ancient Egypt, the thirteenth century BC, when Pharaoh Ramesses II used 11,000 mercenaries during his battles. A long established foreign corps in the Egyptian forces were the Medjay—a generic term given to tribal scouts and light infantry recruited from Nubia serving from the late period of the Old Kingdom through that of the New Kingdom. Other warriors recruited from outside the borders of Egypt included Libyan, Syrian and Canaanite contingents under the New Kingdom and Sherdens from Sardinia who appear in their distinctive horned helmets on wall paintings as body guards for Ramesses II. Celtic mercenaries were greatly employed in the Greek world (leading to the sack of Delphi and the Celtic settlement of Galatia). The Greek rulers of Ptolemaic Egypt, too, used Celtic mercenaries. Carthage was unique for relying primarily on mercenaries to fight its wars, particularly Gaul and Spanish mercenaries.
19th and 20th centuries: In the 20th century, mercenaries in conflicts on the continent of Africa have in several cases brought about a swift end to bloody civil war by comprehensively defeating the rebel forces. There have been a number of unsavory incidents in the brushfire wars of Africa, some involving recruitment of European and American men "looking for adventure".
Many of the adventurers in Africa who have been described as mercenaries were in fact ideologically motivated to support particular governments, and would not fight "for the highest bidder". An example of this was the British South Africa Police (BSAP), a paramilitary, mounted infantry force formed by the British South Africa Company of Cecil Rhodes in 1889–1890 that evolved and continued until 1980.
Famous mercenaries in Africa include:
Frederick Russell Burnham was an American scout for the British South Africa Company who served in both the First Matabele War (1893–94) and the Second Matabele War (1896–97). He effectively ended the Second Matabele War by assassinating the Ndebele religious leader, Mlimo, but Burnham is best known in this war for teaching American Frontier scouting to Robert Baden-Powell and inspiring him to found the boy scouts. In the Second Boer War (1900–1904), Burnham served as Chief of Scouts to the British Army. He was presented the Cross of the Distinguished Service Order for his heroism and given a commission as Major in the British Army by King Edward VII personally even though he declined to renounce his American citizenship. Burnham's real-life adventures also heavily influenced H. Rider Haggard who created the fictional Allan Quatermain adventurer, a character who later was transformed by George Lucas into Indiana Jones.
Mike Hoare was a British career soldier who served with distinction in the London Irish Rifles during World War II. He later emigrated to South Africa, and was contracted by the State of Katanga in the early 1960s to form "4 Commando (Force Katangaise)", a unit of foreign military advisers in the local gendarmerie. Most of Hoare's recruits were Belgians or South Africans. After Katanga's integration in 1963, Hoare remained active in Congo affairs. He was solicited by General Joseph-Desiré Mobutu in 1964 to form "5 Commando" – a second mercenary force raised to crush the Simba Rebellion, which included European adventurers of at least twenty nationalities. Hoare later resurfaced in 1981, shortly after France-Albert René's ascension in the Seychelles, attempting to carry out a coup d'état on behalf of former president James Mancham. His troops were intercepted shortly after debarking on Mahé and only escaped by hijacking an Air India Boeing, which they flew to Durban.
Bob Denard was a former French intelligence operative, policeman, and dedicated anti-communist who saw action during the First Indochina War and Algerian War of Independence. After a brief inroad into civilian life, Denard returned to military service with the Katangese gendarmerie in 1961. Refusing to surrender when secessionist forces collapsed in January 1963, he disappeared into Angola with a nucleus of other die-hards and sought work training North Yemen royalists before returning to the Congo at the request of then-Prime Minister Moise Tshombe. Denard formed his own unit to fight the Simba Rebellion, les affreux, who were also instrumental in suppressing an attempted coup d'état in 1966. Dismissed by Congolese president Joseph Kasa Vubu, the French mercenary joined the Kisangani Mutinies and was wounded in action. He later went on to serve as a military adviser to several African governments, including Gabon and Rhodesia. Denard has since carried out five attempted coup d'etats in Benin and the Comoros Islands, three of them successful.
Neall Ellis was a South African aviator who achieved prominence for his extensive action in Sierra Leone's long-running civil war. Ellis was raised in Bulawayo, Rhodesia (Zimbabwe), but after an unsuccessful career in the Rhodesian Army, emigrated to join the South African Air Force. During the South African Border War, he flew improvised Aérospatiale Alouette III and Atlas Oryx gunships over Angola and Mozambique in support of South African expeditionary forces conducting external raids. He retired a colonel upon the end of apartheid, piloting Yugoslav Mil Mi-8s as an operational freelancer. In 1998, Ellis returned to participate in the Angolan Civil War with private military firm Executive Outcomes, which eventually dispatched him to Sierra Leone. During the Battle for Freetown, he was instrumental in fighting off Revolutionary United Front insurgents from a Mil Mi-24 Hind and providing air support for British forces executing Operation Barras. He has founded his own paramilitary company, Jesa Air West Africa, and continues to fly helicopters for Iraq and Somalia.
Simon Mann was found guilty in Zimbabwe of "attempting to buy weapons" (BBC 27 August) allegedly for a coup in Equatorial Guinea in 2004 (see below).
Congo Crisis: The Congo Crisis (1960–1965) was a period of turmoil in the First Republic of the Congo that began with national independence from Belgium and ended with the seizing of power by Joseph Mobutu. During the crisis, mercenaries were employed by various factions, and also at times helped the United Nations and other peace keepers.
In 1960 and 1961, Mike Hoare worked as a mercenary commanding an English-speaking unit called "4 Commando" supporting a faction in Katanga, a province trying to break away from the newly independent Congo under the leadership of Moïse Tshombe. Hoare chronicled his exploits in his book the Road to Kalamata.
In 1964, Tshombe (then Prime Minister of Congo) hired Major Hoare to lead a military unit called "5 Commando" made up of about 300 men, most of whom were from South Africa. The unit's mission was to fight a rebel group called Simbas, who already had captured almost two-thirds of the country. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Mercenary | During the crisis, mercenaries were employed by various factions, and also at times helped the United Nations and other peace keepers.
In 1960 and 1961, Mike Hoare worked as a mercenary commanding an English-speaking unit called "4 Commando" supporting a faction in Katanga, a province trying to break away from the newly independent Congo under the leadership of Moïse Tshombe. Hoare chronicled his exploits in his book the Road to Kalamata.
In 1964, Tshombe (then Prime Minister of Congo) hired Major Hoare to lead a military unit called "5 Commando" made up of about 300 men, most of whom were from South Africa. The unit's mission was to fight a rebel group called Simbas, who already had captured almost two-thirds of the country.
In Operation Dragon Rouge, "5 Commando" worked in close cooperation with Belgian paratroopers, Cuban exile pilots, and CIA hired mercenaries. The objective of Operation Dragon Rouge was to capture Stanleyville and save several hundred civilians (mostly Europeans and missionaries) who were hostages of the Simba rebels. The operation saved many lives; however, the Operation damaged the reputation of Moïse Tshombe as it saw the return of white mercenaries to the Congo soon after independence and was a factor in Tshombe's loss of support from president of Congo Joseph Kasa-Vubu who dismissed him from his position
At the same time Bob Denard commanded the French-speaking "6 Commando", "Black Jack" Schramme commanded "10 Commando" and William "Rip" Robertson commanded a company of anti-Castro Cuban exiles.
Later, in 1966 and 1967, some former Tshombe mercenaries and Katangese gendarmes staged the Mercenaries' Mutinies.
Biafra: Mercenaries fought for Biafra in the Fourth Commando Brigade led by Rolf Steiner during the Nigerian Civil War (1967–1970). Other mercenaries flew aircraft for the Biafrans. In October 1967, for example, a Royal Air Burundi DC-4M Argonaut, flown by mercenary Heinrich Wartski, also known as Henry Wharton, crash-landed in Cameroon with military supplies destined for Biafra.
It was hoped that employing mercenaries in Nigeria would have similar impact to the Congo, but the mercenaries proved largely ineffective. The British historian Philip Baxter wrote the principle difference was that the Congolese militias commanded by leaders with almost no military experience were no match for the mercenaries, and by contrast the Sandhurst-trained Nigerian Army officers were of an "altogether higher caliber" than Congolese militia leaders. Through much of the leadership of the Nigerian Army had been killed in two coups in 1966, there were still just enough Sandhust graduates left in 1967 to hold the Nigerian Army together and provide enough of a modicum of military professionalism to defeat the mercenaries. By October 1967, most of the mercenaries who had been expecting easy victories like those won in the Congo had already left Biafra, complaining that the Nigerians were a much tougher opponent who were defeating them in battle.
When asked about the impact of the white mercenaries, General Philip Effiong, the chief of the Biafran general staff replied: "They had not helped. It would have made no difference if not a single one of them came to work for the secessionist forces. Rolf Steiner stayed the longest. He was more of a bad influence than anything else. We were happy to get rid of him." One Biafran officer, Fola Oyewole, wrote about the sacking of Steiner in late 1968: "Steiner's departure from Biafra removed the shine from the white mercenaries, the myth of the white man's superiority in the art of soldering". Oyewole wrote that the white mercenaries were hated by the ordinary people of Biafra due to their high-handed behavior; a tendency to retreat when it appeared possible the Nigerians were about to cut them off instead of holding their ground; and a fondness for looting, noting that the European mercenaries seemed more interested in stealing as much as possible instead of helping Biafra."
In May 1969, Count Carl Gustaf von Rosen formed a squadron of five light aircraft known as the Babies of Biafra, which attacked and destroyed Nigerian jet aircraft on the ground and delivered food aid. Count von Rosen was assisted by ex-RCAF fighter pilot Lynn Garrison.
Angola: In 1975, John Banks, an Englishman, recruited mercenaries to fight for the National Liberation Front of Angola (FNLA) against the Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola (MPLA) in the civil war that broke out when Angola gained independence from Portugal in 1975. In the United States, David Bufkin, a self-proclaimed mercenary hero started a recruiting campaign in Soldier of Fortune magazine calling for anti-Communist volunteers, especially Vietnam veterans, to fight in Angola as mercenaries, claiming to be funded to the tune of $80,000 by the Central Intelligence Agency. Bufkin was in fact a former U.S. Army soldier "who has gone AWOL several times, has been tried for rape, and been in and out of jail several times", did not have $80,000, was not supported by the CIA, instead being a con-man who had stolen most of the money paid to him. Bufkin managed to get a dozen or so American mercenaries to Angola, where several of them were killed in action with the rest being captured.
One of the leaders of the mercenaries was Costas Georgiou (the self-styled "Colonel Callan"), who was described by the British journalist Patrick Brogan as a psychopathic killer who personally executed fourteen of his fellow mercenaries for cowardice, and who was extremely brutal to black people. Within 48 hours of his arrival in Angola, Georgiou had already led his men in disarming and massacring a group of FNLA fighters (his supposed allies), who he killed just for the "fun" of it all. At his trial, it was established that Georgiou had personally murdered at least 170 Angolans. Inept as a military leader as he was brutal, Georgiou notably failed as a commander. It was believed in 1975–76 that recruiting white mercenaries to fight in Angola would have a similar impact that the mercenaries had in the Congo in the 1960s, but in Angola the mercenaries failed completely as Brogan described their efforts as a "debacle". If anything, the white mercanaries with their disdain for blacks, or in the case of Georgiou murderous hatred seemed to have depressed morale on the FNLA side.
Many of the mercenaries in Angola were not former professional soldiers as they claimed to have been, but instead merely fantasists who had invented heroic war records for themselves. The fantasist mercenaries did not know how to use their weapons properly, and often injured themselves and others when they attempted to use weaponry that they did not fully understand, leading to some of them being executed by the psychopathic killer Georgiou who did not tolerate failure. On 27 January 1976, a group of 96 British mercenaries arrived in Angola and within a week about dozen had accidentally maimed themselves by trying to use weapons that they falsely claimed to be proficient with. The MLPA forces were better organized and led, and the dispatch of 35, 000 Cuban Army troops in November 1975 decided the war for the MLPA. Cuban accounts of the Angolan war speak of the efforts of the mercenaries in a tone of contempt as Cuban veterans contend that the mercenaries were poor soldiers who they had no trouble defeating.
When captured, John Derek Barker's role as a leader of mercenaries in Northern Angola led the judges to send him to face the firing squad. Nine others were imprisoned. Three more were executed: American Daniel Gearhart was sentenced to death for advertising himself as a mercenary in an American newspaper; Andrew McKenzie and Costas Georgiou, who had both served in the British Army, were sentenced to death for murder. Georgiou was shot by firing squad in 1976. Costas' cousin Charlie Christodoulou was killed in an ambush.
Executive Outcomes employees, Captains Daniele Zanata and Raif St Clair (who was also involved in the aborted Seychelles Coup of 1981), fought on behalf of the MPLA against the National Union for the Total Independence of Angola (UNITA) in the 1990s in violation of the Lusaka Protocol.
The Comoros coup: A major aim of French foreign policy was and still is to maintain the French sphere of influence in what is called Françafrique. In 1975, Ali Soilih took power in the Comoros via a coup, and proved unwilling to accept the French viewpoint that his nation was part of Françafrique. Unhappy with Soilih, the French secret service, the Service de Documentation Extérieure et de Contre-Espionnage in 1978 hired the French mercenary Bob Denard to invade the Comoros to overthrow Soilih. Making the Comoros a tempting target for Denard were its small size, consisting of only three islands in the Indian Ocean. Moreover, Soilih had abolished the Comorian Army, replacing the Army with a militia known as the Moissy, made up mostly of teenage boys with only the most rudimentary military training. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Mercenary | The Comoros coup: A major aim of French foreign policy was and still is to maintain the French sphere of influence in what is called Françafrique. In 1975, Ali Soilih took power in the Comoros via a coup, and proved unwilling to accept the French viewpoint that his nation was part of Françafrique. Unhappy with Soilih, the French secret service, the Service de Documentation Extérieure et de Contre-Espionnage in 1978 hired the French mercenary Bob Denard to invade the Comoros to overthrow Soilih. Making the Comoros a tempting target for Denard were its small size, consisting of only three islands in the Indian Ocean. Moreover, Soilih had abolished the Comorian Army, replacing the Army with a militia known as the Moissy, made up mostly of teenage boys with only the most rudimentary military training. The Moissy, which was modeled after the Red Guard in China, existed mainly to terrorize Soilih's opponents and was commanded by a 15-year-old boy, appointed solely because of his blind devotion to Soilih.
On the night of 13 May 1978, Denard and 42 other mercenaries landed on Grande Comore island, annihilated the poorly trained and badly commanded Moissy, none of whom had any military experience, and by the morning the Comoros was theirs. President Soilih was high on marijuana and naked in his bed together with three nude teenage schoolgirls watching a pornographic film, when Denard kicked in the door to his room to inform him that he was no longer president. Soilih was later taken out and shot with the official excuse being that he was "shot while trying to escape". The new president of the Comoros, Ahmed Abdallah, was a puppet leader and the real ruler of the Comoros was Colonel Denard, who brought the Comoros back into Françafrique.
As a ruler, Denard proved himself to be extremely greedy as he rapaciously plundered the Comorian economy to make himself into a very rich man. Denard served as the commander of the Comorian Presidential Guard and became the largest single landowner in the Comoros, developing the best land by the sea into luxury resorts catering to tourists who wanted to enjoy the tropics. Denard converted to Islam (the prevailing religion in the Comoros), and took advantage of the Islamic rules on polygamy to maintain for himself a harem of Comorian women. Officially, France was committed to the United Nations sanctions against the apartheid government of South Africa, which French and South African businesses circumvented via the Comoros, a form of sanctions-busting that was tolerated by Denard as long as he received his cut of the profits.
Ultimately, Denard's antics as the "great white conqueror" of the Comoros and his lavish lifestyle made him into embarrassment for the French government, as there were charges that France was engaged in neo-colonialism in the Comoros. At the same time there were alternatives to Denard in the form of black Comorian politicians who wanted Denard out, but were willing to keep the Comoros in Françafrique, which would allowed Paris to achieve its aims without the embarrassment of a white European exploiting a country inhabited by black Africans. When Abdallah tried to dismiss Denard as commander of the Presidential Guard, Denard had him assassinated on 26 November 1989. At that point, the French government, which had an alternative leadership in place, intervened by sending paratroopers to remove Denard and the other mercenaries from the Comoros while installing Said Mohamed Djohar as president.
On 28 September 1995, Denard again invaded the Comoros, but this time, Paris was against the invasion, and 600 paratroops were dispatched to the Comoros to usher Denard and his mercenaries out. Denard was charged in France with the murder of President Abdallah, but was acquitted owing to a lack of evidence. In 2006, he was found guilty of conspiracy to overthrow the government of the Comoros in 1995, but by this point Denard was suffering from Alzheimer's disease and he did not serve a day in prison, instead dying in a Paris hospital on 13 October 2007.
The Seychelles invasion: In 1981, "Mad Mike" Hoare was hired by the government of South Africa to lead an invasion of the Seychelles with the aim of deposing the left-wing President France-Albert René, who had roundly criticized apartheid, and replacing him with a more apartheid-friendly leader. Disguised as a drinking club, Ye Ancient Order of Froth-Blowers, and as rugby players, Hoare led a force of 53 men into the airport at Port Larue on 25 November 1981. Hoare's men failed to make it past the customs at the airport as an alert customs officer noticed one of the "rugby players" had an AK-47 assault rifle hidden in his luggage. What followed was a shoot-out at the airport between Hoare's men and Seychellois customs officers. Realizing the invasion was doomed, Hoare and his men escaped by hijacking an Air India jet which flew them back to South Africa. The fiasco of the Seychelles invasion marked the beginning of the decline of the traditional soldier of fortune, centered around a charismatic figure like Hoare or Denard, and a change over to the corporatized private military company, run by men who shunned the limelight.
Eritrea and Ethiopia: Both sides hired mercenaries in the Eritrean–Ethiopian War from 1998 to 2000. Russian mercenaries were believed to be flying in the air forces of both sides.
Sierra Leone: American Robert C. MacKenzie was killed in the Malal Hills in February 1995, while commanding Gurkha Security Guards (GSG) in Sierra Leone. GSG pulled out soon afterwards and was replaced by Executive Outcomes. Both were employed by the Sierra Leone government as military advisers and to train the government soldiers. It has been alleged that the firms provided soldiers who took an active part in the fighting against the Revolutionary United Front (RUF).
In 2000, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation's (ABC-TV) international affairs program Foreign Correspondent broadcast a special report "Sierra Leone: Soldiers of Fortune", focusing on former 32BN and Recce members who operated in Sierra Leone while serving for SANDF. Officers like De Jesus Antonio, TT D Abreu Capt Ndume and Da Costa were the forefront because of their combat and language skills and also the exploits of South African pilot Neall Ellis and his MI-24 Hind gunship. The report also investigated the failures of the UN Peacekeeping Force, and the involvement of mercenaries and private military contractors in providing vital support to UN operations and British military Special Operations in Sierra Leone in 1999–2000.
Equatorial Guinea: In August 2004 there was a plot, which later became known as the "Wonga Coup", to overthrow the government of Equatorial Guinea in Malabo. Currently eight South African apartheid-era soldiers, organised by Neves Matias (former Recce major and De Jesus Antonio former Captain in 2sai BN) with (the leader of whom is Nick du Toit) and five local men are in Black Beach prison on the island. They are accused of being an advanced guard for a coup to place Severo Moto in power. Six Armenian aircrew, also convicted of involvement in the plot, were released in 2004 after receiving a presidential pardon. CNN reported on 25 August, that:
Defendant Nick du Toit said he was introduced to Thatcher in South Africa last year by Simon Mann, the leader of 70 men arrested in Zimbabwe in March suspected of being a group of mercenaries heading to Equatorial Guinea.
It was planned, allegedly, by Simon Mann, a former SAS officer. On 27 August 2004 he was found guilty in Zimbabwe of purchasing arms, allegedly for use in the plot (he admitted trying to procure dangerous weapons, but said that they were to guard a diamond mine in DR Congo). It is alleged that there is a paper trail from him which implicates Sir Mark Thatcher, Lord Archer and Ely Calil (a Lebanese-British oil trader).
The BBC reported in an article entitled "Q&A: Equatorial Guinea coup plot":
The BBC's Newsnight television programme saw the financial records of Simon Mann's companies showing large payments to Nick du Toit and also some $2m coming in – though the source of this funding they say is largely untraceable.
The BBC reported on 10 September 2004 that in Zimbabwe:
[Simon Mann], the British leader of a group of 67 alleged mercenaries accused of plotting a coup in Equatorial Guinea has been sentenced to seven years in jail... The other passengers got 12 months in jail for breaking immigration laws while the two pilots got 16 months...The court also ordered the seizure of Mann's $3m Boeing 727 and $180,000 found on board.
Libya: Muammar Gaddafi in Libya was alleged to have been using mercenary soldiers during the 2011 Libyan civil war, including Tuaregs from various nations in Africa. Many of them had been part of his Islamic Legion created in 1972. Reports say around 800 had been recruited from Niger, Mali, Algeria, Ghana and Burkina Faso. In addition, small numbers of Eastern European mercenaries have also turned up supporting the Gaddafi regime. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Mercenary | The BBC reported on 10 September 2004 that in Zimbabwe:
[Simon Mann], the British leader of a group of 67 alleged mercenaries accused of plotting a coup in Equatorial Guinea has been sentenced to seven years in jail... The other passengers got 12 months in jail for breaking immigration laws while the two pilots got 16 months...The court also ordered the seizure of Mann's $3m Boeing 727 and $180,000 found on board.
Libya: Muammar Gaddafi in Libya was alleged to have been using mercenary soldiers during the 2011 Libyan civil war, including Tuaregs from various nations in Africa. Many of them had been part of his Islamic Legion created in 1972. Reports say around 800 had been recruited from Niger, Mali, Algeria, Ghana and Burkina Faso. In addition, small numbers of Eastern European mercenaries have also turned up supporting the Gaddafi regime. Most sources have described these troops as professional Serbian veterans of the Yugoslav conflict, including snipers, pilots and helicopter experts. Certain observers, however, speculate that they may be from Poland or Belarus. The latter has denied the claims outright; the former is investigating them. Although the Serbian government has denied that any of their nationals are currently serving as mercenary soldiers in North Africa, five such men have been captured by anti-Gaddafi rebels in Tripoli and several others have also allegedly fought during the Second Battle of Benghazi. Most recently, a number of unidentified white South African mercenaries were hired to smuggle Gaddafi and his sons to exile in Niger. Their attempts were thwarted by NATO air activity shortly before the death of Libya's ousted strongman. Numerous reports have indicated that the team was still protecting Saif al-Islam Gaddafi shortly before his recent apprehension.
Amnesty International has claimed that such allegations against Gaddafi and the Libyan state turned out to either be false or lacking any evidence. Human Rights Watch has indicated that while many foreign migrants were erroneously accused of fighting with Gaddafi, there were also genuine mercenaries from several nations who participated in the conflict.
More recently in 2020 at least several hundred mercenaries from the Russian Wagner Group have been fighting on the side of the warlord, General Khalifa Haftar, whom the government of Russia supports. The Wagner Group mercenaries arrived in Libya in late 2019. The Wagner Group have excelled as snipers, and one result of their arrival was a rapid increase in the number of sniper deaths on the opposing side that holds Tripoli. In response, the government of Turkey has hired 2, 000 Syrian mercenaries to fight for the opposing faction that it is supporting in the Libyan civil war.
Since 2019, Turkey deployed Syrian mercenaries in the Libya (See: Turkish military intervention in the Second Libyan Civil War). In July 2020 Al Arabiyah reported that Turkey sent Syrian, Tunisian, Egyptian and Sudanese mercenaries into Libya.
A November 2020 report by human rights advocacy group Human Rights Watch claimed that approximately hundreds of Sudanese men were hired by an Emirati security firm Black Shield Security Services as security guards for malls and hotels in the UAE, but were subsequently tricked into fighting in the Libyan Civil War. Reportedly 390 men were recruited from Khartoum, out of which 12 spoke to HRW and told that they were made to live alongside Libyan fighters aligned with UAE-backed General Khalifa Haftar. The recruits were hired to safeguard the oil facilities controlled by the Haftar forces.
Middle East:
Egypt: By 1807, Muhammad Ali the Great, the Albanian tobacco merchant turned de facto independent Ottoman vali (governor) of Egypt had imported about 400 French mercenaries to train his army. After the end of the Napoleonic wars, Muhammad Ali recruited more mercenaries from all over Europe and the United States to train his army, through French and Italian veterans of the Napoleonic wars were much preferred and formed the largest two groups of mercenaries in Egypt. The most famous of Muhammad Ali's mercenaries was the Frenchman Joseph-Anthelme Sève who set up the first staff school in Egypt and served as the chief of staff to Ibrahim Pasha, the son of the vali and his favorite general. By the 1820s, Muhammad Ali's mercenaries had created a mass conscript army trained to fight in the Western style together with schools for training Egyptian officers and factories for manufacturing Western style weapons as the vali did not wish to be dependent upon imported arms.
Muhammad Ali's grandson, Ismail the Magnificent, who ruled as the Khedive of Egypt between 1863 and 79 recruited mercenaries on large scale. After Napoleon III made an unfavorable arbitration ruling in 1869 about the share of royalties from the newly opened Suez canal, which cost Ismail 3, 000, 000 Egyptian pounds per year, Ismail came to distrust his French mercenaries, and began to look elsewhere. A number of Italian mercenaries such as Romolo Gessi, Gaetamo Casati, Andreanni Somani, and Giacomo Messedaglia played prominent roles in the Egyptian campaigns in the Sudan. Ismail also recruited British mercenaries such as Samuel Baker and the Swiss mercenaries such as Werner Munzinger. After 1869, Ismail recruited 48 American mercenaries to command his army. General Charles Pomeroy Stone, formerly of the United States Army, served as the chief of the Egyptian general staff between 1870 and 1883. Ismail's Americans went to Egypt largely because of the high pay he offered, through several were Confederate veterans who were barred from serving in post-1865 United States Army; the fact that the Americans in Egyptian service had fought on opposing sides in the Civil War was a source of recurring tension as the antagonism between North and South continued in Egypt.
Syrian civil war: The Free Syrian Army claimed the Bashar al-Assad regime recruited mercenaries from Iran, Hezbollah militia, and the Iraqi Mahdi Army militia during the Syrian civil war. The Russian government had approved of the deployment in 2016 of the Wagner Group mercenaries to fight for the Syrian government. The Wagner Group is reported to have played an important role in helping to turn the tide of the Syrian civil war in favor of the government, which in 2015 appeared to be close to collapse. On 7 February 2018, the Wagner Group mercenaries were reported to have attacked an American base in Syria together with a pro-Assad militia in what is known as the Battle of Khasham.
Turkey used Syrian mercenaries against the Kurds in Syria.
Yemen civil war: Multiple mercenary groups, called Popular Committees, which consists of Yemeni tribes loyal to different factions, were formed by both the Hadi government as well as the Houthi Supreme Political Council in the Yemeni Civil War.
Saudi Arabian-led intervention in Yemen: During Operation Decisive Storm, multiple sources reported that Latin American military contractors from Academi headed by Erik Prince were hired by UAE Armed Forces to assist in the fight against Houthis.
Notable mercenaries:
Cyber mercenary: A cyber mercenary is a non-state actor that carries out cyber attacks for Nation states for hire. State actors can use the cyber mercenaries as a front to try and distance themselves from the attack with plausible deniability.
See also: Filibuster (military)
International Stability Operations Association
Mercenaries in popular culture
Mercenary Soldiers' Revolt in Brazil
Mercenary War (c. 240 BC) – also called the Libyan War and the Truceless War
Montreux Document
Private defense agency
Private intelligence agency
Privateer
Rōnin
Security detail
Military volunteer
List of foreign volunteers
Violent non-state actor
References:
Sources: Arrian (1976). de Sélincourt, Aubrey (ed.). Anabasis Alexandri (The Campaigns of Alexander). Penguin Books. ISBN 978-0-14-044253-3.
Bernales-Ballesteros, Enrique; UNHCHR: Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on use of mercenaries
Bodin J; Les Suisses au Service de la France; Editions Albion Michael, 1988. ISBN 2226033343
Bryant, G. L. (January 2000). "Indigenous Mercenaries in the Service of European Imperialists: The Case of the Sepoys in the Early British Indian Army, 1750–1800". War in History. 7 (1).
Chartrand, Rene; Louis XV's Army – Foreign Infantry; Osprey 1997. ISBN 185532623X
Chartrand, Rene; Spanish Army of the Napoleonic Wars 1793–1808; Osprey 1998. ISBN 1855327635
Goldsworthy, Adrian (2006). The Fall of Carthage: The Punic Wars 265–146 BC. London: Phoenix. ISBN 978-0-304-36642-2.
Milliard, Todd S.; Overcoming post-colonial myopia: A call to recognize and regulate private military companies Archived 1 December 2012 at the Wayback Machine(PDF), in Military Law Review Vol 173, June 2003. At the time of publication Major Milliard was a Judge Advocate in the United States Army Judge Advocate General's Corps
Anthony Mockler, Storia dei mercenari: Da Senofonte all'Iraq. Odoya, 2012. ISBN 978-8862881531.
Schuster, Carl Otis (2016). "Memnon and Mentor of Rhodes (ca. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Mercenary | ISBN 1855327635
Goldsworthy, Adrian (2006). The Fall of Carthage: The Punic Wars 265–146 BC. London: Phoenix. ISBN 978-0-304-36642-2.
Milliard, Todd S.; Overcoming post-colonial myopia: A call to recognize and regulate private military companies Archived 1 December 2012 at the Wayback Machine(PDF), in Military Law Review Vol 173, June 2003. At the time of publication Major Milliard was a Judge Advocate in the United States Army Judge Advocate General's Corps
Anthony Mockler, Storia dei mercenari: Da Senofonte all'Iraq. Odoya, 2012. ISBN 978-8862881531.
Schuster, Carl Otis (2016). "Memnon and Mentor of Rhodes (ca. 380–333, ca. 385–340)". In Phang, Sara E.; Spence, Iain; Kelly, Douglas; Londey, Peter (eds.). Conflict in Ancient Greece and Rome: The Definitive Political, Social, and Military Encyclopedia. ABC-CLIO. ISBN 978-1610690201.
Further reading:
Historical: Atwood, Rodney. The Hessians: Mercenaries from Hessen-Kassel in the American Revolution (Cambridge University Press, 1980).
Avant, Deborah. "From mercenary to citizen armies: Explaining change in the practice of war." International Organization (2000): 41–72. online
Fetter, Frank Whitson. “Who Were the Foreign Mercenaries of the Declaration of Independence?” Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, vol. 104, no. 4, 1980, pp. 508–513. online
Ingrao, Charles. "" Barbarous Strangers": Hessian State and Society during the American Revolution." American Historical Review 87.4 (1982): 954–976 online
Ingrao, Charles W. The Hessian mercenary state: ideas, institutions, and reform under Frederick II, 1760–1785 (Cambridge University Press, 2003).
Niccolò Machiavelli. The Prince. 1532. Ch. 12.
"Military science in western Europe in the sixteenth century." Prologue: The nature of armies in the 16th century
Mockler, Anthony. The Mercenaries: The Men Who Fight for Profit – from the Free Companies of Feudal France to the White Adventurers in the Congo. Macmillan, 1969.
Percy, Sarah. Mercenaries: The history of a norm in international relations (Oxford University Press, 2007).
Schmidt, H. D. "The Hessian Mercenaries: The Career of a Political Cliché." History 43.149 (1958): 207–212 online
Scullard, Howard H. (2006) [1989]. "Carthage and Rome". In Walbank, F. W.; Astin, A. E.; Frederiksen, M. W.; Ogilvie, R. M. (eds.). Cambridge Ancient History: Volume 7, Part 2 (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 486–569. ISBN 978-0-521-23446-7.
Thomson, Janice E. Mercenaries, pirates, and sovereigns: state-building and extraterritorial violence in early modern Europe. Princeton University Press, 1994. ISBN 1400808014 Describes the building of the modern state system through the states' "monopolization of extraterritorial violence."
Underwood, Matthew. "Jealousies of a standing army: the use of mercenaries in the American revolution and its implications for Congress's role in regulating private military firms." 'Northwestern University Law Review 106 (2012): 317-349.
Since 1970s: Guy Arnold. Mercenaries: The Scourge of the Third World. Palgrave Macmillan, 1999. ISBN 978-0312222031
Doug Brooks & Shawn Lee Rathgeber. "The Industry Role in Regulating Private Security Companies", Canadian Consortium on Human Security – Security Privatization: Challenges and Opportunities, Vol. 6.3, University of British Columbia, March 2008.
Anthony Mockler. Hired Guns and Coups d'Etat: Mercenaries: Thirty Years 1976–2006. Hunter Mackay, 2007.
Anthony Mockler. The New Mercenaries: The History of the Mercenary from the Congo to the Seychelles. Paragon House, 1987.
Robert Young Pelton. Hunter Hammer and Heaven, Journeys to Three World's Gone Mad, ISBN 1585744166
Jeremy Scahill. Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army, Nation Books, 2007. ISBN 1560259795
Peter J. Woolley. "Soldiers of Fortune," The Common Review, v. 5, no. 4(2007), pp. 46–48. Review essay.
Status in international law: Marina Mancini; Private Military and Security Company Employees: Are They the Mercenaries of the Twenty-first Century?, EUI Working Paper AEL 2010/5, European University Institute, San Domenico di Fiesole, 2010, ISSN 1831-4066.
Katherine Fallah; Corporate Actors: the Legal Status of Mercenaries in Armed Conflict, International Review of the Red Cross, (2006)
Eliav Lieblich; "The Status of mercenaries in International Armed Conflict as a case of politicization of International Humanitarian Law", Bucerius Law Journal, (2009)
Private military companies (PMCs): Robert Young Pelton; Licensed to Kill: Hired Guns in the War on Terror, Crown, (2006), ISBN 1400097819
José Alvear Restrepo Lawyers' Collective; Private Security Transnational Enterprises in Colombia Archived 17 April 2008 at the Wayback Machine February 2008
External links: The Security Contracting Network is resource and community of security contracting professionals.
PMCs Monitor: An international organization which advocates for tighter rules
The Working Group on the use of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights and impeding the exercise of the right of peoples to self-determination UNHCR |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military | Etymology and definitions: The first recorded use of the word "military" in English, spelled militarie, was in 1582. It comes from the Latin militaris (from Latin miles 'soldier') through French, but is of uncertain etymology, one suggestion being derived from *mil-it- – going in a body or mass.
As a noun phrase, "the military" usually refers generally to a country's armed forces, or sometimes, more specifically, to the senior officers who command them. In general, it refers to the physicality of armed forces, their personnel, equipment, and the physical area which they occupy.
As an adjective, military originally referred only to soldiers and soldiering, but it broadened to apply to land forces in general, and anything to do with their profession. The names of both the Royal Military Academy (1741) and United States Military Academy (1802) reflect this. However, at about the time of the Napoleonic Wars, military began to be used in reference to armed forces as a whole, such as "military service", "military intelligence", and "military history". As such, it now connotes any activity performed by armed force personnel.
History: Military history is often considered to be the history of all conflicts, not just the history of the state militaries. It differs somewhat from the history of war, with military history focusing on the people and institutions of war-making, while the history of war focuses on the evolution of war itself in the face of changing technology, governments, and geography.
Military history has a number of facets. One main facet is to learn from past accomplishments and mistakes, so as to more effectively wage war in the future. Another is to create a sense of military tradition, which is used to create cohesive military forces. Still, another is to learn to prevent wars more effectively. Human knowledge about the military is largely based on both recorded and oral history of military conflicts (war), their participating armies and navies and, more recently, air forces.
Organization:
Personnel and units: Despite the growing importance of military technology, military activity depends above all on people. For example, in 2000 the British Army declared: "Man is still the first weapon of war."
Rank and role: The military organization is characterized by a command hierarchy divided by military rank, with ranks normally grouped (in descending order of authority) as officers (e.g. colonel), non-commissioned officers (e.g. sergeant), and personnel at the lowest rank (e.g. private). While senior officers make strategic decisions, subordinated military personnel (soldiers, sailors, marines, or airmen) fulfil them. Although rank titles vary by military branch and country, the rank hierarchy is common to all state armed forces worldwide.
In addition to their rank, personnel occupy one of many trade roles, which are often grouped according to the nature of the role's military tasks on combat operations: combat roles (e.g. infantry), combat support roles (e.g. combat engineers), and combat service support roles (e.g. logistical support).
Recruitment: Personnel may be recruited or conscripted, depending on the system chosen by the state. Most military personnel are males; the minority proportion of female personnel varies internationally (approximately 3% in India, 10% in the UK, 13% in Sweden, 16% in the US, and 27% in South Africa). While two-thirds of states now recruit or conscript only adults, as of 2017 50 states still relied partly on children under the age of 18 (usually aged 16 or 17) to staff their armed forces.
Whereas recruits who join as officers tend to be upwardly-mobile, most enlisted personnel have a childhood background of relative socio-economic deprivation. For example, after the US suspended conscription in 1973, "the military disproportionately attracted African American men, men from lower-status socioeconomic backgrounds, men who had been in nonacademic high school programs, and men whose high school grades tended to be low". However, a study released in 2020 on the socio-economic backgrounds of U.S. Armed Forces personnel suggests that they are at parity or slightly higher than the civilian population with respect to socio-economic indicators such as parental income, parental wealth and cognitive abilities. The study found that technological, tactical, operational and doctrinal changes have led to a change in the demand for personnel. Furthermore, the study suggests that the most disadvantaged socio-economic groups are less likely to meet the requirements of the modern U.S. military.
Obligations: The obligations of military employment are many. Full-time military employment normally requires a minimum period of service of several years; between two and six years is typical of armed forces in Australia, the UK and the US, for example, depending on role, branch, and rank. Some armed forces allow a short discharge window, normally during training, when recruits may leave the armed force as of right. Alternatively, part-time military employment, known as reserve service, allows a recruit to maintain a civilian job while training under military discipline at weekends; he or she may be called out to deploy on operations to supplement the full-time personnel complement. After leaving the armed forces, recruits may remain liable for compulsory return to full-time military employment in order to train or deploy on operations.
Military law introduces offences not recognized by civilian courts, such as absence without leave (AWOL), desertion, political acts, malingering, behaving disrespectfully, and disobedience (see, for example, offences against military law in the United Kingdom). Penalties range from a summary reprimand to imprisonment for several years following a court martial. Certain rights are also restricted or suspended, including the freedom of association (e.g. union organizing) and freedom of speech (speaking to the media). Military personnel in some countries have a right of conscientious objection if they believe an order is immoral or unlawful, or cannot in good conscience carry it out.
Personnel may be posted to bases in their home country or overseas, according to operational need, and may be deployed from those bases on exercises or operations. During peacetime, when military personnel are generally stationed in garrisons or other permanent military facilities, they conduct administrative tasks, training and education activities, technology maintenance, and recruitment.
Training: Initial training conditions recruits for the demands of military life, including preparedness to injure and kill other people, and to face mortal danger without fleeing. It is a physically and psychologically intensive process which resocializes recruits for the unique nature of military demands. For example:
Individuality is suppressed (e.g. by shaving the head of new recruits, issuing uniforms, denying privacy, and prohibiting the use of first names);
Daily routine is tightly controlled (e.g. recruits must make their beds, polish boots, and stack their clothes in a certain way, and mistakes are punished);
Continuous stressors deplete psychological resistance to the demands of their instructors (e.g. depriving recruits of sleep, food, or shelter, shouting insults and giving orders intended to humiliate)
Frequent punishments serve to condition group conformity and discourage poor performance;
The disciplined drill instructor is presented as a role model of the ideal soldier.
Intelligence: The next requirement comes as a fairly basic need for the military to identify possible threats it may be called upon to face. For this purpose, some of the commanding forces and other military, as well as often civilian personnel participate in identification of these threats. This is at once an organization, a system and a process collectively called military intelligence (MI). Areas of study in Military intelligence may include the operational environment, hostile, friendly and neutral forces, the civilian population in an area of combat operations, and other broader areas of interest.
The difficulty in using military intelligence concepts and military intelligence methods is in the nature of the secrecy of the information they seek, and the clandestine nature that intelligence operatives work in obtaining what may be plans for a conflict escalation, initiation of combat, or an invasion.
An important part of the military intelligence role is the military analysis performed to assess military capability of potential future aggressors, and provide combat modelling that helps to understand factors on which comparison of forces can be made. This helps to quantify and qualify such statements as: "China and India maintain the largest armed forces in the World" or that "the U.S. Military is considered to be the world's strongest".
Although some groups engaged in combat, such as militants or resistance movements, refer to themselves using military terminology, notably 'Army' or 'Front', none have had the structure of a national military to justify the reference, and usually have had to rely on support of outside national militaries. They also use these terms to conceal from the MI their true capabilities, and to impress potential ideological recruits.
Having military intelligence representatives participate in the execution of the national defence policy is important, because it becomes the first respondent and commentator on the policy expected strategic goal, compared to the realities of identified threats. When the intelligence reporting is compared to the policy, it becomes possible for the national leadership to consider allocating resources over and above the officers and their subordinates military pay, and the expense of maintaining military facilities and military support services for them.
Economics: Defense economics is the financial and monetary efforts made to resource and sustain militaries, and to finance military operations, including war.
The process of allocating resources is conducted by determining a military budget, which is administered by a military finance organization within the military. Military procurement is then authorized to purchase or contract provision of goods and services to the military, whether in peacetime at a permanent base, or in a combat zone from local population. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military | They also use these terms to conceal from the MI their true capabilities, and to impress potential ideological recruits.
Having military intelligence representatives participate in the execution of the national defence policy is important, because it becomes the first respondent and commentator on the policy expected strategic goal, compared to the realities of identified threats. When the intelligence reporting is compared to the policy, it becomes possible for the national leadership to consider allocating resources over and above the officers and their subordinates military pay, and the expense of maintaining military facilities and military support services for them.
Economics: Defense economics is the financial and monetary efforts made to resource and sustain militaries, and to finance military operations, including war.
The process of allocating resources is conducted by determining a military budget, which is administered by a military finance organization within the military. Military procurement is then authorized to purchase or contract provision of goods and services to the military, whether in peacetime at a permanent base, or in a combat zone from local population.
Capability development: Capability development, which is often referred to as the military 'strength', is arguably one of the most complex activities known to humanity; because it requires determining: strategic, operational, and tactical capability requirements to counter the identified threats; strategic, operational, and tactical doctrines by which the acquired capabilities will be used; identifying concepts, methods, and systems involved in executing the doctrines; creating design specifications for the manufacturers who would produce these in adequate quantity and quality for their use in combat; purchase the concepts, methods, and systems; create a forces structure that would use the concepts, methods, and systems most effectively and efficiently; integrate these concepts, methods, and systems into the force structure by providing military education, training, and practice that preferably resembles combat environment of intended use; create military logistics systems to allow continued and uninterrupted performance of military organizations under combat conditions, including provision of health services to the personnel, and maintenance for the equipment; the services to assist recovery of wounded personnel, and repair of damaged equipment; and finally, post-conflict demobilization, and disposal of war stocks surplus to peacetime requirements.
Development of military doctrine is perhaps the most important of all capability development activities, because it determines how military forces are used in conflicts, the concepts and methods used by the command to employ appropriately military skilled, armed and equipped personnel in achievement of the tangible goals and objectives of the war, campaign, battle, engagement, and action. The line between strategy and tactics is not easily blurred, although deciding which is being discussed had sometimes been a matter of personal judgement by some commentators, and military historians. The use of forces at the level of organization between strategic and tactical is called operational mobility.
Science: Because most of the concepts and methods used by the military, and many of its systems are not found in commercial branches, much of the material is researched, designed, developed, and offered for inclusion in arsenals by military science organizations within the overall structure of the military. Therefore, military scientists can be found interacting with all Arms and Services of the armed forces, and at all levels of the military hierarchy of command.
Although concerned with research into military psychology, particularly combat stress and how it affects troop morale, often the bulk of military science activities is directed at military intelligence technology, military communications, and improving military capability through research. The design, development, and prototyping of weapons, military support equipment, and military technology in general, is also an area in which much effort is invested – it includes everything from global communication networks and aircraft carriers to paint and food.
Logistics: Possessing military capability is not sufficient if this capability cannot be deployed for, and employed in combat operations. To achieve this, military logistics are used for the logistics management and logistics planning of the forces military supply chain management, the consumables, and capital equipment of the troops.
Although mostly concerned with the military transport, as a means of delivery using different modes of transport; from military trucks, to container ships operating from permanent military base, it also involves creating field supply dumps at the rear of the combat zone, and even forward supply points in a specific unit's tactical area of responsibility.
These supply points are also used to provide military engineering services, such as the recovery of defective and derelict vehicles and weapons, maintenance of weapons in the field, the repair and field modification of weapons and equipment; and in peacetime, the life-extension programmes undertaken to allow continued use of equipment. One of the most important role of logistics is the supply of munitions as a primary type of consumable, their storage, and disposal.
In combat: The primary reason for the existence of the military is to engage in combat, should it be required to do so by the national defence policy, and to win. This represents an organisational goal of any military, and the primary focus for military thought through military history. How victory is achieved, and what shape it assumes, is studied by most, if not all, military groups on three levels.
Strategic victory: Military strategy is the management of forces in wars and military campaigns by a commander-in-chief, employing large military forces, either national and allied as a whole, or the component elements of armies, navies and air forces; such as army groups, naval fleets, and large numbers of aircraft. Military strategy is a long-term projection of belligerents' policy, with a broad view of outcome implications, including outside the concerns of military command. Military strategy is more concerned with the supply of war and planning, than management of field forces and combat between them. The scope of strategic military planning can span weeks, but is more often months or even years.
Operational victory: Operational mobility is, within warfare and military doctrine, the level of command which coordinates the minute details of tactics with the overarching goals of strategy. A common synonym is operational art.
The operational level is at a scale bigger than one where line of sight and the time of day are important, and smaller than the strategic level, where production and politics are considerations. Formations are of the operational level if they are able to conduct operations on their own, and are of sufficient size to be directly handled or have a significant impact at the strategic level. This concept was pioneered by the German army prior to and during the Second World War. At this level, planning and duration of activities takes from one week to a month, and are executed by Field Armies and Army Corps and their naval and air equivalents.
Tactical victory: Military tactics concerns itself with the methods for engaging and defeating the enemy in direct combat. Military tactics are usually used by units over hours or days, and are focused on the specific tasks and objectives of squadrons, companies, battalions, regiments, brigades, and divisions, and their naval and air force equivalents.
One of the oldest military publications is The Art of War, by the Chinese philosopher Sun Tzu. Written in the 6th century BCE, the 13-chapter book is intended as military instruction, and not as military theory, but has had a huge influence on Asian military doctrine, and from the late 19th century, on European and United States military planning. It has even been used to formulate business tactics, and can even be applied in social and political areas.
The Classical Greeks and the Romans wrote prolifically on military campaigning. Among the best-known Roman works are Julius Caesar's commentaries on the Gallic Wars, and the Roman Civil war – written about 50 BC.
Two major works on tactics come from the late Roman period: Taktike Theoria by Aelianus Tacticus, and De Re Militari ('On military matters') by Vegetius. Taktike Theoria examined Greek military tactics, and was most influential in the Byzantine world and during the Golden Age of Islam.
De Re Militari formed the basis of European military tactics until the late 17th century. Perhaps its most enduring maxim is Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum (let he who desires peace prepare for war).
Due to the changing nature of combat with the introduction of artillery in the European Middle Ages, and infantry firearms in the Renaissance, attempts were made to define and identify those strategies, grand tactics, and tactics that would produce a victory more often than that achieved by the Romans in praying to the gods before the battle.
Later this became known as military science, and later still, would adopt the scientific method approach to the conduct of military operations under the influence of the Industrial Revolution thinking. In his seminal book On War, the Prussian Major-General and leading expert on modern military strategy, Carl von Clausewitz defined military strategy as 'the employment of battles to gain the end of war'. According to Clausewitz:
strategy forms the plan of the War, and to this end it links together the series of acts which are to lead to the final decision, that is to say, it makes the plans for the separate campaigns and regulates the combats to be fought in each.
Hence, Clausewitz placed political aims above military goals, ensuring civilian control of the military. Military strategy was one of a triumvirate of 'arts' or 'sciences' that governed the conduct of warfare, the others being: military tactics, the execution of plans and manoeuvring of forces in battle, and maintenance of an army.
The meaning of military tactics has changed over time; from the deployment and manoeuvring of entire land armies on the fields of ancient battles, and galley fleets; to modern use of small unit ambushes, encirclements, bombardment attacks, frontal assaults, air assaults, hit-and-run tactics used mainly by guerrilla forces, and, in some cases, suicide attacks on land and at sea. Evolution of aerial warfare introduced its own air combat tactics. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military | Hence, Clausewitz placed political aims above military goals, ensuring civilian control of the military. Military strategy was one of a triumvirate of 'arts' or 'sciences' that governed the conduct of warfare, the others being: military tactics, the execution of plans and manoeuvring of forces in battle, and maintenance of an army.
The meaning of military tactics has changed over time; from the deployment and manoeuvring of entire land armies on the fields of ancient battles, and galley fleets; to modern use of small unit ambushes, encirclements, bombardment attacks, frontal assaults, air assaults, hit-and-run tactics used mainly by guerrilla forces, and, in some cases, suicide attacks on land and at sea. Evolution of aerial warfare introduced its own air combat tactics. Often, military deception, in the form of military camouflage or misdirection using decoys, is used to confuse the enemy as a tactic.
A major development in infantry tactics came with the increased use of trench warfare in the 19th and 20th centuries. This was mainly employed in World War I in the Gallipoli campaign, and the Western Front. Trench warfare often turned to a stalemate, only broken by a large loss of life, because, in order to attack an enemy entrenchment, soldiers had to run through an exposed 'no man's land' under heavy fire from their opposing entrenched enemy.
Technology: As with any occupation, since ancient times, the military has been distinguished from other members of the society by their tools: the weapons and military equipment used in combat. When Stone Age humans first took flint to tip the spear, it was the first example of applying technology to improve the weapon. Since then, the advances made by human societies, and that of weapons, has been closely linked. Stone weapons gave way to Bronze Age and Iron Age weapons such as swords and shields. With each technological change was realized some tangible increase in military capability, such as through greater effectiveness of a sharper edge in defeating armour, or improved density of materials used in manufacture of weapons.
On land, the first significant technological advance in warfare was the development of ranged weapons, notably the sling and later the bow and arrow. The next significant advance came with the domestication of the horses and mastering of equestrianism, creating cavalry and allowing for faster military advances and better logistics. Possibly the most significant advancement was the wheel, a staple of transportation, starting with the chariot and eventually siege engines. The bow was manufactured in increasingly larger and more powerful versions to increase both the weapon range and armour penetration performance, developing into composite bows, recurve bows, longbows, and crossbows. These proved particularly useful during the rise of cavalry, as horsemen encased in ever-more sophisticated armour came to dominate the battlefield.
In medieval China, gunpowder had been invented, and was increasingly used by the military in combat. The use of gunpowder in the early vase-like mortars in Europe, and advanced versions of the longbow and crossbow with armour-piercing arrowheads, put an end to the dominance of the armoured knight. Gunpowder resulted in the development and fielding of the musket, which could be used effectively with little training. In time, the successors to muskets and cannons, in the form of rifles and artillery, would become core battlefield technology.As the speed of technological advances accelerated in civilian applications, so too did military and warfare become industrialized. The newly invented machine gun and repeating rifle redefined firepower on the battlefield, and, in part, explains the high casualty rates of the American Civil War and the decline of melee combat in warfare. The next breakthrough was the conversion of artillery parks from the muzzle-loading guns, to quicker breech-loading guns with recoiling barrels that allowed quicker aimed fire and use of a shield. The widespread introduction of low smoke (smokeless) propellant powders since the 1880s also allowed for a great improvement of artillery ranges. The development of breech loading had the greatest effect on naval warfare for the first time since the Middle Ages, altering the way weapons are mounted on warships. Naval tactics were divorced from the reliance on sails with the invention of the internal combustion. A further advance in military naval technology was the submarine and the torpedo.During World War I, the need to break the deadlock of trench warfare saw the rapid development of many new technologies, particularly tanks. Military aviation was extensively used, and bombers became decisive in many battles of World War II, which marked the most frantic period of weapons development in history. Many new designs, and concepts were used in combat, and all existing technologies of warfare were improved between 1939 and 1945.
During World War II, significant advances were made in military communications through increased use of radio, military intelligence through use of the radar, and in military medicine through use of penicillin, while in the air, the guided missile, jet aircraft, and helicopters were seen for the first time. Perhaps the most infamous of all military technologies was the creation of nuclear weapons, although the exact effects of its radiation were unknown until the early 1950s. Far greater use of military vehicles had finally eliminated the cavalry from the military force structure.
After World War II, with the onset of the Cold War, the constant technological development of new weapons was institutionalized, as participants engaged in a constant arms race in capability development. This constant state of weapons development continues into the present. Main battle tanks, and other heavy equipment such as armoured fighting vehicles, military aircraft, and ships, are characteristic to organized military forces.
The most significant technological developments that influenced combat have been guided missiles, which can be used by all branches of the armed services. More recently, information technology, and its use in surveillance, including space-based reconnaissance systems, have played an increasing role in military operations. The impact of information warfare, which focuses on attacking command communication systems, and military databases, has been coupled with the use of robotic systems in combat, such as unmanned combat aerial vehicles and unmanned ground vehicles.
Recently, there has also been a particular focus towards the use of renewable fuels for running military vehicles on. Unlike fossil fuels, renewable fuels can be produced in any country, creating a strategic advantage. The U.S. military has committed itself to have 50% of its energy consumption come from alternative sources.
As part of society: For much of military history, the armed forces were considered to be for use by the heads of their societies, until recently, the crowned heads of states. In a democracy or other political system run in the public interest, it is a public force.
The relationship between the military and the society it serves is a complicated and ever-evolving one. Much depends on the nature of the society itself, and whether it sees the military as important, as for example in time of threat or war, or a burdensome expense typified by defence cuts in time of peace.
One difficult matter in the relation between military and society is control and transparency. In some countries, limited information on military operations and budgeting is accessible for the public. However, transparency in the military sector is crucial to fight corruption. This showed the Government Defence Anti-corruption Index Transparency International UK published in 2013.
Militaries often function as societies within societies, by having their own military communities, economies, education, medicine, and other aspects of a functioning civilian society. A military is not limited to nations in of itself, as many private military companies (or PMCs) can be used or hired by organizations and figures as security, escort, or other means of protection where police, agencies, or militaries are absent or not trusted.
Ideology and ethics: Militarist ideology is the society's social attitude of being best served, or being a beneficiary of a government, or guided by concepts embodied in the military culture, doctrine, system, or leaders.
Either because of the cultural memory, national history, or the potentiality of a military threat, the militarist argument asserts that a civilian population is dependent upon, and thereby subservient to the needs and goals of its military for continued independence. Militarism is sometimes contrasted with the concepts of comprehensive national power, soft power and hard power.
Most nations have separate military laws which regulate conduct in war and during peacetime. An early exponent was Hugo Grotius, whose On the Law of War and Peace (1625) had a major impact of the humanitarian approach to warfare development. His theme was echoed by Gustavus Adolphus.
Ethics of warfare have developed since 1945, to create constraints on the military treatment of prisoners and civilians, primarily by the Geneva Conventions; but rarely apply to use of the military forces as internal security troops during times of political conflict that results in popular protests and incitement to popular uprising.
International protocols restrict the use, or have even created international bans on some types of weapons, notably weapons of mass destruction (WMD). International conventions define what constitutes a war crime, and provides for war crimes prosecution. Individual countries also have elaborate codes of military justice, an example being the United States' Uniform Code of Military Justice that can lead to court martial for military personnel found guilty of war crimes.
Military actions are sometimes argued to be justified by furthering a humanitarian cause, such as disaster relief operations to defend refugees; such actions are called military humanism. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military | His theme was echoed by Gustavus Adolphus.
Ethics of warfare have developed since 1945, to create constraints on the military treatment of prisoners and civilians, primarily by the Geneva Conventions; but rarely apply to use of the military forces as internal security troops during times of political conflict that results in popular protests and incitement to popular uprising.
International protocols restrict the use, or have even created international bans on some types of weapons, notably weapons of mass destruction (WMD). International conventions define what constitutes a war crime, and provides for war crimes prosecution. Individual countries also have elaborate codes of military justice, an example being the United States' Uniform Code of Military Justice that can lead to court martial for military personnel found guilty of war crimes.
Military actions are sometimes argued to be justified by furthering a humanitarian cause, such as disaster relief operations to defend refugees; such actions are called military humanism.
See also: Armed forces of the world
List of countries by number of military and paramilitary personnel
List of countries by level of military equipment
List of countries by Global Militarization Index
List of countries without armed forces
List of countries by military expenditures
List of countries by past military expenditure
List of countries by military expenditure per capita
List of militaries by country
List of air forces
Lists of armies
List of navies
References:
External links:
Military Expenditure % of GDP hosted by Lebanese economy forum, extracted from the World Bank public data.
‹The template Curlie is being considered for deletion.› Military at Curlie |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military administration | Citations and notes:
References: Weber, Jeffrey A., Eliasson, Johan, Handbook of Military Administration, CRC Press, 2007 |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military awards and decorations | History: Decorations have been known since ancient times. The Egyptian Old Kingdom had the Order of the Golden Collar while the New Kingdom awarded the Order of the Golden Fly. Celts and Romans wore a torc or received other military decorations such as the hasta pura, a spear without a tip. Dayaks wore and still wear tattoos, etc. Necklaces and bracelets were given during the early Middle Ages, evolving into large, richly jewelled necklaces, often with a pendant (commonly a medal) attached.
The oldest military decorations still in use is Sweden's För tapperhet i fält ('For Valour in the Field') and För tapperhet till sjöss ('For Valour at Sea') awarded to officers and soldiers of the Swedish Armed Forces who have—as the medal names suggest—shown valour in the field or at sea in wartime. The medal was instituted by Swedish king Gustav III on 28 May 1789, during his war against Russia. Whilst technically it is still active, it is for practical purposes inactive, not having been awarded since 1915. The next oldest is the Austro-Hungarian Tapferkeits Medaille Honour Medal for Bravery 1789–1792. This medal was instituted on 19 July 1789, by the Emperor Joseph II.
Another of the oldest military decorations still in use is Poland's War Order of Virtuti Militari (Latin for 'For Military Valour'). It was first awarded in 1792.
Forgery: Medals have been forged by many people to make the medal appear more valuable or to make one look like a more decorated soldier. Medal forgeries can include: adding bars, engraving a famous soldier's name on it or creating a whole new medal. Medal forgery is illegal in most countries and can be punishable by imprisonment.
Contemporary use: Today military decorations include:
Orders of merit;
Bravery awards, in the form of a cross, star or medal on a ribbon;
Distinguished service awards, in the form of a cross, star or medal on a ribbon;
Campaign medals worn on a ribbon;
Service medals worn on a ribbon;
Awards for entire units, in the form of battle honours, campaign streamers, fourragères, or unit citations.
In most NATO militaries, only the service ribbons are normally worn on everyday occasions (as opposed to the actual medals).
See also: List of military decorations
List of highest military decorations by country
Civil decoration
State decoration
Neck decoration
Commonwealth Realms orders and decorations
Awards and decorations of the United States military
Awards and decorations of the Russian Federation
Awards and decorations of the Soviet Union
Israeli military decorations
Orders, decorations, and medals of Spain
Orders, decorations, and medals of Belgium
Awards and decorations of the German Armed Forces
Orders, decorations, and medals of the United Kingdom
Medal inflation
== References == |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military base | Jurisdictional definition: Military bases within the United States are considered federal property and are subject to federal law. Civilians (such as family members of military officers) living on military bases are generally subject to the civil and criminal laws of the states where the bases are located. Military bases can range from small outposts to military cities containing up to 100,000 people. A military base may belong to a different nation or state than the territory surrounding it.
Naming: The name used generally refers to the type of military activity that takes place at the base, as well as the traditional nomenclature used by a branch of service.
A military base may go by any of a number of names, such as the following:
Types of establishment: Depending on the context, the term "military base" may refer to any establishment (usually permanent) that houses a nation's armed forces, or even organized paramilitary forces such as the police, constabulary, militia, or national guards. Alternatively, the term may refer solely to an establishment which is used only by an army (or possibly other land fighting related forces, such as marines) to the exclusion of a base used by either an air force or a navy. This is consistent with the different meanings of the word 'military'.
Some examples of permanent military bases used by the navies and air forces of the world are the HMNB Portsmouth in Portsmouth, UK, the Naval Air Station Whidbey Island, Washington State, US, or Ramstein Air Base, Germany (the last two are each designated as a Main Operating Base). Other examples of non- or semi-permanent military bases include a Forward Operating Base (FOB), a Logistics Base (Log base) and a Fire Base (FB).
A military base may also contain large concentrations of military supplies in order to support military logistics. Most military bases are restricted to the public and usually only authorized personnel may enter them (be it military personnel or their relatives and authorized civilian personnel).
In addition to the main military facilities on a certain installation, military bases usually (but not always) have various different facilities for military personnel. These facilities vary from country to country. Military bases can provide housing for military personnel, a post office and dining facilities (restaurants). They may also provide support facilities such as fast food restaurants, gas stations, chapels, schools, banks, thrift stores, a hospital or clinic (dental or health clinics, as well as veterinarian clinics), lodging, movie theaters, and, in some countries, retail stores (usually a supermarket such as Commissary and a Department Store, such as AAFES). On American military installations, Family, Morale, Welfare and Recreation (FMWR) provides facilities such as fitness centers, libraries, golf courses, travel centers, community service centers, campgrounds, child development centers, youth centers, automotive workshops, hobby/arts and crafts centers, bowling centers, and community centers.
Bases used by the United States Air Force Reserve tend to be active USAF bases. However, there are a few Air Reserve Bases, such as Dobbins ARB, Georgia, and Grissom ARB, Indiana, both of which are former active-duty USAF bases. Facilities of the Air National Guard are often located on civil airports in a secure cantonment area not accessible to the general public, though some units are based on USAF bases, and a few ANG-operated bases, such as Selfridge ANGB, Michigan. Support facilities on Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve installations tend to not be as extensive as active bases (i.e., they usually do not have on-base lodging (though Kingsley Field ANGB, Oregon, is an exception), clinics (except for drill days), or retail stores (although some have small convenience stores)).
In Russian usage "military base" or "naval base" is not limited to denoting a specific fence described facility and usually encompasses a broad territory within which a number of discrete facilities may be located. As examples, 1) the Russian Sevastopol Naval Base comprises individual facilities located within the city of Sevastopol proper (waterfront moorings, weapons stores, a headquarters compound, and a naval infantry base) as well as an airfield at Kacha north of the city; 2) the Leningrad Naval Base comprises all naval facilities in the greater St. Petersburg area including training schools, commissioning institutes, the naval academy, and the Kronshtadt base on Kotlin island.
Overseas military base: An overseas military base is a military base that is geographically located outside of the territory of the country whose armed forces are the principal occupants of the base.
Such bases may be established by treaties between the governing power in the host country and another country which needs to establish the military base in the host country for various reasons, usually strategic and logistic.
Furthermore, overseas military bases often serve as the source of the military brat subculture due to the children of the bases' occupant military being born or raised in the host country but raised with a remote parental knowledge of the occupant military's home country.
British military bases: In the 18th and 19th centuries the Royal Engineers were largely responsible for erecting military bases in the British Isles and the British Empire. In 1792 the Chief Engineer was instructed to prepare the Barrack Construction estimates for Parliament and at the same time the Department of the Barrackmaster-General was established.
During the period from the 1840s through the 1860s barracks were constructed under supervision of the Royal Engineers in:
Bristol (1847)
Preston (1848)
Tower of London (1851)
Sheerness (1854)
Sheffield (1854)
Curragh Camp (1855)
Devonport (1856)
Chelsea (1861)
The Cardwell Reforms (1872) ushered in another period of intensive Barrack building at Aldershot, Portsmouth, Plymouth, London, Woking, Woolwich, Dublin, Belfast, Malta, Gibraltar and the Cape of Good Hope.
In 1959 the Corps' Work Services was transferred to the civilian War Department Works Organization (later renamed Property Services Agency (PSA)) and by 1965 the (Specialist Teams Royal Engineers (STRE)) were formed to plan and execute Works projects worldwide.
Some British and Commonwealth naval bases are traditionally named, commissioned, and administered as though they were naval ships. For this reason they are sometimes called stone frigates.
Related term: Billet
Kaserne
See also: List of United States military bases
List of military bases
References:
External links:
Official Directory of US Military bases.
Royal Engineers Museum Military Works (construction)
New US Military Bases: Side Effects Or Causes Of War? by Zoltan Grossman
US Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Installations and Environment)
Outposts of Empire – Booklet and map of the American military bases in the world. Transnational Institute, March 2007 |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military branch | Types of branches:
Unified armed forces: The Canadian Armed Forces is the unified armed forces of Canada. While it has three environmental commands - namely the Canadian Army, Royal Canadian Navy, and Royal Canadian Air Force - it remains a single military service.
NATO definition: Branch of service (also branch of military service or branch of armed service) refers, according to NATO standards, to a branch, employment of combined forces or parts of a service, below the level of service, military service, or armed service.
See also: List of militaries by country
Military organization
== References == |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military camouflage | Principles: Military camouflage is part of the art of military deception. The main objective of military camouflage is to deceive the enemy as to the presence, position and intentions of military formations. Camouflage techniques include concealment, disguise, and dummies, applied to troops, vehicles, and positions.
Vision is the main sense of orientation in humans, and the primary function of camouflage is to deceive the human eye. Camouflage works through concealment (whether by countershading, preventing casting shadows, or disruption of outlines), mimicry, or possibly by dazzle. In modern warfare, some forms of camouflage, for example face paints, also offer concealment from infrared sensors, while CADPAT textiles in addition help to provide concealment from radar.
Compromises: While camouflage tricks are in principle limitless, both cost and practical considerations limit the choice of methods and the time and effort devoted to camouflage. Paint and uniforms must also protect vehicles and soldiers from the elements. Units need to move, fire their weapons and perform other tasks to keep functional, some of which run counter to camouflage. Camouflage may be dropped altogether. Late in the Second World War, the USAAF abandoned camouflage paint for some aircraft to lure enemy fighters to attack, while in the Cold War, some aircraft similarly flew with polished metal skins, to reduce drag and weight, or to reduce vulnerability to radiation from nuclear weapons.
No single camouflage pattern is effective in all terrains. The effectiveness of a pattern depends on contrast as well as colour tones. Strong contrasts which disrupt outlines are better suited for environments such as forests where the play of light and shade is prominent, while low contrasts are better suited to open terrain with little shading structure. Terrain-specific camouflage patterns, made to match the local terrain, may be more effective in that terrain than more general patterns. However, unlike an animal or a civilian hunter, military units may need to cross several terrain types like woodland, farmland and built up areas in a single day. While civilian hunting clothing may have almost photo-realistic depictions of tree bark or leaves (indeed, some such patterns are based on photographs), military camouflage is designed to work in a range of environments. With the cost of uniforms in particular being substantial, most armies operating globally have two separate full uniforms, one for woodland/jungle and one for desert and other dry terrain. An American attempt at a global camouflage pattern for all environments (the 2004 UCP) was produced, however after a few years of service it was withdrawn due to poor performance. On the other end of the scale are terrain specific patterns like the "Berlin camo", applied to British vehicles operating in Berlin during the Cold War, where square fields of various gray shades was designed to hide vehicles against the mostly concrete architecture of post-war Berlin.
Other functions: Camouflage patterns serve cultural functions alongside concealment. Apart from concealment, uniforms are also the primary means for soldiers to tell friends and enemies apart. The camouflage experts and evolutionary zoologists L. Talas, R. J. Baddeley and Innes Cuthill analyzed calibrated photographs of a series of NATO and Warsaw Pact uniform patterns and demonstrated that their evolution did not serve any known principles of military camouflage intended to provide concealment. Instead, when the Warsaw Pact was dissolved, the uniforms of the countries that began to favour the West politically started to converge on the colours and textures of NATO patterns. After the death of Marshal Tito and the breakup of what had been Yugoslavia, the camouflage patterns of the new nations changed, coming to resemble the camouflage patterns used by the armies of their neighbours. The authors note that military camouflage resembles animal coloration in having multiple simultaneous functions.
Snow camouflage: Seasons may play a role in some regions. A dramatic change in colour and texture is created by seasonal snowy conditions in northern latitudes, necessitating repainting of vehicles and separate snow oversuits. The Eastern and northern European countries have a tradition for separate winter uniforms rather than oversuits. During the Second World War, the Waffen-SS went a step further, developing reversible uniforms with separate schemes for summer and autumn, as well as white winter oversuits.
Movement: While patterns can provide more effective crypsis than solid colour when the camouflaged object is stationary, any pattern, particularly one with high contrast, stands out when the object is moving. Jungle camouflage uniforms were issued during the Second World War, but both the British and American forces found that a simple green uniform provided better camouflage when soldiers were moving. After the war, most nations returned to a unicoloured uniform for their troops. Some nations, notably Austria and Israel, continue to use solid colour combat uniforms today. Similarly, while larger military aircraft traditionally had a disruptive pattern with a darker top over a lighter lower surface (a form of countershading), modern fast fighter aircraft often wear gray overall.
Digital camouflage: Digital camouflage provides a disruptive effect through the use of pixellated patterns at a range of scales, meaning that the camouflage helps to defeat observation at a range of distances. Such patterns were first developed during the Second World War, when Johann Georg Otto Schick designed a number of patterns for the Waffen-SS, combining micro- and macro-patterns in one scheme. The German Army developed the idea further in the 1970s into Flecktarn, which combines smaller shapes with dithering; this softens the edges of the large scale pattern, making the underlying objects harder to discern. Pixellated shapes pre-date computer aided design by many years, already being used in Soviet Union experiments with camouflage patterns, such as "TTsMKK" developed in 1944 or 1945.
In the 1970s, US Army officer Timothy R. O'Neill suggested that patterns consisting of square blocks of colour would provide effective camouflage. By 2000, O'Neill's idea was combined with patterns like the German Flecktarn to create pixellated patterns such as CADPAT and MARPAT. Battledress in digital camouflage patterns was first designed by the Canadian Forces. The "digital" refers to the coordinates of the pattern, which are digitally defined. The term is also used of computer generated patterns like the non-pixellated Multicam and the Italian fractal Vegetato pattern. Pixellation does not in itself contribute to the camouflaging effect. The pixellated style, however, simplifies design and eases printing on fabric.
Non-visual: With the birth of radar and sonar and other means of detecting military hardware not depending on the human eye, came means of camouflaging against them. Collectively these are known as stealth technology. Aircraft and ships can be shaped to reflect radar impulses away from the sender, and covered with radar-absorbing materials, to reduce their radar signature. The use of heat-seeking missiles has also led to efforts to hide the heat signature of aircraft engines. Methods include exhaust ports shaped to mix hot exhaust gases with cold surrounding air, and placing the exhaust ports on the upper side of the airframe.
Multi-spectral camouflage attempts to hide objects from several detection methods such as infrared, radar, ultraviolet, and millimetre-wave imaging simultaneously. As of 2018, multiple countries are phasing out legacy camouflage systems with multi-spectral systems.
Auditory camouflage, at least in the form of noise reduction, is practised in various ways. The rubberized hull of military submarines absorbs sonar waves and can be seen as a form of auditory camouflage. Some modern helicopters are designed to be quiet. Combat uniforms are usually equipped with buttons rather than snap fasteners or velcro to reduce noise.
Olfactory camouflage is said to be rare; examples include ghillie suits, special garments for military snipers made from strips of hessian cloth, which are sometimes treated with mud and even manure to give them an "earthy" smell to cover the smell of the sniper.
Magnetic camouflage in the form of "degaussing" coils has been used since the Second World War to protect ships from magnetic mines and other weapons with magnetic sensors. Horizontal coils around the whole or parts of the ship generate magnetic fields to "cancel out" distortions to the Earth's magnetic field created by the ship.
History:
Reconnaissance and riflemen: Ship camouflage was occasionally used in ancient times. Vegetius wrote in the 4th century that "Venetian blue" (bluish-green, like the sea) was used for camouflage in the years 56–54 BC during the Gallic Wars, when Julius Caesar sent his scout ships to gather intelligence along the coast of Britain. The bluish-green scout ships carried sailors and marines dressed in the same colour.
In the Mughal Empire that ruled South Asia between the 16th and 18th centuries, the Mughal army frequently employed the use of camouflage in their military campaigns, foreshadowing the modern use of military camouflage in the 19th and 20th centuries.
The emphasis on hand-to-hand combat, and the short range of weapons such as the musket, meant that recognition and cohesion were more important than camouflage in combat clothing well into the baroque period. The introduction of infantry weapons with longer range, especially the Baker rifle, opened up new roles which needed camouflaged clothing. In the colonial Seven Years' War (1756–1763), the rifle-armed Rogers' Rangers wore gray or green uniforms. John Graves Simcoe, one of the unit's later commanders, noted in 1784:
Green is without comparison the best colour for light troops with dark accouterments; and if put on in the spring, by autumn it nearly fades with the leaves, preserving its characteristic of being scarcely discernible at a distance. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military camouflage | The emphasis on hand-to-hand combat, and the short range of weapons such as the musket, meant that recognition and cohesion were more important than camouflage in combat clothing well into the baroque period. The introduction of infantry weapons with longer range, especially the Baker rifle, opened up new roles which needed camouflaged clothing. In the colonial Seven Years' War (1756–1763), the rifle-armed Rogers' Rangers wore gray or green uniforms. John Graves Simcoe, one of the unit's later commanders, noted in 1784:
Green is without comparison the best colour for light troops with dark accouterments; and if put on in the spring, by autumn it nearly fades with the leaves, preserving its characteristic of being scarcely discernible at a distance.
The tradition was continued by British Rifle Regiments who adopted rifle green for the Napoleonic Wars.
During the Peninsular War, Portugal fielded light infantry units known as Caçadores, who wore brown-jackets which helped conceal them. The brown color was considered to be more adequate for a concealment in the landscape of most of Portuguese regions, in general more arid than the greener landscapes of Central and Northern Europe. Other nations soon followed suit, dressing their rifle regiments and sometimes also light troops in suitable drab tones, usually variations of green or gray.
The first introduction of drab general uniform was by the British Corps of Guides in India in 1848. Initially the drab uniform was specially imported from England, with one of the reasons being to "make them invisible in a land of dust". However, when a larger quantity was required the army improvised, using a local dye to produce uniform locally. This type of drab uniform soon became known as khaki (Urdu for dusty, soil-coloured) by the Indian soldiers, and was of a similar colour to a local dress of cotton coloured with the mazari palm. The example was followed by other British units during the mutiny of 1857, dying their white drill uniforms to inconspicuous tones with mud, tea, coffee or coloured inks. The resulting hue varied from dark or slate grey through light brown to off-white, or sometimes even lavender. This improvised measure gradually became widespread among the troops stationed in India and North-West Frontier, and sometimes among the troops campaigning on the African continent.
Rifle fire: While long range rifles became the standard weapon in the 1830s, armies were slow to adapt their tactics and uniforms, perhaps as a result of mainly fighting colonial wars against less well armed opponents. Not until the First Boer War of 1880/81 did a major European power meet an opponent well equipped with and well versed in the use of modern long range repeating firearms, forcing an immediate change in tactics and uniforms. Khaki-coloured uniform became standard service dress for both British and British Indian Army troops stationed in British India in 1885, and in 1896 khaki drill uniform was adopted by British Army for the service outside of Europe in general, but not until the Second Boer War, in 1902, did the entire British Army standardise on khaki (officially known as "drab") for Service Dress.
The US military, who had blue-jacketed rifle units in the Civil War, were quick to follow the British, going khaki in the same year. Russia followed, partially, in 1908. The Italian Army used grigio-verde ("grey-green") in the Alps from 1906 and across the army from 1909. The Germans adopted feldgrau ("field grey") in 1910. By the outbreak of the First World War in 1914, France was the only major power to still field soldiers dressed in traditional conspicuous uniforms.
The First World War: The First World War was the first full scale industrial conflict fought with modern firearms. The first attempt at disruptive camouflaged garment for the French army was proposed in 1914 by the painter Louis Guingot, but was refused by the army, which nevertheless kept a sample of the clothing. In collaboration with a Russian chemist friend, Guingot had developed a process of painting on weather-resistant fabric before the war and had registered a patent for it. But the casualty rate on the Western Front forced the French to finally relinquish their blue coats and red trousers, adopting a grayish "horizon blue" uniform.
The use of rapid firing machine guns and long range breech loading artillery quickly led to camouflaging of vehicles and positions. Artillery pieces were soon painted in contrasting bold colours to obscure their outlines. Another early trend was building observation trees, made of steel with bark camouflage. Such trees became popular with the British and French armies in 1916. The observation tree was invented by French painter Lucien-Victor Guirand de Scévola, who led the French army's camouflage unit, the first of its kind in any army. He also invented painted canvas netting to hide machine gun positions, and this was quickly taken up for hiding equipment and gun positions from 1917, 7 million square yards being used by the end of the war.
The First World War also saw the birth of aerial warfare, and with it the need not only to conceal positions and vehicles from being spotted from the air, but also the need to camouflage the aircraft themselves. In 1917, Germany started using a lozenge camouflage covering Central Powers aircraft, possibly the earliest printed camouflage. A similarly disruptive splinter pattern in earth tones, Buntfarbenanstrich 1918, was introduced for tanks in 1918, and was also used on the Stahlhelm (steel helmet), becoming the first use of a standardized camouflage pattern for soldiers.
Camoufleurs: In 1909 an American artist and amateur zoologist, Abbott Thayer published a book, Concealing-Coloration in the Animal Kingdom, which was widely read by military leaders, although his advocacy of countershading was unsuccessful, despite his patent for countershading submarines and surface ships.
The earliest camouflage artists were members of the Post- Impressionist and Fauve schools of France. Contemporary artistic movements such as cubism, vorticism and impressionism also influenced the development of camouflage as they dealt with disrupting outlines, abstraction and colour theory.The French established a Section de Camouflage (Camouflage Department) at Amiens in 1915, headed by Lucien-Victor Guirand de Scévola. His camoufleurs included the artists Jacques Villon, André Dunoyer de Segonzac, Charles Camoin and André Mare.
Camouflage schemes of the First World War and Interwar periods that employed dazzle patterns were often described as "cubist" by commentators, and Picasso claimed with typical hyperbole "Yes, it is we who made it, that is cubism". Most of the artists employed as camoufleurs were traditional representative painters, not cubists, but de Scévola claimed "In order to deform totally the aspect of the object, I had to employ the means that cubists use to represent it."
Other countries soon saw the advantage of camouflage, and established their own units of artists, designers and architects. The British established a Camouflage Section in late 1916 at Wimereux, and the U.S. followed suit with the New York Camouflage Society in April 1917, the official Company A of 40th Engineers in January 1918 and the Women's Reserve Camouflage Corps. The Italians set up the Laboratorio di mascheramento in 1917. By 1918 de Scévola was in command of camouflage workshops with over 9,000 workers, not counting the camoufleurs working at the front itself. Norman Wilkinson who first proposed dazzle camouflage to the British military employed 5 male designers and 11 women artists, who by the end of the war had painted more than 2,300 vessels. French women were employed behind the lines of both the British and American armies, sewing netting to disguise equipment and designing apparel for soldiers to wear.
From the Second World War: Printed camouflage for shelter halves was introduced for the Italian and German armies in the interwar period, the "splotchy" M1929 Telo mimetico in Italy and the angular Splittermuster 31 in Germany. During the War, both patterns were used for paratrooper uniforms for their respective countries. The British soon followed suit with a brush-stroke type pattern for their paratroopers' Denison smock, and the Soviets introduced an "amoeba" pattern overgarment for their snipers.
Hugh Cott's 1940 book Adaptive Coloration in Animals systematically covered the different forms of camouflage and mimicry by which animals protect themselves, and explicitly drew comparisons throughout with military camouflage:
The principle is one with many applications to modern warfare. In the Great War it was utilized by the Germans when they introduced strongly marked incidents of white or black tone to conceal the fainter contrasts of tone made by the sloping sides of overhead camouflage-screens, or roofing, as seen from the air. The same principle has, of course, a special application in any attempt to reduce the visibility of large objects of all kinds, such as ships, tanks, buildings, and aerodromes.
Both British and Soviet aircraft were given wave-type camouflage paintwork for their upper surfaces throughout the war, while American ones remained simple two-colour schemes (different upper and under sides) or even dispensed with camouflage altogether. Italian and some Japanese aircraft wore sprayed-on spotted patterns. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military camouflage | Hugh Cott's 1940 book Adaptive Coloration in Animals systematically covered the different forms of camouflage and mimicry by which animals protect themselves, and explicitly drew comparisons throughout with military camouflage:
The principle is one with many applications to modern warfare. In the Great War it was utilized by the Germans when they introduced strongly marked incidents of white or black tone to conceal the fainter contrasts of tone made by the sloping sides of overhead camouflage-screens, or roofing, as seen from the air. The same principle has, of course, a special application in any attempt to reduce the visibility of large objects of all kinds, such as ships, tanks, buildings, and aerodromes.
Both British and Soviet aircraft were given wave-type camouflage paintwork for their upper surfaces throughout the war, while American ones remained simple two-colour schemes (different upper and under sides) or even dispensed with camouflage altogether. Italian and some Japanese aircraft wore sprayed-on spotted patterns. German aircraft mostly used an angular splint-pattern camouflage, but Germany experimented with different schemes, particularly in the later stages of the war. They also experimented with various spray-on camouflage patterns for tanks and other vehicles, while Allied vehicles remained largely uni-coloured. As they had volunteered in the first World War, women sewed camouflage netting, organizing formalized groups for the work in Australia, Britain, New Zealand and the United States who took part as camoufleurs during the second war.
The British Middle East Command Camouflage Directorate, consisting mainly of artists recruited into the Royal Engineers, developed the use of camouflage for large-scale military deception. Operations combined the disguise of actual installations, vehicles and stores with the simultaneous display of dummies, whether to draw fire or to give a false idea of the strength of forces or likely attack directions. In Operation Bertram for the decisive battle at El Alamein, a whole dummy armoured division was constructed, while real tanks were disguised as soft-skinned transport using "Sunshield" covers. The capabilities so developed were put to use not only in the western desert, but also in Europe as in the Operation Bodyguard deception for the Invasion of Normandy, and in the Pacific campaign, as in the Battle of Goodenough Island.
The introduction of strategic bombing led to efforts to camouflage airfields and strategic production centres. This form of positional camouflage could be quite elaborate, and even include false houses and cars. With the threat from nuclear weapons in the post-war era such elaborate camouflage was no longer seen as useful, as a direct hit would not be necessary with strategic nuclear weapons to destroy infrastructure. The Soviet Union's doctrine of military deception defines the need for surprise through means including camouflage, based on experiences such as the Battle of Kursk where camouflage helped the Red Army to overwhelm a powerful enemy.
Application:
Uniforms: The role of uniform is not only to hide each soldier, but also to identify friend from foe. Issue of the "Frogskin" uniforms to US troops in Europe during the Second World War was halted as it was too often mistaken for the disruptively patterned German uniform worn by the Waffen-SS. Camouflage uniforms need to be made and distributed to a large number of soldiers. The design of camouflage uniforms therefore involves a tradeoff between camouflaging effect, recognizability, cost, and manufacturability.
Armies facing service in different theatres may need several different camouflage uniforms. Separate issues of temperate/jungle and desert camouflage uniforms are common. Patterns can to some extent be adapted to different terrains by adding means of fastening pieces of vegetation to the uniform. Helmets often have netting covers; some jackets have small loops for the same purpose. Being able to find appropriate camouflage vegetation or in other ways modify the issued battle uniform to suit the local terrain is an important skill for infantry soldiers.
Countries in boreal climates often need snow camouflage, either by having reversible uniforms or simple overgarments.
Land vehicles: The purpose of vehicle and equipment camouflage differs from personal camouflage in that the primary threat is aerial reconnaissance. The goal is to disrupt the characteristic shape of the vehicle, to reduce shine, and to make the vehicle difficult to identify even if it is spotted.
Paint is the least effective measure, but forms a basis for other techniques. Military vehicles often become so dirty that pattern-painted camouflage is not visible, and although matte colours reduce shine, a wet vehicle can still be shiny, especially when viewed from above. Patterns are designed to make it more difficult to interpret shadows and shapes. The British Army adopted a disruptive scheme for vehicles operating in the stony desert of the North African Campaign and Greece, retrospectively known as the Caunter scheme. It used up to six colours applied with straight lines.
The British Army's Special Air Service used pink as the primary colour on its desert-camouflaged Land Rover Series IIA patrol vehicles, nicknamed Pink Panthers; the colour had been observed to be indistinguishable from sand at a distance.
Nets can be effective at defeating visual observation. Traditional camouflage nets use a textile 'garnish' to generate an apparent texture with a depth of shadow created beneath it, and the effect can be reinforced with pieces of vegetation. Modern nets tend to be made of a continuous woven material, which is easier to deploy over a vehicle and lack the "windows" between patches of garnish of traditional nets. Some nets can remain in place while vehicles move. Simple nets are less effective in defeating radar and thermal sensors. Heavier, more durable "mobile camouflage systems", essentially conformal duvets with thermal and radar properties, provide a degree of concealment without the delay caused by having to spread nets around a vehicle.
Active camouflage for vehicles, using heated or cooled Peltier plates to match the infrared background, has been prototyped in industry but has not yet been put into production.
Ships: Until the 20th century, naval weapons had a short range, so camouflage was unimportant for ships, and for the men on board them. Paint schemes were selected on the basis of ease of maintenance or aesthetics, typically buff upperworks (with polished brass fittings) and white or black hulls. Around the start of the 20th century, the increasing range of naval engagements, as demonstrated by the Battle of Tsushima, prompted the introduction of the first camouflage, in the form of some solid shade of gray overall, in the hope that ships would fade into the mist.
First and Second World War dazzle camouflage, pioneered by English artist Norman Wilkinson, was used not to make ships disappear, but to make them seem smaller or faster, to encourage misidentification by an enemy, and to make the ships harder to hit. In the Second World War, the Royal Canadian Navy trialled a form of active camouflage, counter-illumination, using diffused lighting to prevent ships from appearing as dark shapes against a brighter sky during the night. It reduced visibility by up to 70%, but was unreliable and never went into production.
After the Second World War, the use of radar made camouflage generally less effective. However, camouflage may have helped to protect US warships from Vietnamese shore batteries using optical rangefinders.
Coastal patrol boats such as those of the Norwegian, Swedish and Indonesian navies continue to use terrestrial style disruptively patterned camouflage.
Aircraft: Aircraft camouflage faces the challenge that an aircraft's background varies widely, according to whether the observer is above or below the aircraft, and with the background, e.g. farmland or desert. Aircraft camouflage schemes have often consisted of a light colour underneath and darker colours above.
Other camouflage schemes acknowledge that aircraft may be seen at any angle and against any background while in combat, so aircraft are painted all over with a disruptive pattern or a neutral colour such as gray.
Second World War maritime patrol aircraft such as the Consolidated PBY Catalina flying boat were painted white, as aircraft generally appear dark against the sky (including at night), and hence are least visible when painted in as light a colour as possible. The problem of appearing dark against the sky was explored in the U.S. Navy's Yehudi lights project in 1943, using counter-illumination to raise the average brightness of a plane, when seen head-on, from a dark shape to the same as the sky. The experiments worked, enabling an aircraft to approach to within 2 miles (3.2 km) before being seen, whereas aircraft without the lights were noticed 12 miles (19 km) away.
The higher speeds of modern aircraft, and the reliance on radar and missiles in air combat have reduced the value of visual camouflage, while increasing the value of electronic "stealth" measures. Modern paint is designed to absorb electromagnetic radiation used by radar, reducing the signature of the aircraft, and to limit the emission of infrared light used by heat seeking missiles to detect their target. Further advances in aircraft camouflage are being investigated in the field of active camouflage.
In fashion and art:
Fashion and the "Dazzle Ball": The transfer of camouflage patterns from battle to exclusively civilian uses is not recent. Dazzle camouflage inspired a trend of dazzlesque patterns used on clothing in England, starting in 1919 with the "Dazzle Ball" held by Chelsea Arts Club. Those attending wore dazzle-patterned black and white clothing, influencing twentieth-century fashion and art via postcards (see illustration) and magazine articles. The Illustrated London News announced
The scheme of decoration for the great fancy dress ball given by the Chelsea Arts Club at the Albert Hall, the other day, was based on the principles of 'Dazzle', the method of 'camouflage' used during the war in the painting of ships ... The total effect was brilliant and fantastic. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military camouflage | Further advances in aircraft camouflage are being investigated in the field of active camouflage.
In fashion and art:
Fashion and the "Dazzle Ball": The transfer of camouflage patterns from battle to exclusively civilian uses is not recent. Dazzle camouflage inspired a trend of dazzlesque patterns used on clothing in England, starting in 1919 with the "Dazzle Ball" held by Chelsea Arts Club. Those attending wore dazzle-patterned black and white clothing, influencing twentieth-century fashion and art via postcards (see illustration) and magazine articles. The Illustrated London News announced
The scheme of decoration for the great fancy dress ball given by the Chelsea Arts Club at the Albert Hall, the other day, was based on the principles of 'Dazzle', the method of 'camouflage' used during the war in the painting of ships ... The total effect was brilliant and fantastic.
Camouflage in art: While many artists helped to develop camouflage during and since World War I, the disparate sympathies of the two cultures restrained the use of "militaristic" forms other than in the work of war artists. Since the 1960s, several artists have exploited the symbolism of camouflage. For example, Andy Warhol's 1986 camouflage series was his last major work, including Camouflage Self-Portrait. Alain Jacquet created many camouflage works from 1961 to the 1970s. Ian Hamilton Finlay's 1973 Arcadia was a screenprint of a leafily-camouflaged tank, "an ironic parallel between this idea of a natural paradise and the camouflage patterns on a tank", as the Tate Collection describes it. Veruschka, the pseudonym of Vera von Lehndorff and Holger Trülzsch, created "Nature, Signs & Animals" and "Mimicry-Dress-Art" in 1970–1973. Thomas Hirschhorn made Utopia : One World, One War, One Army, One Dress in 2005.
War protesters and fashionistas: In the US in the 1960s, military clothing became increasingly common (mostly olive drab rather than patterned camouflage); it was often found worn by anti-war protestors, initially within groups such as Vietnam Veterans Against the War but then increasingly widely as a symbol of political protest.
Fashion often uses camouflage as inspiration – attracted by the striking designs, the "patterned disorder" of camouflage, its symbolism (to be celebrated or subverted), and its versatility. Early designers include Marimekko (1960s), Jean-Charles de Castelbajac (1975–), Stephen Sprouse (using Warhol prints, 1987–1988), and Franco Moschino (1986), but it was not until the 1990s that camouflage became a significant and widespread facet of dress from streetwear to high-fashion labels – especially the use of "faux-camouflage". Producers using camouflage in the 1990s and beyond include: John Galliano for Christian Dior, Marc Jacobs for Louis Vuitton, Comme des Garçons, Chanel, Tommy Hilfiger, Dolce & Gabbana, Issey Miyake, Armani, Yves Saint-Laurent.
Companies closely associated with camouflage patterns include 6876, A Bathing Ape, Stone Island, Stüssy, Maharishi, mhi, Zoo York, Addict, and Girbaud, using and overprinting genuine military surplus fabric; others use camouflage patterns in bright colours such as pink or purple. Some, such as Emma Lundgren and Stüssy, have created their own designs or integrated camouflage patterns with other symbols.
Restrictions: Some countries such as Barbados, Aruba, and other Caribbean nations have laws prohibiting camouflage clothing from being worn by non-military personnel, including tourists and children. Civilian possession of camouflage is still banned in Zimbabwe.
See also: Camouflage (1944 film), World War II camouflage training film produced by the US Army Air Forces
List of military clothing camouflage patterns
Notes:
References:
Sources:
External links:
"Abbott Thayer's Camouflage Demonstrations: Countershading, Disruption and Background Picturing"
Shipcamouflage.com
Roy R. Behrens – Art and Camouflage: An Annotated Bibliography
Guy Hartcup – Camouflage: A History of Concealment and Deception in War (1980)
WWII War Department Field Manual FM 5-20B: Camouflage of Vehicles (1944)
The Evolution of Tank Camouflage The Tank Museum
Patterns compared
Camouflage paint colours
Cécile Coutin: Camouflage, in: 1914-1918-online. International Encyclopedia of the First World War.
John Ramm: [Hidden Talent: Graham Clilverd War Artist in Antique Collecting, September 2023, pp 24-27] |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military campaign | Definition: 1. A military campaign denotes the time during which a given military force conducts combat operations in a given area (often referred to as AO, area of operation). A military campaign may be executed by either a single Armed Service, or as a combined services campaign conducted by land, naval, air, cyber, and space forces.
2. The purpose of a military campaign is to achieve a particular desired resolution of a military conflict as its strategic goal. This is constrained by resources, geography and/or season. A campaign is measured relative to the technology used by the belligerents to achieve goals, and while in the pre-industrial Europe was understood to be that between the planting (late spring) and harvest times (late autumn), it has been shortened during the post-industrial period to a few weeks. However, due to the nature of campaign goals, usually campaigns last several months, or up to a year as defined by Trevor N. Dupuy.
"A campaign is a phase of a war involving a series of operations related in time and space and aimed towards a single, specific, strategic objective or result in the war. A campaign may include a single battle, but more often it comprises a number of battles over a protracted period of time or a considerable distance, but within a single theatre of operations or delimited area. A campaign may last only a few weeks, but usually lasts several months or even a year".
Conduct: Planning – the General Staff defining objectives, time, scope and cost of the campaign
Executing – the coordination of forces and resources in logistic and combat operations
Controlling – the monitoring of the progress of the campaign when compared to its baseline plan
Concluding – acceptance or rejection of the campaign outcomes by the directing command structure
Winter season: In premodern times, campaigns were usually interrupted during the winter season, during which the soldiers retreated into the winter quarters (or 'cantonments') to get through the coldest months with warmth and protection. For example, the ancient Romans had easily movable castra aestiva ('summer quarters', with leather tents) but more stationary castra hibera ('winter quarters', with wooden barracks). In favourable weather and with proper equipment and supplies, however, military campaigns could be extended from the 'campaigning season' into winter in an attempt to catch the enemy off-guard. For example, in the Flanders campaign, French general Jean-Charles Pichegru unexpectedly crossed the frozen Great Rivers during the harsh winter of 1794–95, and conquered the Dutch Republic. But ill-prepared winter campaigns often had disastrous consequences due to high mortality amongst the soldiers; the most notorious example of this is the French invasion of Russia by Napoleon (24 June – 14 December 1812). Therefore, army commanders sought to take into account the need to return their troops to their winter quarters, or establish new winter quarters in a secure location, well before the winter set in, so as to not leave their soldiers vulnerable to the enemy nor the elements.
Evaluation: The success of a military campaign is evaluated based on the degree of achievement of planned goals and objectives through combat and noncombat operations. That is determined when one of the belligerent military forces defeats the opposing military force within the constraints of the planned resource, time and cost allocations. The manner in which a force terminates its operations often influences the public perception of the campaign's success. A campaign may end in conquest, and be followed by the transition of military authority to a civil authority and the redeployment of forces, or a permanent installation of a military authority in the occupied area.
Military campaigns, inside and outside defined wars, may exceed the original or even revised planning parameters of scope, time and cost. Such stalled campaigns, for example the western front in World War I, were formerly called "stalemates" but in the late 20th century the metaphor of a quagmire was often applied, and "frozen conflict" in the 21st. Such a situation may arise of various factors such as:
a small hope for victory
poorly defined objectives
no clear exit strategy
See also: General
Military operations other than war – concept that encompass the use of military capabilities across the range of military operations short of war.
Campaign desk – used by officers and their staffs in rear areas during a military campaign.
Military strategy – collective name for planning the conduct of warfare.
War cycles – the theory that wars happen in cycles.
Military decorations
Campaign medal – a military decoration which is awarded to a member of the military who serves in a designated military operation or performs duty in a geographical theater.
Campaign clasp – an attachment to a military award consisting of a metal bar which is pinned to the upper cloth portion of an award medal.
Campaign streamer – a long streamer attached to the headpiece of a military flag, denoting participation of that military service in a particular campaign.
Lists and examples
List of wars – contains military campaigns.
List of battles – part of larger military campaigns.
List of sieges – part of larger military campaigns.
References:
Sources: Dupuy, T.N., Understanding war: History and Theory of Combat, Leo Cooper, London, 1992 |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military deception | Definition: Many standard military activities can be considered deceptive, but not deception. For example, a unit may move into an assembly area to complete organizing and rehearsing prior to a mission. It is a standard deceptive tactic to camouflage the vehicles, equipment and personnel in the assembly area with the intent of confusing the enemy. Military deception is more complex than simple deceptive activities, with a unit deliberately planning and carrying out an elaborate effort that will cause a targeted adversary decision maker to take an action that is detrimental to the adversary and beneficial to the side employing deception.
Types: Deception can be accomplished through either increasing or decreasing an adversary's understanding of the operating environment. Ambiguity increasing deception is intended to sow confusion in the mind of the enemy decision maker by presenting multiple possible friendly courses of action. Because the adversary does not know which is true, his reactions are delayed or paralyzed, which gives the friendly side an advantage. With ambiguity decreasing deception, the friendly side intends to make the adversary certain of the friendly course of action — certain, but wrong. As a result, the adversary will misallocate time, personnel, or resources, which enables the friendly side to obtain an advantage.
The Operation Bodyguard deception in World War II can be viewed as an ambiguity increasing deception that over time became ambiguity decreasing. Initially, the aim was to increase confusion among German planners and leaders by presenting the possibilities of Allied invasions at the Pas-de-Calais and Normandy in France, as well as the Balkans, southern France, and Norway. Eventually, the deception increased certainty on the German side by causing them to conclude that Calais was the real invasion site. When the Allies attacked at Normandy, they did so with the advantage of surprise.
Tactics: Military deception may take place at the tactical, operational, and strategic levels of warfare. The five basic tactics include:
Diversion
Use of feints, demonstrations, displays, or ruses to draw the enemy's attention away from a friendly main effort and induce the enemy to concentrate resources at a time and place that is to the enemy's disadvantage.
Example: On the night of 17–18 August 1943, the Royal Air Force carried out Operation Hydra, the bombing of a World War II rocket research center at Peenemünde, a German town on the Baltic Sea. Over a period of time, the British had conditioned the Germans to expect and respond to attacks on Berlin by sending de Havilland Mosquito bombers along the same route towards the city. When the British executed Operation Hydra, the Germans believed eight Mosquitoes flying towards Berlin were the vanguard of yet another attack on the same target. As a result of this diversion, the Germans deployed the majority of their fighter aircraft over Berlin, which gave the British an advantage over Peenemünde.
Feint
An offensive action involving force-on-force contact with the adversary which deceives the adversary as to the location and/or time of the friendly side's main effort. A feint will cause the enemy to concentrate resources at an incorrect time and location. A series of feints will condition the enemy to friendly activities in the same location, causing the enemy to lower their guard or respond ineffectively to the friendly main effort.
Example: In May 1940, Nazi Germany's Army Group B attacked the Netherlands and Belgium. At the same time, Army Group A invaded France by attacking through the Ardennes towards the city of Sedan. Army Group B's attack was a feint intended to disguise Germany's main effort from British and French military leaders.
Demonstration
A demonstration presents a show of force similar to a feint, but avoids actual force-on-force contact with the adversary. The intent of a demonstration is for the adversary to incorrectly determine the time and location of the friendly main effort, which gives the friendly side an advantage by causing the adversary to incorrectly allocate resources, move to the wrong location, or fail to move.
Example: During the Peninsula campaign of the American Civil War, Union commander George B. McClellan believed he faced a stronger Confederate force commanded by John B. Magruder than he actually did. Magruder reinforced McClellan's perception with numerous demonstrations, including parading his soldiers where they could be viewed by Union observers, concealing them as they moved back to the start point, then parading them again within sight of McClellan's observers. McClellan concluded that he was outnumbered and decided to retreat.
Ruse
The deliberate exposure to the enemy of false information that causes the enemy to reach an incorrect conclusion about friendly intentions and capabilities. A ruse is a trick of warfare that relies on guile to contribute to a larger deception plan.
Example: The creation of the fictional Major William Martin ("The Man Who Never Was") as a British officer carrying important World War II battle plans. As part of the Operation Mincemeat deception that concealed the location of the planned Allied invasion of Sicily, the Allies intended for the Nazis to acquire the false documents, which indicated a planned Allied invasion of Greece and the Balkans, and then incorrectly allocate troops and materiel.
Display
The static portrayal of activity, troops, or equipment. A display is intended to deceive the adversary's visual observation capability, causing him to believe the friendly force is in a location other than where it is, that it has a capacity or capability it does not possess, or that it does not have a capacity or capability that it does possess.
Example: The Allied use of "sunshields" in Operation Bertram and inflatable decoys in Operation Bodyguard during World War II to deceive the enemy as to the size, location and objectives of Allied forces.
These basic deception tactics are often used in combination with each other as part of a larger deception plan.
Legality: Adherents to Protocol I (1977) of the Geneva Conventions agree not to engage in acts of perfidy during the conduct of warfare. Perfidious conduct is a deceitful action in which one side promises to act in good faith with the intention of breaking that promise to gain an advantage. Examples include one side raising a flag of truce to entice an enemy to come into the open and take them as prisoners of war, then opening fire on the uncovered adversary. Additional examples include misusing protected signs and symbols, such as the red cross, crescent, and crystal, to conceal weapons and ammunition by making them appear to be a medical facility.
Axioms, maxims, and principles: The development of modern military deception doctrine has led to the codification of several rules and maxims. In U.S. doctrine, three of the most important are expressed as Magruder's Principle, the Jones' Dilemma, and Care in the Placement of Deceptive Material (Avoid Windfalls).
Magruder's Principle: Named for Confederate general John B. Magruder, the principle asserts that it is easier to convince a target into holding on to a pre-existing belief than it is to convince a target of something it does not believe. Examples include the Allies of World War II making use in the Operation Mincemeat deception of the pre-existing German belief that Greece and the Balkans would be their next invasion target after North Africa, when the Allies actually intended to invade Sicily.
Jones' Dilemma: Named for British scientist Reginald Victor Jones, who played an important role in the Allied effort during World War II, the Jones dilemma indicates that the greater the number of intelligence and information gathering and transmitting resources available to the deception target, the more difficult it is to deceive the target. Conversely, the more of the target's intelligence and information systems that are manipulated in a deception plan or denied to the target, the more likely the target is to believe the deception. One reason the World War II Operation Bodyguard deception was accepted as true on the German side is that Germany's ability to acquire information about activities in England was limited, enabling the Allies to manipulate the few German intelligence gathering resources that were available.
Avoid Windfalls: If a deception target obtains deceptive information too easily ("too good to be true"), the target is unlikely to act on it and the deception will fail. This requires deception planners to take care in placing deceptive information so that it will appear to have been acquired in a seemingly natural manner. The deception target is then able to assemble details from multiple sources into a coherent, believable, but untrue story. The best deception plans co-opt the enemy's skepticism through requiring enemy participation, either by expending time and resources in obtaining the deceptive information, or by devoting significant effort to interpreting it. In an example of valid information being dismissed as a windfall, early in World War II a plane carrying German officers to Cologne became lost in bad weather and landed in Belgium. Before being arrested by Belgian authorities, the Germans attempted to burn the papers they were carrying, which included copies of the actual invasion plans for Belgium and the Netherlands. Belgian authorities discounted this true information as false because of the ease with which they obtained it.
Multiple Forms of Surprise: Friendly events about which an adversary can be deceived are described in the mnemonic SALUTE-IS, which stands for Size, Activity, Location, Unit, Time, Equipment, Intent, and Style. The maxim indicates that the more of these categories the friendly side can deceive the adversary about, the more likely the adversary is to believe the deception. Conversely, if there are plans and activities about which the adversary is already aware, attempting to deceive him about them is unlikely to succeed. In Operation Bodyguard, the Germans knew there would be an invasion on the coast of France, that it would happen in 1944, and that it would be based in England. They did not know the exact date and the exact location. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military deception | Belgian authorities discounted this true information as false because of the ease with which they obtained it.
Multiple Forms of Surprise: Friendly events about which an adversary can be deceived are described in the mnemonic SALUTE-IS, which stands for Size, Activity, Location, Unit, Time, Equipment, Intent, and Style. The maxim indicates that the more of these categories the friendly side can deceive the adversary about, the more likely the adversary is to believe the deception. Conversely, if there are plans and activities about which the adversary is already aware, attempting to deceive him about them is unlikely to succeed. In Operation Bodyguard, the Germans knew there would be an invasion on the coast of France, that it would happen in 1944, and that it would be based in England. They did not know the exact date and the exact location. The Allies concentrated their deception on the SALUTE-IS details the Germans did not know about, and did not attempt to deceive them about what they already knew.
Planning process: The doctrine for planning deception has been codified over time. In the U.S. military, this doctrine begins with understanding the deception target's cognitive process. Expressed as "See-Think-Do", this understanding of the adversary considers what information has to be conveyed to the target through what medium for the target to develop the perception of the situation that will cause the enemy to take an action beneficial to the friendly side. In the planning process, "See-Think-Do" is considered in reverse order—what does the friendly side want the enemy to do as a result of the deception, what perceptions will the target have to form to take the action, and what information needs to be transmitted to the target through which medium so that the target will develop the desired perception.
As an example, the intent for Operation Bodyguard was for Germany to allocate forces away from Normandy ("Do"). The perception the Allies wanted to create in the mind of the deception target (Hitler) was that the Allies were planning to invade at Calais ("Think"). The information the Allies conveyed to the target to create the perception included the false radio traffic, dummy equipment displays, and deceptive command messages of the fictional First United States Army Group ("See").
History:
Ancient Egypt: According to a story from an ancient Egyptian papyrus, in about 1450 BC, an Egyptian army under Pharaoh Thutmose III and his general Djehuty besieged the Caananite city of Yapu (later Joppa and now Jaffa). Unable to gain entry, they resorted to deception. Djehuty hid several soldiers in baskets and had the baskets delivered to the town with the message that the Egyptians were admitting defeat and sending tribute. The people of Yapu accepted the gift and celebrated the end of the siege. Once inside the city, the hidden soldiers emerged from the baskets, opened the city gates, and admitted the main Egyptian force. The Egyptians then conquered the city.
Ancient Greece: The Iliad and The Odyssey, epic poems composed between the 9th and 6th centuries BC, are credited to the Ancient Greek author Homer. These poems contain details of the Trojan War, presumed by the Greeks to have been fought in approximately the 13th century BC. The Odyssey provides the details of the Trojan Horse, a successfully executed deception. After several years of stalemate, a Greek leader, Odysseus, devised a deception. Over three days, the Greeks constructed a hollow wooden horse, which they inscribed as an offering to the goddess Athena in prayer for safe return to their homes. The Greeks then pretended to depart the area around Troy, giving the impression that they had sailed for Greece. Rather than risk offending Athena, the Trojans brought the horse into the city. That night, Greek soldiers concealed inside the horse came out of their hiding place and opened the city gates. The main force of Greek soldiers who had actually remained nearby then entered the city and killed the inhabitants.
Ancient Macedon: In 326 BC, the army of Macedon, which was led by Alexander the Great, had advanced through the Middle East to Asia, conquering numerous kingdoms along the way. Alexander planned for battle against the forces of Porus, the king of the region of Pakistan and India that is now Punjab. To confront Porus, Alexander needed to cross the Hydaspes River. Porus used the terrain to his advantage and arranged his forces to prevent Alexander from crossing the river at the most likely fording point. Leading up to the battle, Alexander scouted several alternative fords, but Porus moved each time to counter him.
Alexander eventually located a suitable crossing point approximately 17 miles north of his base. He then led a portion of his army to the crossing site, while his subordinate Craterus kept the entire army's campfires burning within sight of Porus and feigned several river crossings that Porus was able to observe. With Porus distracted, Alexander successfully led his detachment across the river, then marched south to engage in battle. In the Battle of the Hydaspes, Alexander's army had the element of surprise and quickly defeated Porus' troops, while sustaining relatively few casualties on the Macedonian side. Having conquered Porus' kingdom, Alexander then allowed Porus to rule it as one of Alexander's satraps.
Ancient China: In 341 BC, troops under the general Sun Bin of the state of Qi faced battle with the forces of the state of Wei. Knowing that Wei regarded the army of Qi as inferior and cowardly, Sun Bin decided to use Wei's perception to his advantage. When Qi's forces invaded Wei, Sun Bin ordered them to light 100,000 camp fires on the first night. On the second night, they lit 50,000. On the third, 30,000. Sun Bin's deception caused the Wei forces led by general Pang Juan to believe Qi faced mass desertions. Rushing to attack what they believed to be an inferior army, the Wei forces assaulted Qi's troops at a narrow gorge, not knowing Sun Bin's soldiers had prepared it as an ambush site. When Pang Juan's troops reached the gorge they observed that a sign had been posted. Lighting a torch to see the message, the Wei commander read "Pang Juan dies beneath this tree". The lighting of the torch was the signal for Qi to initiate the ambush. Sun Bin's army quickly routed Pang Juan's and Pang Juan committed suicide.
Another well-known deceptive measure from ancient China has come to be known as the Empty Fort Strategy. Employed several times in numerous conflicts, the best-known example is a fictional one contained in a historical novel from the 1320s AD, Romance of the Three Kingdoms. This work, which contains embellished tales of actual Chinese history from 169 to 280 AD, includes the story of general Zhuge Liang of Shu Han employing the Empty Fort Strategy. As recounted in the novel's description of Zhuge Liang's Northern Expeditions, an actual historical event, the forces of general Sima Yi of Cao Wei arrived at Zhuge Liang's location, the city of Xicheng, while the bulk of Zhuge Liang's army was deployed elsewhere. Zhuge Liang instructed the few troops he had on hand to pretend to be townspeople and told them to perform tasks which would make them visible to Sima Yi, including sweeping the town's streets. Zhuge Liang ordered Xichneg's gates to be opened, then took up a visible position on a viewing platform, playing his Guqin while flanked by only two pages. Because Zhuge Liang's reputation as a military leader was so great, Sima Yi assumed Zhuge Liang had prepared an ambush, so he declined to enter Xicheng. Zhuge Liang's deception saved the town and prevented the few soldiers he had with him from being massacred or taken prisoner.
Ancient Carthage: During the Second Punic War, the Carthaginian general Hannibal employed deception during the Battle of Cannae in 216 BC. In preparing to face a Roman force led by Lucius Aemilius Paullus and Gaius Terentius Varro, Hannibal had 40,000 soldiers, as compared to the over 80,000 that had been amassed by Rome. To overcome the Roman advantage in numbers, Hannibal placed his less experienced and disciplined Gauls in the center of his formation, arranged to bulge out towards the Romans. On either side of his line, Hannibal positioned his experienced and disciplined Libyan and Gaetuli infantry. Hannibal intended for the Gauls to give way to the advancing Romans, with the center of his line bending but not breaking. Seeing the Gauls appear to retreat, the Romans would advance into the bowl shape or sack created by the bending of Hannibal's line. Once inside the sack, the African infantry positioned on the left and right would wheel inwards and attack the Roman flanks. In combination with the Carthaginian cavalry, the infantry on the flanks would continue moving until they encircled the Romans and could attack their rear. The battle unfolded as Hannibal had envisioned. Only 10,000 Romans escaped, with the rest either killed or captured. The battle came to be seen as evidence of Hannibal's genius for tactical generalship, while it was among the worst defeats suffered by Ancient Rome.
Ancient Rome: During the Gallic Wars, in 52 BC Roman commander Julius Caesar attempted to engage the forces of tribal leader Vercingetorix in open battle in what is now central France. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military deception | Seeing the Gauls appear to retreat, the Romans would advance into the bowl shape or sack created by the bending of Hannibal's line. Once inside the sack, the African infantry positioned on the left and right would wheel inwards and attack the Roman flanks. In combination with the Carthaginian cavalry, the infantry on the flanks would continue moving until they encircled the Romans and could attack their rear. The battle unfolded as Hannibal had envisioned. Only 10,000 Romans escaped, with the rest either killed or captured. The battle came to be seen as evidence of Hannibal's genius for tactical generalship, while it was among the worst defeats suffered by Ancient Rome.
Ancient Rome: During the Gallic Wars, in 52 BC Roman commander Julius Caesar attempted to engage the forces of tribal leader Vercingetorix in open battle in what is now central France. Vercingetorix kept the River Elave (now Allier) between Caesar's forces and his own. His troops destroyed or removed the bridges and mirrored the movements of Caesar's troops, preventing Caesar from crossing the river. Caesar responded by hiding forty of his sixty cohorts and arranging the remaining twenty to give the appearance of sixty as viewed from the opposite riverbank. The twenty cohorts continued to march along the river, and Vercingetorix's troops continued to mirror their movements. Caesar then led the forty hidden cohorts back to a repairable bridge, had it fixed, led his troops across, and sent for the other twenty cohorts to rejoin him. Now on the same side of the river as Vercingetorix, Caesar was able to engage the Gallic tribes in battle as he intended.
Mongol Empire: The Mongol Empire frequently used deception to aid its military success. A favored tactic was to exaggerate the size of their army, which would cause their enemies to surrender or flee. When he fought the Naimans in 1204, Chinggis Khan ordered his soldiers to light five campfires each, giving the impression of a more numerous army. In 1258 Möngke Khan invaded Sichuan with 40,000 soldiers, and spread rumors of 100,000 in an effort to intimidate his enemy.
When confronting numerically superior forces, the Mongols often sent troops behind their own lines to raise dust with branches tied to their horses' tails, which created the impression that reinforcements were en route. Mongol soldiers had more than one horse each, and to exaggerate the size of their army, they would compel prisoners or civilians to ride their spare horses within sight of the enemy, or mount dummies on their spare horses. To make their forces appear smaller, the Mongols would ride in single file, minimizing dust and making the hoofprints of their horses more difficult to count. Mongol armies also used the feigned retreat. A typical tactic was to deploy the mangudai, a vanguard unit that would charge the enemy, break up its formation, and then fall back in an attempt to draw the enemy into a position more favorable to the Mongols.
Middle Ages: Examples of deception occurred during the Crusades. In 1271, Sultan Baybars captured the formidable Krak des Chevaliers by handing the besieged knights a letter, supposedly from their commander, ordering them to surrender. The letter was fake, but the knights believed it was genuine and capitulated.
In 1401, during the Glyndŵr Rising, the Tudors of Wales were seeking a revocation of the price that Henry Percy had placed on their heads. After deciding to capture Percy's Conwy Castle, one member of the Tudor faction posed as a carpenter, gained access, and then admitted his compatriots. The successful deception was in part responsible for the creation of England's Tudor dynasty.
Renaissance: In an event from the early 1480s that was recounted in Washington Irving's Conquest of Granada, during the Granada War, the Alhama de Granada was besieged by Moors. During the siege, a portion of the fortress' outer wall was destroyed after the earth beneath it was washed away in a violent storm. To conceal the breach, the Conde de Tendilla, leader of the Spanish defenders, directed the erection of a cloth screen. The screen deceived the Moors because it was painted to resemble stone, and no Moorish besiegers ventured close enough to spot the fakery. The wall was repaired over the next several days, and the Moors did not learn of the gap in the Alhama's defenses.
Henry VIII of England led troops on the European mainland during the War of the League of Cambrai. On 4 September 1513, Henry's forces began to besiege the city of Tournai in what is now Belgium. The site of a thriving tapestry industry and home to many well-known painters, Tournai prolonged the siege by using painted canvas that resembled trenchworks to exaggerate the strength of its defenses. As a result of this deception, the city held out for several days longer than expected and obtained favorable terms when it surrendered.
Colonial Africa: In 1659, the kingdom of Denmark–Norway constructed Fort Christiansborg near what is now Accra in Ghana. Used to control commerce in slaves, as well as raw materials including gold and ivory, the site changed hands several times between Denmark–Norway, Portugal, and Sweden, sometimes by force, sometimes by purchase. In 1692, Nana Asamani, the king of the Akwamu people, planned to capture the fort from Denmark–Norway. Disguising himself as a cook and interpreter, he obtained work at the fort, where over the next year he became proficient in the Danish language and conducted reconnaissance to learn about the activities of the facility's occupants and the people with whom they traded.
After gaining familiarity with Fort Christiansborg's occupants and operations, in 1693 Asamani informed the Danish traders who occupied it about a group of Akwamu who desired to purchase weapons and ammunition, and suggested they were so anxious to buy that the Danes should inflate their prices. Lured by the prospect of large profits, the Danes bartered with the 80 Akwamu that Asamani had brought to the fort. When the Danes allowed the Akwamu to inspect rifles and prepare to test-fire them, the Akwamu instead used the guns to commence an attack on the Danes. Caught by surprise, the Danes were quickly overpowered and ejected from Fort Christiansborg. The Akwamu occupied the post for a year before Asamani agreed to sell it back to Denmark–Norway. Asamani kept the keys as a trophy, and they are still in the possession of the Akwamu.
French and Indian War: During the Seven Years' War in North America (known in the United States as the French and Indian War), British commander James Wolfe attempted throughout the summer of 1759 to force French commander Louis-Joseph de Montcalm to come out of his well-defended position in Quebec City. When artillery fire that destroyed most of the city did not produce the desired effect, Wolfe employed a deception strategy called "uproar east, attack west" Wolfe ordered Admiral Charles Saunders to move the British fleet on the Saint Lawrence River to a position opposite one of Montcalm's main camps east of Quebec City. This demonstration gave the appearance of preparations for an upcoming attack. Montcalm was deceived, and moved troops to guard against a British assault from that location.
Wolfe's soldiers at Quebec City capitalized on the favorable balance of forces created by the deception. First, they opened a road from the riverbank to the city heights. Next, they deployed into battle formation on a farmer's field near the city walls. Caught by surprise, Montcalm knew he would not be able to withstand a siege and had no choice but to fight. On 13 September 1759, the French were decisively beaten in the Battle of the Plains of Abraham. The loss of Quebec led to defeat in the war and France was forced to cede Canada to the British.
American Revolution:
Siege of Boston: As head of the Continental Army, George Washington successfully used deception to equalize the odds in the fight against the larger, better-equipped, and better-trained British army and its mercenary allies. During the Siege of Boston from April 1775 to March 1776, the newly organized Continental Army suffered from numerous equipment and supply shortages. Among the most critical was a lack of gunpowder, which was so acute that in a battle, Washington's troops would be able to fire no more than nine bullets per man. To conceal the lack of gunpowder from the British, Washington's quartermaster soldiers filled gunpowder casks with sand and shipped them from Providence, Rhode Island to the Continental Army's depots. The deception fooled British spies, and British commanders decided not to risk an attack during the siege.
Battle of Long Island: After the Patriot defeat at the Battle of Long Island in late August 1776, Washington's forces retreated to Brooklyn Heights, with a superior British force surrounding them on three sides and their backs to the East River. The British expected Washington would find his position untenable and surrender. Washington instead arranged for a flotilla of small boats to ferry his 9,000 troops across the river to the relative safety of Manhattan Island. Moving under cover of darkness, Washington's troops withdrew unit by unit to avoid the appearance that a general retreat was taking place. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military deception | To conceal the lack of gunpowder from the British, Washington's quartermaster soldiers filled gunpowder casks with sand and shipped them from Providence, Rhode Island to the Continental Army's depots. The deception fooled British spies, and British commanders decided not to risk an attack during the siege.
Battle of Long Island: After the Patriot defeat at the Battle of Long Island in late August 1776, Washington's forces retreated to Brooklyn Heights, with a superior British force surrounding them on three sides and their backs to the East River. The British expected Washington would find his position untenable and surrender. Washington instead arranged for a flotilla of small boats to ferry his 9,000 troops across the river to the relative safety of Manhattan Island. Moving under cover of darkness, Washington's troops withdrew unit by unit to avoid the appearance that a general retreat was taking place. The wheels of supply wagons and gun carriages were wrapped in rags to muffle their noise, and troops ordered to remain silent to avoid alerting the nearby British. Rear guard units kept campfires blazing through the night. These measures fooled British scouts into thinking the Patriot army was still on Brooklyn Heights. A morning fog obscured visibility, which helped the Continentals complete their retreat, and all 9,000 were safely ferried across the river. When the British advanced, they were surprised to find the American positions completely empty.
Battle of Trenton: Prior to the Battle of Trenton on Christmas Day 1776, Washington used a spy, John Honeyman to gain information about the positions of Britain's Hessian mercenaries. Posing as a Loyalist butcher and weaver, Honeyman traded with British and Hessian troops and acquired useful intelligence. At the same time, he aided Washington's plan by spreading disinformation that convinced the British and Hessians that Continental Army morale was low and an end-of-year attack against British positions unlikely. Honeyman's deceptive information enabled Washington to gain the element of surprise, and his troops routed the stunned Hessians.
Battle of Princeton: After the Battle of Trenton, the British dispatched a large army under General Charles Cornwallis to chase down Washington's smaller force. At the 2 January 1777 Battle of the Assunpink Creek, the Continental troops under Washington successfully repulsed three British attacks on their positions. Darkness ended the British attacks and they planned to resume the following morning. That night, Washington again resorted to the same deceptive tactics he had used in Brooklyn, including muffling the wheels of wagons and gun carriages to reduce noise, and leaving a rear guard to keep campfires burning. The British were again fooled, and Washington was able to move his army into a position from which he defeated the British at the Battle of Princeton on 3 January.
Siege of Fort Stanwix: In August 1777, the first Patriot attempt to relieve the Siege of Fort Stanwix, New York was blocked by the British as the result of the Battle of Oriskany. A second attempt, led by Benedict Arnold succeeded in part because of a successful effort to deceive the British besiegers. Arnold dispatched a messenger, Hon Yost Schuyler to the British lines. Schuyler was a Loyalist and regarded by the British army's Mohawk allies as a prophet because of his strange dress and conduct. To ensure his good conduct, Arnold held Schuyler's brother as a hostage. Upon reaching the British positions outside Fort Stanwix, Schuyler informed the Mohawk that Arnold's relief column was nearer than it was, and that it was much larger than it actually was. The Mohawk initially disbelieved Schuyler, but assumed he was telling the truth after other American Indian messengers sent by Arnold began to arrive with the same information. The Mohawk decided to leave, forcing British commander Barry St. Leger to order a retreat. The end of the siege also ended British attempts to control the Mohawk Valley.
Battle of Cowpens: In the fall of 1780, Continental Army general Nathanael Greene, commander of the Southern Department, carried out a harassment campaign against the British in North and South Carolina. One of Greene's subordinates, Daniel Morgan, commanded a force of approximately 600, and was tasked with harassing the enemy in the backcountry of South Carolina. In January 1781, as a British force commanded by Banastre Tarleton closed in on Morgan near Cowpens, South Carolina on the Broad River, he opted to fight rather than risk being attacked while attempting to cross the water.
Knowing the British regarded Patriot militia as inferior, Morgan used this perception to his advantage by arranging his troops in three lines. The first was sharpshooters, who provided harassing fire and attempted to pick off British officers. The sharpshooters would then fall back to the second line, which would consist of militiamen. The militia would fire two volleys, then feign a rout and pretend to flee. If the British believed they had caused a panic in the militiamen, they would charge forward. But instead of catching up to the fleeing militia, they would run into the third line—Continental Army soldiers commanded by John Eager Howard. As a reserve, Morgan had a small Continental cavalry force commanded by William Washington.
Morgan's deception proved decisive. At the Battle of Cowpens on 17 January 1781, the British under Tarleton launched a frontal assault. The militia feigned retreat, and Tarleton's troops charged forward. As planned, they were met by Howard's troops, then surprised by Washington's cavalry charging into their flanks. The British lost over 100 killed, over 200 wounded, and over 500 captured. Morgan's command sustained only 12 killed and 60 wounded.
French Revolutionary Wars: Napoleon Bonaparte made significant use of deception during his campaigns. At the 1796 Battle of Lodi, he used deception to achieve a successful crossing of the River Po. As a diversion, Napoleon mounted a token crossing attempt against a strong Austrian force under Johann Peter Beaulieu. Meanwhile, the bulk of his force moved upriver and obtained an uncontested bridgehead at Piacenza. Once it had crossed the river, Napoleon's force attacked the enemy's rear guard in a tactic he referred to as manoeuvre sur les derrières ("maneuvering behind").
War of the First Coalition: During the War of the First Coalition, France attempted an invasion of Britain. During the February 1797 Battle of Fishguard, Colonel William Tate an Irish-American commanding French and Irish troops, landed near Fishguard in Wales. English and Welsh militia and civilians under the command of John Campbell, 1st Baron Cawdor hastily assembled to defend the town. When discipline began to break down among Tate's troops and their attempted invasion slowed down, Tate asked for surrender terms that would permit his command to leave. Instead of offering terms, Cawdor demanded unconditional surrender. As Tate and his subordinates considered Cawdor's demands overnight, Cawdor backed up his bluff with several deceptive measures. According to local lore, these included having women in Traditional Welsh costumes and Welsh hats line the cliffs near the French camp. from a distance, the women appeared to be British soldiers in red coats and Shakos. Convinced that he was outnumbered, Tate surrendered and his troops were taken prisoner.
First Barbary War: In October, 1803 the frigate USS Philadelphia ran aground off the North African port of Tripoli during the First Barbary War and was captured by the Tripolitan forces. In February 1804, a U.S. military detachment under the command of Stephen Decatur Jr., was assigned to retrieve the ship or destroy it to keep Tripoli from putting it into service. The raiding party deceived the Tripolitan authorities by sailing into Tripoli harbor aboard USS Intrepid, a captured Tripolitan ketch which they disguised as a Maltese merchant ship. The ship's Sicilian harbor pilot spoke to the Tripolitan authorities in Arabic, claimed the ship had lost its anchors in a storm, and sought permission to tie up next to the captured Philadelphia. Permission was granted and Decatur and his crew overwhelmed the small force guarding Philadelphia, using only swords and pikes to avoid gunshots that would alert authorities on shore of their presence. Unable to sail Philadelphia away, Decatur and his crew burned it, then safely escaped.
War of 1812:
First American Invasion of Canada: In July 1812, General William Hull was at Fort Detroit as the British fortified a defensive position across the Detroit River in Windsor, Ontario. Hull decided to move the British to Fort Malden, further away from Detroit, so that he could seize the defenses in Windsor. To implement his plan, Hull resorted to deception, which began when his troops collected all the boats and canoes they could find. On 11 July 1812, Hull sent some boats down the river to Springwells, south of Detroit, in full view of the British. At the same time, the American regiment commanded by Duncan McArthur marched from Detroit to Springwells, also observed by the British.
With the British now anticipating an American crossing south of Detroit, a second American force moved north in the dark until they reached Bloody Run, a crossing point a mile and a half north of Fort Detroit and opposite the Ontario town of Sandwich. Finding no activity at Springwells, the British believed the Americans had already crossed the river and marched on Fort Malden. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military deception | Hull decided to move the British to Fort Malden, further away from Detroit, so that he could seize the defenses in Windsor. To implement his plan, Hull resorted to deception, which began when his troops collected all the boats and canoes they could find. On 11 July 1812, Hull sent some boats down the river to Springwells, south of Detroit, in full view of the British. At the same time, the American regiment commanded by Duncan McArthur marched from Detroit to Springwells, also observed by the British.
With the British now anticipating an American crossing south of Detroit, a second American force moved north in the dark until they reached Bloody Run, a crossing point a mile and a half north of Fort Detroit and opposite the Ontario town of Sandwich. Finding no activity at Springwells, the British believed the Americans had already crossed the river and marched on Fort Malden. Assuming Fort Malden was vulnerable, the British troops in Sandwich marched south, and in the morning the Americans at Bloody Run crossed to Sandwich unopposed. After landing in Sandwich, the Americans then marched from Sandwich to Windsor and seized the British defensive works.
Retaking the brig Nerina: In July 1812, the British warship HMS Belvidera captured the American brig Nerina, which had sailed for New York City from Newry, Ireland without knowing that war had been declared in June. Nerina's crew was transferred to a British ship, except for the captain, James Stewart, who remained on board with a British prize crew which intended to sail Nerina to Halifax, Nova Scotia so a prize court could adjudicate the British claim. When the British ship was out of sight, Stewart suggested to the prize master the propriety of opening the hatches to air out Nerina's hold. The master gave the order, and the fifty American passengers Stewart had hidden belowdecks before Nerina was boarded rushed out and retook the ship. Stewart's successful deception enabled him to resume command and sail Nerina to New London, Connecticut, which he reached on 4 August.
Siege of Detroit: In a notable deception that occurred during the War of 1812's Siege of Detroit, British Major General Isaac Brock and Native American chief Tecumseh used a variety of tricks, including letters they allowed to be intercepted which exaggerated the size of their forces, disguising Brock's militia contingent as more fearsome regular army soldiers, and repeatedly marching the same body of Native Americans past U.S. observers to make it appear they were more numerous than they were. Though he had superior troop strength, the U.S. commander, Brigadier General William Hull, believed he faced overwhelming numbers of British regular troops and hordes of uncontrollable Indians. Fearing a massacre, in August 1812 Hull surrendered the town and the attached fort. Most of his militia were allowed to return home, while his regular army soldiers were held as prisoners of war.
Capture of brigs Catharine and Rose: American Lieutenant John Downes was in command of Georgiana as part of Captain David Porter's naval force, which raided British shipping in the Galapagos chain. On 28 May 1813, lookouts on Georgiana spotted two British ships, Catharine and Rose, off James Island. Resorting to deception, Downes raised the British flag, which tricked the British whalers into thinking they were not under threat. When the Americans were within range they lowered a few boats filled with men, which rowed to Catharine and Rose and captured them without resistance. The British captains revealed to Downes that they had no idea of the attack until the Americans were already on deck.
Capture of HMS Eagle: In 1813, the British Royal Navy continued to blockade America's major ports. The British flagship HMS Poictiers, commanded by Commodore J.B. Beresford maintained station just outside Sandy Hook on Lower New York Bay, supported by the schooner HMS Eagle. Eagle had a notorious reputation among local fishermen for seizing both fishing boat crews and the boats' valuable cargoes. John Percival of the United States Navy volunteered to end the threat, and acquired a fishing boat named Yankee. On the morning of 4 July 1813, he concealed 34 armed volunteers in the hold, while he and two volunteers stayed on deck dressed as fishermen. Percival then sailed Yankee as though it was departing on a fishing voyage. Eagle's commander spotted Yankee and sailed in close so he could order it to transfer the livestock it carried on deck to the nearby Poictiers. Percival pretended to comply, and when Eagle was less than ten feet away, he signaled his volunteers to launch a surprise attack by shouting "Lawrence!" in honor of slain U.S. Navy Captain James Lawrence. Percival's volunteers poured out on deck and began firing. Eagle's crew were taken by surprise and fled below deck. One of Eagle's crew struck her colors, thus surrendering to Yankee. Two British sailors were killed and another received mortal wounds, but there were no American casualties. Percival brought the captured Eagle into port and delivered his prisoners to New York City's Whitehall Street docks as thousands of Americans were celebrating Independence Day.
Ambush at Black Swamp Road: In July 1813, Benjamin Forsyth, one of the company commanders in the American Regiment of Riflemen wanted to enlist the aid of Seneca warriors during planned military operations against the British near Newark, Ontario (now Niagara-on-the-Lake). Forsyth and the Seneca leaders agreed to work together to ambush the Mohawks who were allied with the British. American riflemen and Seneca warriors hid on both sides of the Black Swamp Road. A few Seneca horse riders rode out to gain the Mohawks' attention, then conducted a feigned retreat. After the Seneca horsemen passed the hidden American riflemen and Senecas, Forsyth blew his bugle as a signal. The concealed Americans and Senecas rose from their hiding places and fired into the pursuing Mohawks. Fifteen Mohawks were killed and thirteen surrendered, including a British interpreter. A few Mohawks escaped, while the Americans and their Seneca allies marched their prisoners back to American lines.
Battle of Fort Stephenson: In August 1813, American Major George Croghan was in charge of 160 soldiers at Fort Stephenson, a base on the Sandusky River in what is now Sandusky County, Ohio which guarded a nearby supply depot. British commander Henry Procter arrived with a superior force that included at least 500 British regulars, 800 American Indians under Major Robert Dickson, and at least 2,000 more under Tecumseh. Procter met Croghan under a flag of truce and urged him to surrender, but Croghan refused. The British then bombarded the fort by artillery and gunboat, to little effect. Croghan returned fire with his single cannon, "Old Betsy" while frequently changing its position in the hopes that the British would believe he had more than one artillery piece. When Croghan's supply of ammunition ran low, he ordered his men to cease fire.
Croghan deduced that the British were going to strike in full force at the northwestern angle of the fort, so he ordered his men to conceal "Old Betsy" in a blockhouse at that location. The next morning, the British feinted twice at the southern angle, then approached the northwest one. American gunners surprised them by uncovering "Old Betsy" and firing at point blank range, which destroyed the British column. Procter withdrew and sailed away. Procter reported British casualties as 23 killed, 35 wounded, and 28 missing. American casualties were only one killed and seven wounded. Croghan was celebrated as a national hero and promoted to lieutenant colonel.
Ambush at Odelltown: On 28 June 1814, Benjamin Forsyth, commander of the American Regiment of Riflemen, advanced from Chazy, New York to Odelltown, Lower Canada intending to draw a British force of Canadians and American Indian allies into an ambush. Upon arriving at the British positions, Forsyth sent a few men forward as decoys to make contact. When the British responded, the American decoys conducted a feigned retreat, which successfully lured 150 Canadians and American Indian allies into the ambush site.
During the ensuing fight, Forsyth needlessly exposed himself by stepping on a log to watch the attack and was shot and killed. Forsyth's riflemen, still hidden and now enraged over the death of their commander, rose from their covered positions and fired a devastating volley. The British were surprised by the ambush and retreated in confusion, leaving seventeen dead on the field. Forsyth was the only American casualty. Even though Forsyth was killed, his feigned retreat and ambush succeeded at inflicting heavy casualties on the British force.
Battle of Lundy's Lane: In the July 1814 Battle of Lundy's Lane, American forces used deception at several critical points. When troops under Winfield Scott returned from attacks on British formations they were twice mistaken in the dark for a British unit and allowed to pass. In one incident, a British leader asked who was approaching by shouting "The 89th?" The Americans recognized the opportunity to pass unmolested and called back "The 89th!"
In another event, American Captain Ambrose Spencer saw a unit approaching in the dark. He rode up and called out "What regiment is that?" "The Royal Scots, Sir!" a Scottish officer replied. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military deception | The British were surprised by the ambush and retreated in confusion, leaving seventeen dead on the field. Forsyth was the only American casualty. Even though Forsyth was killed, his feigned retreat and ambush succeeded at inflicting heavy casualties on the British force.
Battle of Lundy's Lane: In the July 1814 Battle of Lundy's Lane, American forces used deception at several critical points. When troops under Winfield Scott returned from attacks on British formations they were twice mistaken in the dark for a British unit and allowed to pass. In one incident, a British leader asked who was approaching by shouting "The 89th?" The Americans recognized the opportunity to pass unmolested and called back "The 89th!"
In another event, American Captain Ambrose Spencer saw a unit approaching in the dark. He rode up and called out "What regiment is that?" "The Royal Scots, Sir!" a Scottish officer replied. Spencer called out "Halt, Royal Scots!" and then rode off. Believing a superior officer had given them a command, the regiment stopped, then remained in place until a real British officer found them and gave them new orders.
In a third incident, British soldier Shadrach Byfield reported that an individual in a company of hidden Americans impersonated a British officer and told the British troops opposing them to form up and stand tall in preparation for inspection. The British troops believed a superior officer was addressing them and stood, enabling the Americans to fire a volley, after which they escaped retaliation by scattering in the dark.
Battle of Conjocta Creek: In August 1814, American Major Lodowick Morgan of the Regiment of Riflemen, who was based in Buffalo, New York, correctly deduced that the British were going to attack Buffalo from Canada by crossing the bridge at Conjocta Creek (also called Scajaquada). Morgan and 240 riflemen marched to the point where the road from Black Rock crossed the Conjocta. They sabotaged the bridge by pulling up a number of planks, then built breastworks at the south side. Afterwards, they continued on to Black Rock. Once at Black Rock, Morgan's troops marched back the way they came while playing music and making as much noise as possible to gain the attention of the British and make them believe the Americans were headed to Buffalo.
Once out of sight, Morgan and his men marched secretly through the woods to occupy the breastworks they had constructed on the south bank of the creek. The unsuspecting British arrived at the bridge and discovered the sabotage. While they halted to consider their options, Morgan began the Battle of Conjocta Creek by blowing a whistle to signal his soldiers, who fired a devastating volley. The British sought cover on the north bank and fired back, but the American troops remained protected behind their breastworks. The British attempted an assault on the breastworks, which the Americans repulsed. The British then attempted a flanking maneuver, which the Americans also repulsed. Unable to proceed past the Conjocta, the British retreated back to Canada. The Americans lost two killed and eight wounded, while the British sustained twelve killed and twenty-one wounded.
American Civil War:
Peninsula campaign: In the American Civil War's Peninsula campaign, Union commander George B. McClellan was the victim of a deception executed by the forces under Confederate commander John B. Magruder during the 1862 Siege of Yorktown. Magruder, who had acted in and produced plays, used his knowledge of visual and audio effects to deceive McClellan into believing Magruder's force was larger than it was. These included placing straw dummy crewmen alongside Quaker guns—logs painted black to resemble cannons—in his defensive works. Magruder interspersed his Quaker guns with the few real cannons he possessed, making his artillery seem more numerous than it was. In addition, he used shouted orders and bugle calls to march his relatively small force of about 10,000 in front of Union positions until they were out of sight, then had them loop around unseen and march through the same area again, making his troop strength seem greater than it was. Magruder's elaborate charade convinced McClellan, who outnumbered Magruder by ten to one, that he faced a more formidable opponent than was actually the case, which caused him to delay attacking. McClellan's delay allowed Confederate reinforcements to arrive, causing him to retreat back to Washington, D.C.
Vicksburg campaign: In early 1863, Union naval commander David Dixon Porter lost a new ironclad, USS Indianola after it ran aground on the Mississippi River near Vicksburg, Mississippi and was captured by Confederate forces. As the Confederates attempted to repair and refloat the damaged ship so they could use it against Porter's fleet, Porter executed a deception to thwart their effort. His men constructed a giant dummy ironclad from barges, barrels, and other materials that were on hand. Made to resemble a new, real ironclad, USS Lafayette (1848), the dummy was painted black to give it a sinister appearance and flew the Jolly Roger pirate flag. Porter's sailors floated the dummy, christened Black Terror, downstream at night, and it appeared impervious to Confederate shore battery fire. Exaggerated rumors about the seemingly indestructible super ship quickly spread to Vicksburg and reached salvage crews working on Indianola. In a panic, they halted their efforts, blew up Indianola, and abandoned the wreckage. When Black Terror ran aground and was inspected by Confederates, local newspapers roundly criticized military and naval commanders for being unable to tell the difference between a real warship and a fake.
Second Boer War: During the Second Boer War, British commander Robert Baden-Powell made extensive use of deception during his October 1899 to May 1900 defense of Mafeking. After he occupied the town with a force of 1,500, Baden-Powell faced 8,000 Boers who intended to begin a siege. As the Boers advanced, Baden-Powell wrote a letter to a friend in Transvaal whom he knew had died, which contained news of the imminent approach of more British troops. Baden-Powell intended for the letter to be intercepted and when it fell into Boer hands, they believed it was real. As a result, they diverted 1,200 troops to guard the approaches against Baden-Powell's fictional reinforcements. Baden-Powell's troops also set up fake defensive works at a distance from the town itself, including one marked as his command post, which further diverted Boer attention. In addition, he had local residents execute deceptive tactics, including carrying boxes of sand labeled "mines" in places where they could be observed. Word of these supposed mines reached the Boers, and when they soon afterwards observed supposed minefields appear around the edge of the town, they assumed the danger was real. These deceptive measures held off a Boer attack, which allowed Baden-Powell time to improve Mafeking's defences. As a result of his effort, the British were able to hold out until reinforcements arrived and lifted the siege.
World War I:
Gallipoli campaign: During World War I, deception shifted from the tactical level to the strategic as modernized warfare and advances in technology increased the size and complexity of battlefield organizations. Several methods of deception were used by the Australian and New Zealand Army Corps (Anzac) during its withdrawal from Gallipoli in Turkey, which was completed on 20 December 1915. As early as mid-November, artillery and sniper activity went silent for periods of time, giving the impression that the Anzacs were preparing to remain in the defense with limited resupply of ammunition during the upcoming winter. To cover the removal of the last troops, "drip rifles" were prepared to fire about 20 minutes after they were set, with a water can leaking into a second can that was tied to a rifle trigger. When the second can was full, the weight caused the unmanned rifle to fire. The sporadic firing created by this ruse convinced the Turks that the Anzac troops were still manning their defenses. In addition, Anzac troops used dummy artillery and mannequins to further enhance the impression that soldiers remained in their positions. As a result of these deceptive measures, both the main body of Anzac troops and the rear guard retreated unmolested. Given the failure of the Gallipoli effort from the Anzac perspective, the evacuation was considered the most successful part of the entire campaign.
Western front: In March 1917, leaders of the German Army on the Western Front decided to withdraw from their positions in France to the Hindenburg Line, a 90-mile long defensive position that ran from Arras to Laffaux. With Germany unable to conduct an offensive because of personnel losses earlier in the war, commanders intended for unrestricted submarine warfare and strategic bombing to weaken the British and French, giving the German army time to recuperate. In addition, the move to the Hindenburg Line supported the plan of commanders Paul von Hindenburg and Erich Ludendorff to shift the German focus to Russia and the Eastern Front. The withdrawal to the new defensive line would shorten Germany's front by 25 miles, enabling 13 divisions to be employed against the Russians.
Under the plan code named Operation Alberich, the Germans abandoned their old positions in a staged series that began in late February. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military deception | Western front: In March 1917, leaders of the German Army on the Western Front decided to withdraw from their positions in France to the Hindenburg Line, a 90-mile long defensive position that ran from Arras to Laffaux. With Germany unable to conduct an offensive because of personnel losses earlier in the war, commanders intended for unrestricted submarine warfare and strategic bombing to weaken the British and French, giving the German army time to recuperate. In addition, the move to the Hindenburg Line supported the plan of commanders Paul von Hindenburg and Erich Ludendorff to shift the German focus to Russia and the Eastern Front. The withdrawal to the new defensive line would shorten Germany's front by 25 miles, enabling 13 divisions to be employed against the Russians.
Under the plan code named Operation Alberich, the Germans abandoned their old positions in a staged series that began in late February. The majority of their movement occurred between 16 and 21 March, and the full German withdrawal to the Hindenburg Line was completed on 5 April. The German withdrawal included numerous efforts to deceive the Allies, among them night movements and skeleton crews who remained behind to provide screening fire from machine guns, rifles, and mortars. The deception activities proved generally successful, and Germany completed its withdrawal to the Hindenburg Line largely unmolested.
In August 1918, the Allies intended to launch two offensives, one led by British Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig, Commander-in-chief (C-in-C) of the British Expeditionary Force (BEF), near Amiens, and the other by American General John J. Pershing, C-in-C of the American Expeditionary Forces (AEF), near Saint-Mihiel. Prior to the Battle of Amiens, Haig's subordinate, General Henry Rawlinson, commander of the British Fourth Army, employed several deceptive tactics, including periods of radio silence by units involved in the coming attack and false radio traffic from other parts of the British lines. In addition, Rawlinson delayed troop movement for as long as possible prior to the start of the attack to prevent German observers from obtaining data on his disposition of forces, and moved troops and materiel almost entirely at night. The British offensive was immediately successful because they had maintained the element of surprise. British troops and tanks advanced eight miles, captured 400 artillery pieces, and inflicted 27,000 casualties, including 12,000 prisoners.
In an effort to gain an advantage near Saint-Mihiel, U.S. planners including Arthur L. Conger attempted to deceive the Germans into believing the American attack would come at Belfort, 180 miles to the south. False orders left where spies or informants could find them and staff officer reconnaissance activity created the appearance that the U.S. intended to conduct operations in and around Belfort. Pershing gained surprise at Saint-Mihiel and his offensive was successful. In 1926, Conger discovered from a former German officer that while the Belfort Ruse had not been completely successful, it had aided Pershing. Concerned that an Allied attack in the Belfort area was at least a possibility, many German units that could have reinforced German lines in the Saint-Mihiel area delayed movement from their rear area positions near Saint-Mihiel until it was too late. As a result of the success of Pershing's offensive, they did not have time to execute their withdrawal plans, and either abandoned their weapons and fled or were taken as prisoners.
Eastern front: At a war council held with senior commanders and the czar in April 1916, Russian General Aleksei Brusilov presented a plan to the Stavka (the Russian high command), proposing a massive offensive by his Southwestern Front against the Austro-Hungarian forces in Galicia. Brusilov's plan aimed to take some of the pressure off French and British armies in France and the Italian Army along the Isonzo Front and if possible to knock Austria-Hungary out of the war. As the Austrian army was heavily engaged in Italy, the Russian army enjoyed a significant numerical advantage in the Galician sector.
Brusilov's plan was approved, and he massed 40 infantry divisions and 15 cavalry divisions in preparation for the Brusilov Offensive. Deception efforts included false radio traffic, false orders sent by messengers who were intended to be captured, and equipment displays including dummy artillery to mislead Austria-Hungary as to the location of his units. Beginning in June 1916, Brusilov's surprise offensive caused Germany to halt its Western front attack on Verdun and transfer considerable forces to the Eastern front. It also severely reduced the fighting effectiveness of Austria-Hungary's forces, effectively depriving Germany of its most important ally.
Palestine: In October 1917, Edmund Allenby, commander of Britain's Egyptian Expeditionary Force, planned to attack the Ottomans in southern Palestine. Rather than repeat previous frontal assaults at Gaza, which had been unsuccessful, he planned a flanking attack at Beersheba. As part of the larger deception effort to convince the Ottomans that Gaza was his objective, an officer under Allenby's command executed a deceptive tactic now known as the Haversack Ruse. In this effort, usually attributed to Richard Meinertzhagen, the officer intentionally dropped a knapsack which contained false plans for an attack on Gaza, which the Ottomans recovered. As a result of the Haversack Ruse and other deceptive measures, the British surprised the Ottomans and achieved victory at the 31 October 1917 Battle of Beersheba.
Allenby again resorted to deception as he prepared to attack the Ottomans again at Tel Megiddo in September 1918. In preparation for the battle, British forces concealed the movement of three cavalry and several infantry divisions from the eastern end of the front line, the Jordan Valley, to the western end on the Mediterranean Sea. The single mounted division that remained in the east, reinforced with infantry, maintained the illusion that the Jordan Valley remained fully garrisoned. Deceptive measures included marching infantry into the valley during the day when they could be observed by the Ottomans, transporting them out by truck at night, then marching them back the next day. The tents of the departed units were left standing, and dummy horses, mules, and soldiers made from canvas and straw were displayed throughout the encampment. In addition, mules dragged branches up and down the valley to generate thick clouds of dust, giving the impression of more animals and men on hand than there actually were. Though the deceptions did not induce Otto Liman von Sanders, the commander of the Ottoman Army, to concentrate his forces on the eastern flank, as Allenby hoped, the Ottomans could not be certain of his intentions, so they could not mass their forces. With the Ottomans spread throughout their line, Allenby's forces had a numerical advantage at the 19 to 25 September Battle of Megiddo (1918), and attained victory over the Ottomans.
At sea: Britain's Royal Navy made extensive use of Q-ships to combat German submarines. Camouflaged to look like a civilian sailing vessel or decrepit tramp steamer, the Q-ships were decoys that carried concealed heavy guns. The function of the Q-ships was to appear to be an undefended target. If successful, German submarines would be lured to the surface to sink or destroy the ship by using deck guns, enabling the submarine to conserve its limited supply of torpedoes for use against warships. If a German U-boat surfaced, the Q-ship would immediately display the Royal Navy's White Ensign flag in compliance with international law, then deploy its guns against the submarine. In 150 engagements, British Q-ships destroyed 14 U-boats and damaged 60. 27 of the 200 Q-ships the British employed were lost to German attacks.
World War II:
Eastern Front: Before Operation Barbarossa in June 1941, the German High Command explained away the creation of a massive force arrayed to invade the Soviet Union by informing Soviet leaders including Joseph Stalin that it was training in preparation for an invasion of the United Kingdom. The deception worked, and Stalin continued to ignore German preparations until after the invasion of the Soviet Union had actually commenced.
When the Allies on the Western Front planned the Normandy invasion for June 1944, the Soviet Union simultaneously planned for a major Eastern front offensive against German forces. Called Operation Bagration, this Soviet attack was designed to catch the Germans unprepared in Belorussia, at the center of their lines. To gain and maintain the element of surprise for Bagration, the Soviets executed a successful deception effort. The overall intent was to make German commanders believe the Soviets would only defend in the center of the front (Belorussia), while launching a major offensive to the south in Ukraine and Crimea and a feint to the north in Finland. Soviet military leaders successfully masked preparations for action in Belorussia and limited German reconnaissance in the center of the front while drawing German attention to deceptive activities in the north and south. Germany was caught off-guard at the start of the Bagration offensive on 23 June, and the Soviets quickly pushed retreating German forces from the Soviet Union all the way to Poland.
Western Front:
Africa: From early 1941, Dudley Clarke commanded the 'A' Force, based in Cairo, Egypt, which developed much of the war's Allied deception strategy. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military deception | To gain and maintain the element of surprise for Bagration, the Soviets executed a successful deception effort. The overall intent was to make German commanders believe the Soviets would only defend in the center of the front (Belorussia), while launching a major offensive to the south in Ukraine and Crimea and a feint to the north in Finland. Soviet military leaders successfully masked preparations for action in Belorussia and limited German reconnaissance in the center of the front while drawing German attention to deceptive activities in the north and south. Germany was caught off-guard at the start of the Bagration offensive on 23 June, and the Soviets quickly pushed retreating German forces from the Soviet Union all the way to Poland.
Western Front:
Africa: From early 1941, Dudley Clarke commanded the 'A' Force, based in Cairo, Egypt, which developed much of the war's Allied deception strategy. In an initial deception failure from which Clarke derived an important lesson he put to use in the future, the British intended to retake British Somaliland by an advance from Sudan into Eritrea. Operation Camilla was intended to deceive the Italians occupying British Somaliland into thinking the British intended to retake British Somaliland by an amphibious assault from Aden. Instead of moving their troops to meet the potential amphibious landing, or retreating to Italian-occupied Somalia, the Italians withdrew into Eritrea. As a result, they possessed greater strength at the British objective when the genuine British attack occurred. Clarke's lesson was to focus deception not on what the enemy should think is happening but what the deception planner wants the enemy to do as a result.
North Africa: Deception played an important part in the war in North Africa. In 1941, a British Army unit led by magician and illusionist Jasper Maskelyne prevented the destruction of Alexandria, Egypt by using lights to recreate the nighttime image of the city, while blacking out the actual city lights. Coupled with explosives that simulated German bombs landing on the city, Maskelyne's illusion caused German planes to release their ordnance on the empty coastal site he had prepared rather than on the city.
Maskelyne was subsequently tasked with preventing the Germans from attacking the Suez Canal, a key asset in the Allied supply chain. He responded by creating a system of swirling searchlights which cast a spray of strobe light over more than 100 miles of the sky above Egypt. German pilots were unable to see the canal, and so were unable to destroy it.
As part of the deception surrounding Operation Crusader during the Siege of Tobruk, camouflage artist Steven Sykes built a dummy railhead near Misheifa in Egypt. The intent, which succeeded, was to divert German aerial attacks from the real railhead and deceive the Germans into believing that the British attack would not begin until the dummy was completed. Before the Second Battle of El Alamein, camouflage unit commander Geoffrey Barkas led Operation Sentinel and Operation Bertram, which used dummy equipment and other deceptive measures to deceive German commander Erwin Rommel about Allied strength and the timing and location of the Allied attack.
In Operation Sly Bob, Maskalyne's unit attempted to create a dummy submarine that would draw the attention of German reconnaissance aircraft along the German and Italian Italy-to-Tripoli supply line, enabling British ships to gain the element of surprise when attacking Axis shipping. By using old railroad sleeper cars, a wooden frame, nailed and welded beams, and metal tubing, Maskalyne's unit succeeded in creating a prototype that British ship commanders unaware of the deception plan nearly sank when they observed it near the Suez Canal. The difficulty in creating a viable dummy rendered the project impractical, and Sly Bob was abandoned before it was fully implemented.
Based on the experience with Sly Bob, the British attempted to portray an aging cruiser as a battleship that would pose a threat to German shipping. When the effort proved unsuccessful because the dummy equipment and fixtures added to the cruiser were unrealistic, Maskalyne's team used the partially-dummied cruiser as "sucker bait". With sucker bait, a magician uses an audience's powers of observation against it by allowing members to falsely believe they see through a trick. By appearing to attempt to camouflage the cruiser-turned-dummy battleship, which Maskalyne christened HMS Houdin after magician Jean-Eugène Robert-Houdin, but allowing German observers to see through the camouflage, Maskalyne's team enabled the Germans to conclude on their own that the British were attempting to hide a battleship. Allowing the Germans to believe they had penetrated the camouflage and detected the battleship created in the minds of German military leadership the same risk to German shipping a real battleship would have posed.
Normandy: Before the June 1944 D-Day invasion of Normandy, the Allies launched a deception codenamed Operation Bodyguard. As part of Bodyguard, the Operation Quicksilver deception portrayed First United States Army Group (FUSAG), a skeleton headquarters commanded by Omar Bradley, as an army group commanded by George Patton. In Operation Fortitude South, another component of Bodyguard, the Germans were persuaded that FUSAG would invade France at Pas-de-Calais in the fall of 1944. British and American troops used dummy equipment, false radio traffic and double agents (see Double-Cross System) to deceive German intelligence on the location and timing of the invasion. The Germans awaited the Calais landing for many weeks after the real landings in Normandy, leaving in place near Calais several divisions that could have helped delay or defeat the Normandy attack. By the time the Germans realized the Normandy landings were the actual offensive, Allied units were so well established in Normandy that they could not be dislodged.
Pacific theater: Japan continued diplomatic engagement with the U.S. on several issues of concern throughout late November and into early December 1941 even though attacking ships had sailed from their base in the remote Kuril Islands. The surprise 7 December 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor took place several hours before Japan presented a formal declaration of hostilities and officially broke diplomatic ties. Japan also made extensive use of decoys and other deceptive displays throughout the war, which took on increased importance as the tide of the war went against it in 1944 and 1945.
Prior to the October 1944 Battle off Samar, the Japanese incorporated deception into their plan of attack by luring Admiral William Halsey Jr. into leading his powerful Third Fleet to chase a decoy fleet, a target so inviting Halsey took with him every ship he commanded.
With Halsey's force out of the way, the Japanese intended to attack the Allied landings on Leyte. The U.S. responded with their few remaining forces, the three escort carrier groups of the Seventh Fleet. Escort carriers and destroyer escorts had been built to protect slow convoys from submarine attack, and were later adapted to attack ground targets, but they had few torpedoes, as they normally relied on Halsey's fleet to protect them from armored warships. These ships, organized as Task Unit 77.4.3 ("Taffy 3"), and commanded by Rear Admiral Clifton Sprague, possessed neither the firepower nor the armor to oppose the 23 ships of the Japanese force, which included Yamato's 18-inch guns, but took the initiative and attacked. In addition to ships firing on the Japanese from point-blank range, aircraft including FM-2 Wildcats, F6F Hellcats and TBM Avengers, strafed, bombed, torpedoed, rocketed, and depth-charged the Japanese force until they ran out of ammunition. They then resorted to deception, including numerous "dry runs" at the Japanese ships. Concerned that he faced a larger force than he actually did, Japanese commander Admiral Takeo Kurita decided to withdraw.
During the Battle of Iwo Jima in February and March 1945, Japanese deception included dummy tanks sculpted out of the island's soft volcanic rock. At the Japanese-held airfield in Tianhe District, China, the Japanese painted on the ground the image of a B-29 Bomber that appeared to be on fire. Their intent was for the painted image to appear real to high-flying aircraft, which would lower their altitude to investigate, thus making them targets for Japanese anti-aircraft fire. In addition, the Japanese made extensive use of bamboo-framed dummy aircraft to project airpower and protect their remaining aircraft, straw dummy soldiers and wood weapons that made defensive works appear to be manned, and wood dummy tanks to make infantry soldiers appear to have more combat power than they actually possessed.
The Allies planned an invasion of Japan to take place after the end of fighting in Europe. This plan, codenamed Operation Downfall, had several components, including the Operation Olympic invasion of the southern Japanese island of Kyushu. The deception created to enable Olympic to succeed, Operation Pastel, would have included false attacks against Japanese held-ports in China, as well as Japanese positions on the island of Formosa. The end of the war following the U.S. atomic bomb attacks on Japan ended the need for a ground invasion or a deception plan, so Pastel was never implemented.
At sea: As a liaison to the British Navy early in the war, actor and U.S. Navy officer Douglas Fairbanks Jr. observed and participated in several raiding parties and diversions on the French coast. Upon returning to the United States, Fairbanks proposed to Ernest King, the Chief of Naval Operations the creation of a unit that would plan and execute diversionary and deception missions. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military deception | This plan, codenamed Operation Downfall, had several components, including the Operation Olympic invasion of the southern Japanese island of Kyushu. The deception created to enable Olympic to succeed, Operation Pastel, would have included false attacks against Japanese held-ports in China, as well as Japanese positions on the island of Formosa. The end of the war following the U.S. atomic bomb attacks on Japan ended the need for a ground invasion or a deception plan, so Pastel was never implemented.
At sea: As a liaison to the British Navy early in the war, actor and U.S. Navy officer Douglas Fairbanks Jr. observed and participated in several raiding parties and diversions on the French coast. Upon returning to the United States, Fairbanks proposed to Ernest King, the Chief of Naval Operations the creation of a unit that would plan and execute diversionary and deception missions. King authorized Fairbanks to recruit 180 officers and 300 enlisted men for the program, which was named Beach Jumpers. There are several stories about how the unit was named; during an interview late in life, Fairbanks said British admiral Louis Mountbatten coined it with the intention of creating a designation that provided cover for the unit's activities by being partly descriptive and partly in code.
On 16 March 1943 Beach Jumper Unit ONE (BJU-1) was commissioned with the mission "To assist and support the operating forces in the conduct of Tactical Cover and Deception in Naval Warfare." Eleven BJUs deployed during the war, and were used in all theaters. The Beach Jumpers raided false landing zones and shore defenses during amphibious attacks, sowing confusion with the enemy about actual landing sites and causing the enemy to defend in the wrong place. To carry out these deceptions, their boats were equipped with two .50 caliber machine guns, 10 window (chaff) rockets, smoke generators, and floating time-delay explosive packs. They were also outfitted with naval balloons and communications and psychological operations equipment, including recorders, speakers, generators, and radio jammers. The balloons included radar reflective strips that when towed would cause Beach Jumper units to appear to enemy radar operators as a larger force than they actually were.
Beach Jumper units created diversionary landings during several battles, including Operation Husky and Operation Dragoon. The Beach Jumpers were inactivated after World War II, but were reconstituted for service during the Korean War and Vietnam War. With the U.S. military creating and fielding an Information Operations capability beginning in the early 1990s, the modern Beach Jumpers exist as part of U.S. Naval Information Forces.
Korean War: In the summer of 1950, the Korean People's Army (KPA) of North Korea attacked South Korea. 140,000 South Korean and allied soldiers were nearly defeated. In August and September 1950, South Korea and its allies waged the Battle of Pusan Perimeter against the KPA and succeeded in establishing a defensive line that prevented the KPA from destroying them.
To enable the counterattack that started with an amphibious landing at Inchon (codenamed Operation Chromite), United Nations (U.N.) forces staged an elaborate deception that made it appear the landing would take place at Gunsan, 105 miles away from the actual landing site at Inchon and closer to the Pusan Perimeter. On 5 September, the U.S. Air Force began attacks on roads and bridges to isolate Gunsan. This was followed by a naval bombardment, which was followed by heavy bombing of military installations in and near the town. These tactics were typical pre-invasion steps, and were intended to cause North Korea to believe Gunsan was the planned U.N. invasion site.
In addition to the aerial and naval bombardment, United States Marine Corps officers briefed their units on the supposed Gunsan landing within earshot of many Koreans, assuming that the information would make its way to KPA leaders through rumors or spies. On the night of 12–13 September, the British Royal Navy landed U.S. Army special operations troops and Royal Marines commandos at Gunsan, making sure that enemy forces noticed their supposed reconnaissance of the area. U.N. forces also conducted rehearsals on the coast of South Korea at several sites with conditions were similar to Inchon. These drills enabled U.N. forces to perfect the timing and actions of the planned Inchon landing while simultaneously confusing the North Koreans as to the actual landing site.
On 15 September, United Nations forces under Douglas MacArthur surprised the KPA with the Inchon landing. In the ensuing Battle of Inchon, the U.N. ended a string of victories by North Korea. The KPA collapsed within a month, and 135,000 KPA troops were taken prisoner.
Cuban Missile Crisis: During the period leading up to the Cuban Missile Crisis of October 1962, Cuba and the Soviet Union employed several deceptive measures to hide their activities. These included the codename for the plan to deploy missiles in Cuba; Anadyr, a Russian town, is associated with the sparsely-populated and inaccessible area of Northeastern Russia and did not suggest an operation in the Caribbean. Soviet soldiers constructed false superstructures to hide the defenses of the ships transporting missiles and launching equipment to Cuba, and placed agricultural equipment and other non-military machinery on deck where it could be seen. Upon arrival, the ships unloaded at eleven different Cuban ports to deceive American surveillance efforts. At the same time, Soviet and Cuban news media reported on the supposedly massive agricultural assistance the Soviets were providing Cuba, which provided a plausible explanation for the activity and equipment that could be observed. The Soviet deception proved highly effective and the missiles were discovered only after they were already operational.
Vietnam War: Both North Vietnam and the forces of South Vietnam and the United States made use of deception during the Vietnam War.
Operation El Paso: As part of Operation El Paso, which took place from May to July 1966, the U.S. 1st Infantry Division deliberately exposed information about a planned resupply and engineer equipment convoy from Minh Than north to An Lộc. Division planners anticipated the enemy response would be an ambush at one of a number of possible locations. As a result, the supposedly lightly armed convoy actually consisted of armored cavalry and infantry. Additionally, 1st ID planners prepared for air assault operations at the most likely ambush sites. Events unfolded as the planners had foreseen, and the Viet Cong ambushed the convoy. The ambush sprang the 1st Infantry Division's trap, and the subsequent Battle of Minh Thanh Road resulted in 50 percent of the Viet Cong regiment becoming casualties.
Operation Bolo: In 1967's Operation Bolo, a United States Air Force unit led by Robin Olds successfully countered the threat posed by Soviet MiG-21 fighter planes operating in North Vietnam.
During bombing missions, unescorted U.S. Republic F-105 Thunderchief fighter-bombers would often be attacked by MiG-21s. Heavily laden with ordnance, the F-105s were no match for the faster MiGs. On occasions when the F-105s were escorted by F-4 Phantom II fighter planes, the MiGs would refuse to engage. In addition, the rules of engagement on the U.S. side prevented attacking the MiGs when they were on the ground. This measure was intended to keep the Soviet Union from becoming further engaged in the conflict by preventing casualties to the Soviet mechanics and technical advisors who were assisting North Vietnam.
To counter the MiG threat, Olds' 8th Fighter Wing prepared its F-4s to display the electronic and radar signatures of F-105s. To create this effect, the 8th Fighter Wing outfitted F-4s with QRC-160 jamming pods, a device used only by F-105s. When they flew the mission, Olds and his fellow pilots assumed the route, elevation, speed, and formation of an F-105 flight. They also staggered the takeoff and arrival times of the F-4s, enabling later-arriving F-4s to prevent the MiGs from landing.
The Bolo deception was executed successfully. The North Vietnamese believed they faced an F-105 flight and dispatched their MiGs. The later-arriving F4s prevented the MiGs from returning to their base. The 8th Fighter Wing destroyed seven MiGs in a matter of minutes, while Olds' fighters sustained no losses. The destruction of half their MiGs and uncertainty about whether future flights observed on radar and electronic sensors were unescorted F-105s or F-4s pretending to be F-105s caused North Vietnam to ground its MiGs. The MiGs failed in their mission of preventing U.S. Operation Rolling Thunder bombing runs over North Vietnam.
Tet Offensive: In 1967, the government and military of North Vietnam began planning for an offensive that would begin in early 1968. The intent within the war's area of operations was to spark an uprising by the Viet Cong and others in South Vietnam who were sympathetic to the government in the north. In a wider sense, North Vietnam hoped the offensive would cause a withdrawal of U.S. troops from South Vietnam by undermining U.S. public confidence in the war.
North Vietnam implemented several deceptive measures to mask preparations for the offensive. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military deception | The destruction of half their MiGs and uncertainty about whether future flights observed on radar and electronic sensors were unescorted F-105s or F-4s pretending to be F-105s caused North Vietnam to ground its MiGs. The MiGs failed in their mission of preventing U.S. Operation Rolling Thunder bombing runs over North Vietnam.
Tet Offensive: In 1967, the government and military of North Vietnam began planning for an offensive that would begin in early 1968. The intent within the war's area of operations was to spark an uprising by the Viet Cong and others in South Vietnam who were sympathetic to the government in the north. In a wider sense, North Vietnam hoped the offensive would cause a withdrawal of U.S. troops from South Vietnam by undermining U.S. public confidence in the war.
North Vietnam implemented several deceptive measures to mask preparations for the offensive. In October, the North Vietnamese government announced that it would observe a seven-day holiday truce from 27 January to 3 February 1968, several days longer than previous Tet truces had lasted. The U.S. and South Vietnam presumed that the coming offensive, of which they had received some intelligence, would take place before or after the truce. When the attacks had not commenced before the holiday, South Vietnamese and U.S. leaders assumed it would come after the holiday. As a result, they allowed many soldiers to take holiday leave and relaxed the usual security measures.
As an additional deceptive measure, while intending to attack South Vietnam's major cities and military installations, the North Vietnamese continued attacks along the border between the two countries during late 1967. These diversionary assaults served to draw U.S. attention to the border and U.S. forces away from the actual objectives—the heavily populated South Vietnamese coastal lowlands and cities.
When the offensive commenced, South Vietnam and the U.S. were surprised by the coordinated attacks. However, the U.S. and South Vietnam regrouped and over several days repulsed the North Vietnamese assaults. North Vietnam failed to attain the immediate objective of creating an uprising in South Vietnam. In the longer term, the offensive aided in swaying U.S. public opinion against the war, which led to a decreased U.S. presence in Vietnam and eventual withdrawal.
Cherbourg Project: In 1969, France abruptly declared an arms embargo against countries in the Middle East, chiefly aimed at Israel, and cancelled a contract to build patrol boats for Israel's navy. France also refused to release the last five boats built under the contract even though Israel had already paid for them. In response, the Israel Defense Forces mounted an elaborate scheme involving the purchase of the boats by a civilian company for non-military purposes. When they became concerned that the dummy transaction would be exposed, Israel decided to secretly take possession of the boats. The Israeli navy dispatched crews disguised as civilians, who gradually arrived at the French Atlantic seaport of Cherbourg. Once the crews assembled, they secretly sailed the five boats out of the harbor on the night of Christmas Eve 1969. Though they encountered a winter storm, the boats reached the Mediterranean Sea and safely completed the voyage to Israel. The plan to take possession of the boats, which the Israelis called "Operation Noa" but came to be known as the Cherbourg Project, was assisted by sympathetic Cherbourg shipyard and boat building company employees, but the French government was kept totally unaware until the boats had left port.
Yom Kippur War: In the period before the 1973 Yom Kippur War between Israel and the joint forces of Egypt and Syria, Egypt executed annual maneuvers near the Sinai Peninsula, Tahrir 41, which conditioned Israel to Egyptian troop activity in the area. In addition, several months before the start of the war, Egypt created the false impression of an imminent attack, which caused Israel to announce an emergency military reserve call up. When the war started, Israel believed the initial Egyptian troop movements were another iteration of the exercises the Egyptians had previously undertaken. In addition, because an emergency call up was costly and disruptive, the Israeli government was reluctant to conduct another one until it was sure an attack was underway. As a result of the deception, Egypt had surprise on its side when it attacked.
Operation Entebbe Rescue Mission: After the hijacking of an Air France plane in late June 1976, the perpetrators had the aircraft diverted to Entebbe Airport in Uganda, where they threatened to kill all the Jewish and Israeli passengers if their demands were not met. The Israeli government pursued diplomatic efforts to free the hostages while the Israeli Defense Forces planned a rescue mission in secrecy. When the raid was launched, IDF commandos secretly landed at an old unused area of the airport, where they offloaded decoy vehicles resembling Ugandan president Idi Amin's motorcade. By making themselves appear to be Amin and his security detail, the Israelis intended to gain the element of surprise on Ugandan guards at the terminal where the hostages were held. The ruse was only partly successful because Amin had recently changed limousines, and his new one was white, while the one the Israelis were using was black. The Ugandan guards realized the trick, which led to a gunfight that cost the Israeli commandos the element of surprise, but the raid ended with the successful rescue of the hostages.
Falklands War: The Falklands War took place between April and June 1982. During the period prior to the war, Argentina's military leaders, who were subordinate to general and president Leopoldo Galtieri, used the December 1981 change of command ceremony for Argentina's new chief of naval operations as cover to begin secretly planning for an invasion of the Falkland Islands. In April 1982, the forces of Argentina carried out the Invasion of South Georgia, an island possession of the United Kingdom. In mid-March, Argentina had used deception to successfully position an advance guard on South Georgia. An Argentinian company received a contract to dismantle a British whaling station for scrap. When the contractor's ship arrived, it contained members of an Argentinian Navy special forces unit who were disguised as scientists.
When the British prepared to conduct a Falklands landing in response to Argentina's invasion, Argentina anticipated an assault at Port Stanley, the capital and site of the largest airport on the islands. The British gained the element of surprise by launching a feint at Stanley while conducting their main assault at San Carlos, on the opposite side of East Falkland. The British then marched overland to Port Stanley, where they launched a land-based attack on the Argentine defenses surrounding the city. The Argentinians were caught off-guard and were soon compelled to surrender.
Operation Just Cause: When the leader of Panama, Manuel Noriega realized he was being surveilled by the U.S. military prior to the United States invasion of Panama in December 1989, Noriega resorted to several deceptive measures to mask his movements and locations. These included look-alike doubles, decoy vehicles and aircraft, false convoys, frequent changes of clothes, recordings of his voice played at locations where he was not present, and frequent changes of his actual location.
On the U.S. side, deception included troop movements in and around U.S. bases in Panama made to look like routine training missions, a logistics buildup disguised as routine activity, and large-scale exercises in the United States that desensitized Panamanian leaders as to U.S. capabilities and intent. While Noriega and his subordinates knew the United States had the capacity to act, they were misled by their perceptions of U.S. activity and misreading of U.S. intent into believing that the U.S. would not attack. As a result, when the attack occurred, the U.S. had the element of surprise, which helped it gain a quick victory.
Operation Desert Storm: During the period prior to the 1990–1991 Gulf War, Iraqi president Saddam Hussein positioned 100,000 troops near Iraq's border with Kuwait. To mask his true intention of invading Kuwait, during the summer of 1990, Saddam told ambassadors to Iraq, the leaders of other countries, and members of the international news media that his troops were on a training mission or were near the border merely as a tactic to extract concessions from Kuwait during diplomatic negotiations. On 2 August, Iraq's invasion commenced; the small Kuwaiti military was quickly overwhelmed, and Iraq occupied Kuwait.
After invading Kuwait, the creation of an anti-Iraq coalition and its movement of troops and materiel into Saudi Arabia caused Saddam to anticipate a Coalition ground assault from Saudi Arabia north into Kuwait and an amphibious landing on Kuwait's Persian Gulf coast. Prior to the start of the Coalition offensive in February 1991, its ground forces successfully moved multiple divisions west to the largely undefended border between Saudi Arabia and Iraq. When the attack commenced, the Coalition conducted a feint directly into Kuwait while the main effort—the "Left Hook" enabled by concealing the move of units to the west—attacked into Iraq and cut off Iraqi forces in Kuwait. After advancing into Iraq, Coalition forces turned right and attacked Iraqi forces in Kuwait from the rear. Facing overwhelming Coalition combat power in Kuwait and unable to retreat to Iraq, the Iraqi military in Kuwait quickly surrendered.
Kosovo War: During the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia as part of the 1998–1999 Kosovo War, the Serbian Army made extensive use of deception, which caused NATO forces to expend time, effort, and resources attacking false targets. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military deception | Prior to the start of the Coalition offensive in February 1991, its ground forces successfully moved multiple divisions west to the largely undefended border between Saudi Arabia and Iraq. When the attack commenced, the Coalition conducted a feint directly into Kuwait while the main effort—the "Left Hook" enabled by concealing the move of units to the west—attacked into Iraq and cut off Iraqi forces in Kuwait. After advancing into Iraq, Coalition forces turned right and attacked Iraqi forces in Kuwait from the rear. Facing overwhelming Coalition combat power in Kuwait and unable to retreat to Iraq, the Iraqi military in Kuwait quickly surrendered.
Kosovo War: During the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia as part of the 1998–1999 Kosovo War, the Serbian Army made extensive use of deception, which caused NATO forces to expend time, effort, and resources attacking false targets. According to post-war assessments, NATO often attacked crude decoy tanks, artillery, and wheeled vehicles made of easy to obtain material including sticks and plastic. Many of these decoys included easily produced heat sources, such as burning cans of oil, which deceived the thermal imaging systems of NATO aircraft. As a result, NATO believed it inflicted far more damage on the Serbian Army than it actually had, and Serbia gained a propaganda victory by showing how easily NATO had been deceived.
2006 Lebanon War: Prior to the 2006 Lebanon War, the Hezbollah terrorist group employed deceptive measures intended to degrade Israel's military reputation both internationally and within Israel. Deceptive measures included the construction of false bunkers and command posts which Hezbollah allowed Israel to observe while the work was in progress, while simultaneously concealing the construction of actual facilities. When Israel attacked Hezbollah in southern Lebanon in July, the dummy sites were destroyed while the actual ones were left intact.
Russo-Ukrainian War: In 2014, Russia and Ukraine went to war after Russia contested control of Ukraine's Crimea and Donbas. Russia employed disinformation and denial to facilitate its military activities, in addition to engaging in several deceptive activities. As an example, in August, Russian television news carried stories about a Russian truck convoy transporting water and baby food to Crimea. The international news media reported heavily on this convoy, presuming it was carrying Russian military supplies or materiel, and that they would be able to prove Russia was lying about the cargo. While attention was focused on this diversion, Russia's military was moving soldiers, combat equipment, and vehicles into Donbas.
Sino-Indian border dispute: During the 2020–2021 China–India skirmishes, China employed military deception to gain an advantage. Intending to increase its troop presence in disputed areas of Ladakh, China's military conducted training maneuvers near the areas that were the source of tension with India. This activity conditioned India to the presence of Chinese troops in the vicinity. In addition, China began construction of a nearby airbase. In early May, China began marching troops into several of the contested locations. In mid-to-late May, the Chinese military diverted trucks from the airbase construction project and used them to rapidly transport soldiers into portions of the disputed territory. The rapid troop movements came without warning and took India by surprise. As a result, China gained numerical superiority in several of Ladakh's contested areas.
2023 Israel–Hamas war: During the 2023 Israel–Hamas war, Hamas employed deception to gain the element of surprise when it attacked Israel. These deceptive measures included a sustained effort to convince Israeli leadership that Hamas was focused on economic improvement in Gaza, not armed conflict. Hamas also trained and rehearsed its attacks in plain sight, allowing the Israelis to assume that these activities were merely posturing on the part of Hamas fighters. In addition, Hamas ramped down conflict in the Gaza strip while increasing tensions in the West Bank; Israel moved forces from one location to the other, giving Hamas a more favorable force ratio in Gaza. Additional deceptive activities included acquiring and pre-positioning non-military vehicles intended for military use, including bulldozers, paragliders, motorcycles, and small boats. When the attack commenced, Hamas had the advantage of catching Israel off guard, which enabled Hamas's initial success.
In fiction: Fictional examples of military deception include the 1966 Star Trek episode "The Corbomite Maneuver". When Enterprise is held by the tractor beam of an alien ship, its commander announces his intention to destroy Enterprise. Captain James T. Kirk informs the alien commander, Balok, that Enterprise is on a peaceful mission. Balok does not accept Kirk's explanation, so Kirk responds with a deceptive bluff, claiming Enterprise is outfitted with a secret doomsday device made of "Corbomite". Destruction of Enterprise will trigger the Corbomite device, resulting in destruction of the alien ship. Balok uses a smaller ship to tow Enterprise to a remote area where it can be safely destroyed. Enterprise breaks free from the smaller ship's tractor beam, but damages the smaller ship in the process. Kirk then leads a boarding party to assist the aliens. Kirk's party meets Balok, who is alone and says he was testing Enterprise to discern whether Kirk's claims of peaceful intentions were true. Satisfied by their willingness to render aid to a perceived enemy, Balok expresses a desire to learn more about humans and their culture.
A scene from the 2000 film The Patriot depicts Patriot militia leader Benjamin Martin employing deceptive decoys when negotiating for the release of several members of his command who have been taken prisoner. Martin offers to exchange eighteen British officers, whom he claims are held on a hillside near the British headquarters. The British commander, General Cornwallis views the hill with a spyglass, observes figures in British uniforms who appear to be prisoners, and agrees to the exchange. After Martin and his men leave, the officer dispatched by Cornwallis to recover the British prisoners discovers they are scarecrows in captured British uniforms.
In the 2003 film Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World, Captain Jack Aubrey of HMS Surprise is pursued by the French privateer Acheron. When Acheron appears likely to catch Surprise, Aubrey orders construction of a raft with sails, which contains lanterns arranged in the same pattern as those visible on the stern of Surprise. After night falls, a member of Aubrey's crew lights the raft's lanterns while another crewman douses the lanterns on Surprise. After recovering the crewman from the raft, Aubrey has it cut loose. The darkened Surprise then escapes on a new course while Acheron pursues the decoy.
In the 2018 video game We Happy Few, "Arthur's Story" depicts an alternate version of World War II that includes the German military threatening the village of Wellington Wells with dummy tanks made of papier-mâché. The populace does not resist because it believes the threat is real.
Opinions: Opinions vary among military strategists and authors as to the value of military deception. For example, the two books on warfare usually considered the most famous classics, Sun Tzu's The Art of War and Clausewitz's On War have diametrically opposed views. Sun Tzu emphasizes military deception and considers it the key to victory. Clausewitz argues that the fog of war prevents a commander from having a clear understanding of the operating environment, so creating some sort of false appearance, particularly on a large scale, is unlikely to be meaningful. Because of the cost and effort, Clausewitz argues that from a cost-benefit analysis, a large deception is an acceptable part of a course of action only under special circumstances.
See also:
Notes:
References:
Bibliography:
External links: Media related to Military deception at Wikimedia Commons
Sworn to Secrecy: Secrets of War; Season 1, Episode 9, Tools of Deception. New York: History Channel. 1998. Archived from the original on 21 December 2021. Retrieved 29 May 2021 – via YouTube.
Sworn to Secrecy: Secrets of War; Season 4, Episode 2, Battlefield Deceptions. New York: History Channel. 2001. Archived from the original on 21 December 2021. Retrieved 29 May 2021 – via YouTube. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military doctrine | Defining doctrine: NATO's definition of doctrine, used unaltered by many member nations, is:
Fundamental principles by which the military forces guide their actions in support of objectives. It is authoritative but requires judgement in application.
In 1998 the Canadian Army stated:
Military doctrine is a formal expression of military knowledge and thought, that the army accepts as being relevant at a given time, which covers the nature of conflict, the preparation of the army for conflict, and the method of engaging in conflict to achieve success ... it is descriptive rather than prescriptive, requiring judgement in application. It does not establish dogma or provide a checklist of procedures, but is rather an authoritative guide, describing how the army thinks about fighting, not how to fight. As such it attempts to be definitive enough to guide military activity, yet versatile enough to accommodate a wide variety of situations.
A U.S. Air Force Air University staff study in 1948 defined military doctrine functionally as "those concepts, principles, policies, tactics, techniques, practices, and procedures which are essential to efficiency in organizing, training, equipping, and employing its tactical and service units".
A U.S. Army essay written in 2016 similarly defined military doctrine as "consist[ing] of tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs)".
In 2005 Gary Sheffield of the Defence Studies Department of King's College London/JSCSC quoted J F C Fuller's 1923 definition of doctrine as the "central idea of an army".
In 1965 the Soviet Dictionary of Basic Military Terms defined military doctrine as "a state's officially accepted system of scientifically founded views on the nature of modern wars and the use of the armed forces in them. ... Military doctrine has two aspects: social-political and military-technical." The social-political side "encompasses all questions concerning methodology, economic, and social bases, the political goals of war. It is the defining and the more stable side." The other side, the military-technical, must accord with the political goals. It includes the "creation of military structure, technical equipping of the armed forces, their training, definition of forms and means of conducting operations and war as a whole".
Development of doctrine: Before the development of separate doctrinal publications, many nations expressed their military philosophy through regulations.
United Kingdom: Field Service Regulations were issued by the War Office in 1909, 1917, 1923, 1930, and 1935. Similar publications under various names were subsequently published. Formal British Military Doctrine was first published in 1988 and in 1996 became British Defence Doctrine applicable throughout the armed forces.
France: The development of military doctrine in France came about in the aftermath of the nation's defeat during the Franco-Prussian war. The École supérieure de guerre, under the direction of its commandant, Ferdinand Foch, began developing a consistent doctrine for handling armies, corps, and divisions. Foch's 1906 work, Des principes de la guerre (translated by Hilaire Belloc as The Principles of War) expressed this doctrine.
Prussia and German Empire: Prussian doctrine was published as Regulations for the Instruction of the Troops in Field Service and the Exercises of the larger Units of the 17th June, 1870. The doctrine was revised in 1887 and published in English in 1893 as The Order of Field Service of the German Army, by Karl Kaltenborn und Stachau, and once again in 1908 as Felddienst Ordnung ("Field Service Regulations").
Soviet Union: Soviet doctrine was greatly influenced by M. V. Frunze.
United States: In the period between the Napoleonic Wars and the First World War, doctrine was defined by the War Department in "Field Service Regulations". In addition, many officers wrote military manuals that were printed by private publishers, such as Hardee's Tactics, used by both Confederate and Union forces. General George B. McClellan wrote a cavalry manual, Regulations and Instructions for the Field Service of the U.S. Cavalry, in 1862.
The General Staff became responsible for writing Field Service Regulations. They were published in 1908, were revised in 1913 and again in 1914 based on experiences of European powers in the first months of the war.
As late as 1941 U.S. Army doctrine was published in Field Service Regulations – Operations. This designation was dropped and replaced by U.S. Army Field Manuals (FM).
Relationship between doctrine and strategy: Military doctrine is a key component of grand strategy.
NATO's definition of strategy is "presenting the manner in which military power should be developed and applied to achieve national objectives or those of a group of nations." The official definition of strategy by the United States Department of Defense is: "Strategy is a prudent idea or set of ideas for employing the instruments of national power in a synchronized and integrated fashion to achieve national or multinational objectives."
Military strategy provides the rationale for military operations. Field Marshal Viscount Alan Brooke, Chief of the Imperial General Staff and co-chairman of the Anglo-US Combined Chiefs of Staff Committee for most of the Second World War, described the art of military strategy as:
"to derive from the [policy] aim a series of military objectives to be achieved: to assess these objectives as to the military requirements they create, and the pre-conditions which the achievement of each is likely to necessitate: to measure available and potential resources against the requirements and to chart from this process a coherent pattern of priorities and a rational course of action."
Instead, doctrine seeks to provide a common conceptual framework for a military service:
what the service perceives itself to be ("Who are we?")
what its mission is ("What do we do?")
how the mission is to be carried out ("How do we do that?")
how the mission has been carried out in history ("How did we do that in the past?")
other questions.
In the same way, doctrine is neither operations nor tactics. It serves as a conceptual framework uniting all three levels of warfare.
Doctrine reflects the judgments of professional military officers, and to a lesser but important extent civilian leaders, about what is and is not militarily possible and necessary.
Factors to consider include:
military technology
national geography
the capabilities of adversaries
the capability of one's own organization
Military doctrine by country:
China: Chinese military doctrine is influenced by a number of sources including an indigenous classical military tradition characterized by strategists such as Sun Tzu and modern strategists such as Mao Zedong, along with Western and Soviet influences. One distinctive characteristic of Chinese military science is that it places emphasis on the relationship between the military and society and views military force as merely one part of an overarching grand strategy.
According to French newspaper Le Monde, the Chinese nuclear doctrine is to maintain a nuclear force allowing it to deter and respond to a nuclear attack. However, new evolutions show that China could allow use of its nuclear arsenal in more situations.
France: Following the defeat of the French Army in the Franco-Prussian War, the French military, as part of its movements to increase professionalism, emphasized officer training at the École de Guerre. Ferdinand Foch, as an instructor, argued against the concept of a commander moving units without informing subordinates of his intentions. In doing so, a common doctrine served as a point of training.
We have then, a doctrine. All the brains have been limbered up and regard all questions from an identical point of view. The fundamental idea of the problem being known, each one will solve the problem in his own fashion, and these thousand fashions, we may very well be sure, will act to direct all their efforts to a common objective.Prior to WWI, France had an offensive military doctrine.
In the aftermath of WWI, France adopted a defensive military doctrine where the Maginot Line played a central role in its deterrence of Germany.
Germany: Prior to WWI, Germany had an offensive military doctrine exemplified by the Schlieffen Plan. Germany also devoted considerable resources to building a fleet of battleships, which provoked fears among European powers. During World War II, Germany deployed an operational strategy sometimes referred to as Blitzkrieg in its offensives against Poland and France.
German military doctrine incorporates the concept of Auftragstaktik (Mission-type tactics), which can be seen as a doctrine within which formal rules can be selectively suspended in order to overcome "friction". Carl von Clausewitz stated that "Everything in war is very simple but the simplest thing is difficult". Problems will occur with misplaced communications, troops going to the wrong location, delays caused by weather, etc., and it is the duty of the commander to do his best to overcome them. Auftragstaktik encourages commanders to exhibit initiative, flexibility and improvisation while in command.
India: The current combat doctrine of the Indian Army is based on the effective combined utilization of holding formations and strike formations. In the case of an attack, the holding formations would contain the enemy and strike formations would counter-attack to neutralize enemy forces. In the case of an Indian attack, the holding formations would pin enemy forces down whilst the strike formations attack at a point of Indian choosing.
India's nuclear doctrine follows the policy of credible minimum deterrence, No first strike, No use of nuclear weapons on Non-nuclear states and Massive nuclear retaliation in case deterrence fails.
India has recently adopted a new war doctrine known as "Cold Start" and its military has conducted exercises several times since then based on this doctrine. "Cold Start" involves joint operations between India's three services and integrated battle groups for offensive operations. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military doctrine | Auftragstaktik encourages commanders to exhibit initiative, flexibility and improvisation while in command.
India: The current combat doctrine of the Indian Army is based on the effective combined utilization of holding formations and strike formations. In the case of an attack, the holding formations would contain the enemy and strike formations would counter-attack to neutralize enemy forces. In the case of an Indian attack, the holding formations would pin enemy forces down whilst the strike formations attack at a point of Indian choosing.
India's nuclear doctrine follows the policy of credible minimum deterrence, No first strike, No use of nuclear weapons on Non-nuclear states and Massive nuclear retaliation in case deterrence fails.
India has recently adopted a new war doctrine known as "Cold Start" and its military has conducted exercises several times since then based on this doctrine. "Cold Start" involves joint operations between India's three services and integrated battle groups for offensive operations. A key component is the preparation of India's forces to be able to quickly mobilize and take offensive actions without crossing the enemy's nuclear-use threshold. A leaked US diplomatic cable disclosed that it was intended to be taken off the shelf and implemented within a 72-hour period during a crisis.
Israel:
Strategic doctrine: Israel's military doctrine is formed by its small size and lack of strategic depth. To compensate, it relies on deterrence, including through a presumed nuclear weapons arsenal. It tries to overcome its quantitative disadvantage by staying qualitatively superior. Its doctrine is based on a strategy of defense but is operationally offensive, by pre-empting enemy threats and securing a quick, decisive victory if deterrence fails. Israel maintains a heightened state of readiness, advanced early warning systems, and a robust military intelligence capability to ensure attackers cannot take advantage of Israel's lack of strategic depth. Early warning and speedy victory is also desired because the Israel Defense Forces rely heavily on reservists during major wars; lengthy mobilization of reservists is costly to the Israeli economy. Israeli doctrine is constructed with the assumption that Israel would be largely self-sufficient in its war-fighting, without nearby allies to assist.
Israel's emphasis on operational offense was espoused by its first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, as early as 1948 (during the 1948 Arab–Israeli war):
If [the Arabs] attack us as they did this time, we shall transfer the war to the gates of their country. ... We do not intend to conduct ... a static defensive war at the venue where we were attacked. If they attack us again, in the future, we want the war to be waged not in our country, but in the enemy's country, and we want to be not on the defensive but on the attack.
Yitzhak Rabin, who was Chief of the IDF Staff during the Six-Day War, offered a similar explanation for Israel's pre-emptive beginning to the war:
The basic philosophy of Israel was not to initiate war, unless an act of war was carried out against us. We then lived within the lines prior to the Six-Day War, lines that gave no depth to Israel—and therefore, Israel was in a need, whenever there would be a war, to go immediately on the offensive—to carry the war to the enemy's land.
Tactical doctrine: IDF command has been decentralized since the early days of the state, with junior commanders receiving broad authority within the context of mission-type orders. Israeli junior officer training has emphasized the need to make quick decisions in battle to prepare them appropriately for maneuver warfare.
Russia and the Soviet Union: The Soviet meaning of military doctrine was very different from U.S. military usage of the term. Soviet Minister of Defence Marshal Andrei Grechko defined it in 1975 as "a system of views on the nature of war and methods of waging it, and on the preparation of the country and army for war, officially adopted in a given state and its armed forces".
In Soviet times, theorists emphasised both the political and "military-technical" sides of military doctrine, while from the Soviet point of view, Westerners ignored the political side. However, the political side of Soviet military doctrine, Western commentators Harriet F Scott and William Scott said, "best explained Soviet moves in the international arena".
Soviet (and contemporary Russian) doctrine emphasizes combined-arms warfare as well as operational warfare. It emphasizes the initiation of military hostilities at a time, date, and location of its choosing on terms of its choosing and the extensive preparation of the battlespace for operations.
Former Soviet/Russian doctrine sacrifices tactical flexibility and adaptability for strategic and operational flexibility and adaptability; tactical personnel are trained as relatively inflexible executors of specific, detailed orders, while the operational-strategic level of Russian military doctrine is where most innovation takes place.
The Soviet response to problems of nuclear strategy began with classified publications. However, by 1962, with the publication in the Marshal of the Soviet Union Vasily Sokolovsky's volume, Military Strategy, the Soviets laid out their officially endorsed thoughts on the matter, and their ideas on how to cope with nuclear conflict.
Sweden: In the 2000s and early 2010s, the Moderate Party–led governments transformed the Swedish Armed Forces from a Cold War posture of defence to one of participation in international operations. The assumption was that Sweden's homeland would face minimal external threats. Supreme Commander Sverker Göranson estimates that as of 2014, Swedish forces could resist a limited enemy attack for only one week.
The annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation and the subsequent Russian invasion of Ukraine has stirred debate within Sweden that a return to significant defensive forces and a closer alliance with NATO is necessary in the wake of Russia's actions in Ukraine.
United Kingdom: For some 280 years the British Army did not have a formal 'Military Doctrine', although a huge number of publications dealing with tactics, operations and administration had been produced. However, during his tenure as Chief of the General Staff (1985–89) General Sir Nigel Bagnall directed that British Military Doctrine was to be prepared, and tasked Colonel (later General) Timothy Granville-Chapman (an artillery officer who had been his Military Assistant in Headquarters 1st British Corps) to prepare it. The first edition of British Military Doctrine (BMD) was published in 1988. It led to the Royal Navy and Royal Air Force developing their own maritime and air-power doctrines. However, in 1996 the first edition of British Defence Doctrine (BDD) was published, drawing heavily on the BMD. The Army adopted BDD as their Military Doctrine. The fourth edition of BDD was published in 2011; it uses the NATO definition of doctrine.
NATO underpins the defence of the UK and its Allies, while also providing deployable expeditionary capabilities to support and defend UK interests further afield. However, until recently, most NATO doctrine has been mirrored by equivalent, but different, national Joint Doctrines. This has often caused a dilemma for UK Armed Forces committed to operations as part of a NATO-based coalition.
In 2012, the Chief of Defence Staff and Permanent Undersecretary for Defence issued direction on how the UK contribution to NATO could be improved, stating that 'We should use NATO doctrine wherever we can, and ensure coherence of UK doctrine with NATO wherever we cannot.'
The 2014 edition of Joint Doctrine Publication (JDP) 0-01 UK Defence Doctrine reflects this change in policy.
However, the British Army had formal publications for a long time, and these amounted to its doctrine. Field Service Regulations (FSR), on the Prussian pattern, were published in 1906 and with amendments and replacement editions lasted into the Second World War. They required each arm and service to produce their own specific publications to give effect to FSR. After the Second World War FSR were replaced by various series of manuals, again with specific training pamphlets for each arm and service. These deal with operational and tactical matters.
The current capstone publication for the army is Army Doctrine Publication Operations alongside maritime and air-power equivalents and joint warfare publications all under the umbrella of BDD. The four layers constituting "land doctrine" are summarised as:
British Defence Doctrine – provides philosophy
Joint (and Allied) Operational Doctrine and Capstone Environmental Doctrine (JDP 01 Joint Operations Archived 2011-04-14 at the Wayback Machine AJP-01 Allied Joint Operations Archived 2011-08-15 at the Wayback Machine ADP Operations – provides principles
Joint Functional and Thematic Doctrine such as JDP 5-00 Campaign Planning and JDP 3-40 Security and Stabalisation provide doctrine on specific areas or themes. JDP 5-00([2] Archived 2011-04-14 at the Wayback Machine) JDP 3-40([3] Archived 2011-05-16 at the Wayback Machine)
Army Field Manual (two volumes) – provides practices
Land component handbooks and special to arm publications – provide procedures
The Army Field Manual comprises Volumes 1 (Combined Arms Operations) in 12 parts led by "Formation Tactics" and "Battlegroup Tactics", and Volume 2 (Operations in Specific Environments) in 6 parts (desert, urban, etc.).
BDD is divided into two parts: "Defence Context" and "Military Doctrine". Defence Context deals with two matters. First, the relationship between Defence policy and military strategy, and—while highlighting the utility of force – emphasizes the importance of addressing security issues through a comprehensive, rather than an exclusively military, approach. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military doctrine | JDP 5-00([2] Archived 2011-04-14 at the Wayback Machine) JDP 3-40([3] Archived 2011-05-16 at the Wayback Machine)
Army Field Manual (two volumes) – provides practices
Land component handbooks and special to arm publications – provide procedures
The Army Field Manual comprises Volumes 1 (Combined Arms Operations) in 12 parts led by "Formation Tactics" and "Battlegroup Tactics", and Volume 2 (Operations in Specific Environments) in 6 parts (desert, urban, etc.).
BDD is divided into two parts: "Defence Context" and "Military Doctrine". Defence Context deals with two matters. First, the relationship between Defence policy and military strategy, and—while highlighting the utility of force – emphasizes the importance of addressing security issues through a comprehensive, rather than an exclusively military, approach. Second it expounds the Nature of and the Principles of War, the three Levels of Warfare (Strategic, Operational and Tactical) and its evolving character. The ten Principles of War are a refined and extended version of those that appeared in FSR between the two world wars and based on the work of JFC Fuller.
The Military Doctrine states that it comprises national Joint Doctrine, Higher Level Environmental Doctrine, Tactical Doctrine, Allied Doctrine and doctrine adopted or adapted from ad hoc coalition partners. The part deals with three matters. First it describes the likely employment of the British Armed Forces in pursuit of Defence policy aims and objectives. Next it explains the three components of fighting power (conceptual, physical and moral components) and the criticality of the operating context to its effective application. Finally it describes the British approach to the conduct of military operations—"the British way of war". This includes mission command, the manoeuvrist approach and a warfighting ethos that requires accepting risks.
The BDD is linked to a variety of unclassified policy documents such as Defence White Papers and Strategic Defence Reviews, as well as classified Strategic Planning Guidance. The current, 2011, edition of BDD is underpinned by recent developmental and conceptual publications such as The DCDC Global Strategic Trends Programme 2007–2036 and The High Level Operational Conceptual Framework, which comprises specific army, navy and air force publications.
United States:
Sources: The United States Constitution invests Congress with the powers to provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States and to raise and support armies. Title 10 of the United States Code states what Congress expects the Army, in conjunction with the other Services, to accomplish. This includes: Preserve the peace and security and provide for the defense of the United States, its territories and possessions, and any areas it occupies; Support national policies; Implement national objectives; Overcome any nations responsible for aggressive acts that imperil the peace and security of the United States.
Key concepts: Most modern US doctrine is based around the concept of power projection and full spectrum operations, which combine offensive, defensive, and stability or civil support operations simultaneously as part of an interdependent joint or combined force to seize, retain, and exploit the initiative. They employ synchronized action—lethal and nonlethal—proportional to the mission and informed by a thorough understanding of all dimensions of the operational environment.
Offensive operations defeat and destroy enemy forces, and seize terrain, resources, and population centers. They impose the commander's will on the enemy. Defensive operations defeat an enemy attack, gain time, economize forces, and develop conditions favorable for offensive or stability operations.
Stability operations encompass various military missions, tasks, and activities conducted abroad to maintain or reestablish a safe and secure environment, provide essential governmental services, emergency infrastructure reconstruction, and humanitarian relief. Civil support operations are support tasks and missions to homeland civil authorities for domestic emergencies, and for designated law enforcement and other activities. This includes operations dealing with the consequences of natural or manmade disasters, accidents, and incidents within the homeland.
Under President Lyndon Johnson it was stated that the US armed forces should be able to fight two—at one point, two-and-a-half—wars at the same time. This was defined to mean a war in Europe against the Soviet Union, a war in Asia against China or North Korea, and a "half-war" as well—in other words, a "small" war in the Third World. When Richard Nixon took office in 1969, he altered the formula to state that the United States should be able to fight one-and-a-half wars simultaneously.
This doctrine remained in place until 1989–90, when President George H. W. Bush ordered the "Base Force" study which forecast a substantial cut in the military budget, an end to the Soviet Union's global threat, and the possible beginning of new regional threats. In 1993, President Bill Clinton ordered a "Bottom-Up Review", based on which a strategy called "win-hold-win" was declared—enough forces to win one war while holding off the enemy in another conflict, then moving on to win it after the first war is over. The final draft was changed to read that the United States must be able to win two "major regional conflicts" simultaneously.
The current strategic doctrine, which Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld issued in his Quadrennial Defense Review of early 2001 (before the 9/11 attacks), is a package of U.S. military requirements known as 1-4-2-1. The first 1 refers to defending the US homeland. The 4 refers to deterring hostilities in four key regions of the world. The 2 means the US armed forces must have the strength to win swiftly in two near-simultaneous conflicts in those regions. The final 1 means that the US forces must win one of those conflicts "decisively".
The general policy objectives are to (1) assure allies and friends; (2) dissuade future military competition, (3) deter threats and coercion against U.S. interests, and (4) if deterrence fails, decisively defeat any adversary.
United States Department of Defense: The Department of Defense publishes Joint Publications which state all-services doctrine. The current basic doctrinal publication is Joint Publication 3-0, "Doctrine for Joint Operations".
United States Air Force: Headquarters, United States Air Force, publishes current USAF doctrine. The lead agency for developing Air Force doctrine is the LeMay Center for Doctrine Development and Education; the Air Staff International Standardization Office works on multinational standardization, such as NATO Standardization Agreements (STANAGs), and agreements between the American, British, Canadian, and Australian Armies and Navies (ABCA) that affect the Air Force. Currently the basic Air Force doctrinal documents are the 10-series of Air Force publications.
United States Army: The United States Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) is responsible for developing Army doctrine. TRADOC was developed early in the 1970s as a response to the American Army's difficulties in the Vietnam War, and is one of the reforms that improved Army professionalism. Currently the capstone Army doctrinal document is Army Doctrine Publication 3-0, Unified Land Operations (published October 2011).
United States Navy: The Naval Warfare Development Command (NWDC) Doctrine Department coordinates development, publication, and maintenance of United States Navy doctrine. Currently the basic unclassified naval doctrinal documents are Naval Doctrine Publications 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6. NWDC is also the United States Navy lead for NATO and multinational maritime doctrine and operational standardization.
United States Marine Corps: The Marine Corps Combat Development Command (MCCDC) has responsibility for United States Marine Corps doctrine. The capstone doctrinal document is Warfighting (MCDP1), along with MCDP's 1-1, 1–2, and 1–3 (Strategy, Campaigning, and Tactics, respectively). MCDP 1-0 (Marine Corps Operations) translates the philosophical-based capstone/keystone publications into operational doctrine.
United States Coast Guard: Headquarters, United States Coast Guard, published Coast Guard Publication 1, U.S. Coast Guard: America's Maritime Guardian, which is the source of USCG doctrine.
SFR Yugoslavia: With the passing of the National Defense Law of 1969, Yugoslavia adopted a total war military doctrine named Total National Defense or Total People's Defense[b]. It was inspired by the Yugoslav People's Liberation War against the fascist occupiers and their collaborators in the Second World War, and was designed to allow Yugoslavia to maintain or eventually reestablish its independent and non-aligned status should an invasion occur. According to it, any citizen who resists an aggressor is a member of the armed forces, thus the whole population could be turned into a monolithic resistance army.
Starting from the elementary school education, over high schools, universities, organizations and companies, the authorities prepared the entire population to contest an eventual occupation of the country and finally to liberate it. For this purpose, the Territorial Defense Forces (TO) would be formed to mobilize the population in case of an aggression. The combat readiness of the TO meant that the steps of organization and training could be bypassed after the start of hostilities. The TO would supplement the regular Yugoslav People's Army, giving it greater defensive depth and an armed local population ready to support combat actions. Large numbers of armed civilians would increase the cost of an invasion to a potential aggressor.
The most likely scenario in the doctrine being used was a general war between the NATO and the Warsaw Pact. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military doctrine | According to it, any citizen who resists an aggressor is a member of the armed forces, thus the whole population could be turned into a monolithic resistance army.
Starting from the elementary school education, over high schools, universities, organizations and companies, the authorities prepared the entire population to contest an eventual occupation of the country and finally to liberate it. For this purpose, the Territorial Defense Forces (TO) would be formed to mobilize the population in case of an aggression. The combat readiness of the TO meant that the steps of organization and training could be bypassed after the start of hostilities. The TO would supplement the regular Yugoslav People's Army, giving it greater defensive depth and an armed local population ready to support combat actions. Large numbers of armed civilians would increase the cost of an invasion to a potential aggressor.
The most likely scenario in the doctrine being used was a general war between the NATO and the Warsaw Pact. In such a situation, Yugoslavia would remain non-aligned, and it would not accept foreign troops of either alliance on its territory. The doctrine recognized the likelihood that one side or the other might try to seize Yugoslav territory as a forward staging area, to ensure lines of communication or simply to deny the territory to enemy forces. Such action would be considered aggression and would be resisted. Regardless of ideology, the occupiers would be considered Yugoslavia's enemy.
Territorial Defense Forces: The Territorial Defense Forces (TO) were formed in 1969 as an integral part of the Yugoslav Total National Defense doctrine. The TO forces consisted of able-bodied civilian males and females. Between 1 and 3 million Yugoslavs between the ages of 15 and 65 would fight under TO command as irregular or guerrilla forces in wartime. In peacetime, however, about 860,000 TO troops were involved in military training and other activities.
The TO concept focused on small, lightly armed infantry units fighting defensive actions on a familiar local terrain. A typical unit was a company-sized detachment. More than 2000 communes, factories, and other enterprises organized such units, which would fight in their home areas, maintaining local defense production essential to the overall war effort. The TO also included some larger, more heavily equipped units with wider operational responsibilities. The TO battalions and regiments operated in regional areas with artillery and antiaircraft guns and some armoured vehicles. Using their mobility and tactical initiative, these units would attempt to alleviate the pressure of enemy armored columns and air strikes on smaller TO units. In the coastal regions, TO units had naval missions. They operated some gunboats in support of navy operations. They were organized to defend strategic coastal areas and naval facilities against enemy amphibious landings and raids. They also trained some divers for use in sabotage and other special operations.
The TO was helped by the fact that most of its citizen-soldiers were one-time JNA conscripts who had completed their term of compulsory military service. However, TO recruitment was somewhat limited by the army's desire to include as many recently released conscripts as possible in its own military reserve. Other sources of TO manpower lacked prior military service and required extensive basic training.
The TO organisation was highly decentralized and independent. TO units were organized and funded by the governments in each of the Yugoslav constituent republics: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Slovenia.
See also: Strategy
Grand strategy
Naval strategy
Operational level of war
Military strategy
Principles of war
Military tactics
Foreign policy doctrine
Military science
References:
Bibliography: Chapman, Bert (2009), Military Doctrine: A Reference Handbook, ABC-CLIO, ISBN 9780313352331, retrieved 2021-04-16
Austin Long. The Soul of Armies: Counterinsurgency Doctrine and Military Culture in the US and UK. Ithaca–London: Cornell University Press, 2016.
NSA, (NATO STANDARDIZATION AGENCY) (2013), AAP-6(V) NATO Glossary of Terms and Definitions (PDF), archived (PDF) from the original on 2018-07-18, retrieved 2021-04-16
Christopher P. Twomey. The Military Lens: Doctrinal Difference and Deterrence Failure in Sino-American Relations. Ithaca–London: Cornell University Press, 2010.
History
Robert M. Cassidy. Peacekeeping in the Abyss: British and American Peacekeeping Doctrine and Practice after the Cold War. Westport, CT–London: Praeger, 2004.
Aaron P. Jackson. The Roots of Military Doctrine: Change and Continuity in Understanding the Practice of Warfare. Fort Leavenworth, KS: Combat Studies Institute Press, 2013.
Elizabeth Kier. Imagining War: French and British Military Doctrine between the Wars. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998 (reprint 2017).
Matthias Strohn. The German Army and the Defence of the Reich: Military Doctrine and the Conduct of the Defensive Battle 1918-1939, 2nd revised edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017.
Soviet
Willard C. Frank and Philip S. Gillette, eds. Soviet Military Doctrine from Lenin to Gorbachev, 1915-1991. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992.
Raymond L. Garthoff. Deterrence and the Revolution in Soviet Military Doctrine. Brookings Institution Press, 1990.
Odom, William E. (1988). "Soviet Military Doctrine". Foreign Affairs. 67 (2): 114–134. doi:10.2307/20043776. JSTOR 20043776.
Harriet Fast Scott and William F. Scott. The Armed Forces of the USSR. Boulder, Co.: Westview Press, 1979.
Harriet Fast Scott and William F. Scott. Soviet Military Doctrine: Continuity, Formulation, and Dissemination. Boulder, Co.: Westview Press, 1989.
External links:
Joint Electronic Library
UK Development, Concepts and Doctrine Centre
Navy Warfare Development Command (NWDC)
Military Analysis Network
Air War College accessed September 27, 2006 – literally thousands of online texts and links to off-site sources
Quadrennial Defense Review Report. September 30, 2001 Archived December 25, 2016, at the Wayback Machine
US Military Doctrine since the Cold War accessed June 24, 2009
Fred Kaplan "The Doctrine Gap. Reality vs. the Pentagon's new strategy."
Pentagon Rethinking Old Doctrine on 2 Wars- The New York Times, March 14, 2009.
Joint Doctrine Ontology: A Benchmark for Military Information Systems Interoperability, Semantic Technology for Intelligence, Defense and Security, 2015 |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military education and training | Recruit training: The primary and initial form of military training, recruit training, makes use of various conditioning techniques to resocialize trainees into a military system, to ensure that they will obey all orders without hesitation, and to teach basic military skills.
Resocialization as a sociological concept involves the process of mentally and emotionally "retraining" individuals so that they can operate in a new environment; it promotes changes to an individual's attitudes and behaviours. The drill instructor has the task of making the service members fit for military use.
Role-specific training: After their recruit training, personnel may undergo further training specific to their military role, including the use of any specialist equipment. They are then normally deemed fit for military service.
Further training: Military personnel may continue to receive training during their career.
See also: Military academy
List of United States military schools and academies
Royal Military Academy Sandhurst
Royal Military College of Canada
Military academies in Russia
Military academies in India
Military discipline
Military science
Refresher training
Staff college
== References == |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military engineering | Etymology: The word engineer was initially used in the context of warfare, dating back to 1325 when engine’er (literally, one who operates an engine) referred to "a constructor of military engines". In this context, "engine" referred to a military machine, i. e., a mechanical contraption used in war (for example, a catapult).
As the design of civilian structures such as bridges and buildings developed as a technical discipline, the term civil engineering entered the lexicon as a way to distinguish between those specializing in the construction of such non-military projects and those involved in the older discipline. As the prevalence of civil engineering outstripped engineering in a military context and the number of disciplines expanded, the original military meaning of the word "engineering" is now largely obsolete. In its place, the term "military engineering" has come to be used.
History: In ancient times, military engineers were responsible for siege warfare and building field fortifications, temporary camps and roads. The most notable engineers of ancient times were the Romans and Chinese, who constructed huge siege-machines (catapults, battering rams and siege towers). The Romans were responsible for constructing fortified wooden camps and paved roads for their legions. Many of these Roman roads are still in use today.
The first civilization to have a dedicated force of military engineering specialists were the Romans, whose army contained a dedicated corps of military engineers known as architecti. This group was pre-eminent among its contemporaries. The scale of certain military engineering feats, such as the construction of a double-wall of fortifications 30 miles (48 km) long, in just 6 weeks to completely encircle the besieged city of Alesia in 52 B.C.E., is an example. Such military engineering feats would have been completely new, and probably bewildering and demoralizing, to the Gallic defenders. Vitruvius is the best known of these Roman army engineers, due to his writings surviving.
Examples of battles before the early modern period where military engineers played a decisive role include the Siege of Tyre under Alexander the Great, the Siege of Masada by Lucius Flavius Silva as well as the Battle of the Trench under the suggestion of Salman the Persian to dig a trench.
For about 600 years after the fall of the Roman empire, the practice of military engineering barely evolved in the west. In fact, much of the classic techniques and practices of Roman military engineering were lost. Through this period, the foot soldier (who was pivotal to much of the Roman military engineering capability) was largely replaced by mounted soldiers. It was not until later in the Middle Ages, that military engineering saw a revival focused on siege warfare.
Military engineers planned castles and fortresses. When laying siege, they planned and oversaw efforts to penetrate castle defenses. When castles served a military purpose, one of the tasks of the sappers was to weaken the bases of walls to enable them to be breached before means of thwarting these activities were devised. Broadly speaking, sappers were experts at demolishing or otherwise overcoming or bypassing fortification systems.
With the 14th-century development of gunpowder, new siege engines in the form of cannons appeared. Initially military engineers were responsible for maintaining and operating these new weapons just as had been the case with previous siege engines. In England, the challenge of managing the new technology resulted in the creation of the Office of Ordnance around 1370 in order to administer the cannons, armaments and castles of the kingdom. Both military engineers and artillery formed the body of this organization and served together until the office's successor, the Board of Ordnance was disbanded in 1855.
In comparison to older weapons, the cannon was significantly more effective against traditional medieval fortifications. Military engineering significantly revised the way fortifications were built in order to be better protected from enemy direct and plunging shot. The new fortifications were also intended to increase the ability of defenders to bring fire onto attacking enemies. Fort construction proliferated in 16th-century Europe based on the trace italienne design.
By the 18th century, regiments of foot (infantry) in the British, French, Prussian and other armies included pioneer detachments. In peacetime these specialists constituted the regimental tradesmen, constructing and repairing buildings, transport wagons, etc. On active service they moved at the head of marching columns with axes, shovels, and pickaxes, clearing obstacles or building bridges to enable the main body of the regiment to move through difficult terrain. The modern Royal Welch Fusiliers and French Foreign Legion still maintain pioneer sections who march at the front of ceremonial parades, carrying chromium-plated tools intended for show only. Other historic distinctions include long work aprons and the right to wear beards. In West Africa, the Ashanti army was accompanied to war by carpenters who were responsible for constructing shelters and blacksmiths who repaired weapons. By the 18th century, sappers were deployed in the Dahomeyan army during assaults against fortifications.
The Peninsular War (1808–14) revealed deficiencies in the training and knowledge of officers and men of the British Army in the conduct of siege operations and bridging. During this war low-ranking Royal Engineers officers carried out large-scale operations. They had under their command working parties of two or three battalions of infantry, two or three thousand men, who knew nothing in the art of siegeworks. Royal Engineers officers had to demonstrate the simplest tasks to the soldiers, often while under enemy fire. Several officers were lost and could not be replaced, and a better system of training for siege operations was required. On 23 April 1812 an establishment was authorised, by Royal Warrant, to teach "Sapping, Mining, and other Military Fieldworks" to the junior officers of the Corps of Royal Engineers and the Corps of Royal Military Artificers, Sappers and Miners.
The first courses at the Royal Engineers Establishment were done on an all ranks basis with the greatest regard to economy. To reduce staff the NCOs and officers were responsible for instructing and examining the soldiers. If the men could not read or write they were taught to do so, and those who could read and write were taught to draw and interpret simple plans. The Royal Engineers Establishment quickly became the centre of excellence for all fieldworks and bridging. Captain Charles Pasley, the director of the Establishment, was keen to confirm his teaching, and regular exercises were held as demonstrations or as experiments to improve the techniques and teaching of the Establishment. From 1833 bridging skills were demonstrated annually by the building of a pontoon bridge across the Medway which was tested by the infantry of the garrison and the cavalry from Maidstone. These demonstrations had become a popular spectacle for the local people by 1843, when 43,000 came to watch a field day laid on to test a method of assaulting earthworks for a report to the Inspector General of Fortifications. In 1869 the title of the Royal Engineers Establishment was changed to "The School of Military Engineering" (SME) as evidence of its status, not only as the font of engineer doctrine and training for the British Army, but also as the leading scientific military school in Europe.
The dawn of the internal combustion engine marked the beginning of a significant change in military engineering. With the arrival of the automobile at the end of the 19th century and heavier than air flight at the start of the 20th century, military engineers assumed a major new role in supporting the movement and deployment of these systems in war. Military engineers gained vast knowledge and experience in explosives. They were tasked with planting bombs, landmines and dynamite.
At the end of World War I, the standoff on the Western Front caused the Imperial German Army to gather experienced and particularly skilled soldiers to form "Assault Teams" which would break through the Allied trenches. With enhanced training and special weapons (such as flamethrowers), these squads achieved some success, but too late to change the outcome of the war. In early WWII, however, the Wehrmacht "Pioniere" battalions proved their efficiency in both attack and defense, somewhat inspiring other armies to develop their own combat engineers battalions. Notably, the attack on Fort Eben-Emael in Belgium was conducted by Luftwaffe glider-deployed combat engineers.
The need to defeat the German defensive positions of the "Atlantic wall" as part of the amphibious landings in Normandy in 1944 led to the development of specialist combat engineer vehicles. These, collectively known as Hobart's Funnies, included a specific vehicle to carry combat engineers, the Churchill AVRE. These and other dedicated assault vehicles were organised into the specialised 79th Armoured Division and deployed during Operation Overlord – 'D-Day'.
Other significant military engineering projects of World War II include Mulberry harbour and Operation Pluto.
Modern military engineering still retains the Roman role of building field fortifications, road paving and breaching terrain obstacles. A notable military engineering task was, for example, breaching the Suez Canal during the Yom Kippur War.
Education: Military engineers can come from a variety of engineering programs. They may be graduates of mechanical, electrical, civil, or industrial engineering.
Sub-discipline: Modern military engineering can be divided into three main tasks or fields: combat engineering, strategic support, and ancillary support. Combat engineering is associated with engineering on the battlefield. Combat engineers are responsible for increasing mobility on the front lines of war such as digging trenches and building temporary facilities in war zones. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military engineering | These and other dedicated assault vehicles were organised into the specialised 79th Armoured Division and deployed during Operation Overlord – 'D-Day'.
Other significant military engineering projects of World War II include Mulberry harbour and Operation Pluto.
Modern military engineering still retains the Roman role of building field fortifications, road paving and breaching terrain obstacles. A notable military engineering task was, for example, breaching the Suez Canal during the Yom Kippur War.
Education: Military engineers can come from a variety of engineering programs. They may be graduates of mechanical, electrical, civil, or industrial engineering.
Sub-discipline: Modern military engineering can be divided into three main tasks or fields: combat engineering, strategic support, and ancillary support. Combat engineering is associated with engineering on the battlefield. Combat engineers are responsible for increasing mobility on the front lines of war such as digging trenches and building temporary facilities in war zones. Strategic support is associated with providing service in communication zones such as the construction of airfields and the improvement and upgrade of ports, roads and railways communication. Ancillary support includes provision and distribution of maps as well as the disposal of unexploded warheads. Military engineers construct bases, airfields, roads, bridges, ports, and hospitals. During peacetime before modern warfare, military engineers took the role of civil engineers by participating in the construction of civil-works projects. Nowadays, military engineers are almost entirely engaged in war logistics and preparedness.
Explosives engineering: Explosives are defined as any system that produces rapidly expanding gases in a given volume in a short duration. Specific military engineering occupations also extend to the field of explosives and demolitions and their usage on the battlefield. Explosive devices have been used on the battlefield for several centuries, in numerous operations from combat to area clearance. Earliest known development of explosives can be traced back to 10th-century China where the Chinese are credited with engineering the world's first known explosive, black powder. Initially developed for recreational purposes, black powder later was utilized for military application in bombs and projectile propulsion in firearms. Engineers in the military who specialize in this field formulate and design many explosive devices to use in varying operating conditions. Such explosive compounds range from black powder to modern plastic explosives. This particular is commonly listed under the role of combat engineers who demolitions expertise also includes mine and IED detection and disposal. For more information, see Bomb disposal.
Military engineering by country: Military engineers are key in all armed forces of the world, and invariably found either closely integrated into the force structure, or even into the combat units of the national troops.
Brazil: Brazilian Army engineers can be part of the Quadro de Engenheiros Militares, with its members trained or professionalized by the traditional Instituto Militar de Engenharia (IME) (Military Institute of Engineering), or the Arma de Engenharia, with its members trained by the Academia Militar das Agulhas Negras (AMAN) (Agulhas Negras Military Academy).
In the Brazil's Navy, engineers can occupy the Corpo de Engenheiros da Marinha, the Quadro Complementar de Oficiais da Armada and the Quadro Complementar de Oficiais Fuzileiros Navais. Officers can come from the Centro de Instrução Almirante Wandenkolk (CIAW) (Admiral Wandenkolk Instruction Center) and the Escola Naval (EN) (Naval School) which, through internal selection of the Navy, finish their graduation at the Universidade de São Paulo (USP) (University of São Paulo).
The Quadro de Oficias Engenheiros of the Brazilian Air Force is occupied by engineers professionalized by Centro de Instrução e Adaptação da Aeronáutica (CIAAR) (Air Force Instruction and Adaptation Center) and trained, or specialized, by Instituto Tecnológico de Aeronáutica (ITA) (Aeronautics Institute of Technology).
Russia: Russian Empire – Pososhniye lyudi
Soviet Union – Engineer Troops (Soviet Union); Assault Engineering Brigades
Russia – Russian Engineer Troops
United Kingdom: The Royal School of Military Engineering is the main training establishment for the British Army's Royal Engineers. The RSME also provides training for the Royal Navy, Royal Air Force, other Arms and Services of the British Army, Other Government Departments, and Foreign and Commonwealth countries as required. These skills provide vital components in the Army's operational capability, and Royal Engineers are currently deployed in Afghanistan, Iraq, Cyprus, Bosnia, Kosovo, Kenya, Brunei, Falklands, Belize, Germany and Northern Ireland. Royal Engineers also take part in exercises in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Italy, Egypt, Jordan, Canada, Poland and the United States.
United States: The prevalence of military engineering in the United States dates back to the American Revolutionary War when engineers would carry out tasks in the U.S. Army. During the war, they would map terrain to and build fortifications to protect troops from opposing forces. The first military engineering organization in the United States was the Army Corps of Engineers. Engineers were responsible for protecting military troops whether using fortifications or designing new technology and weaponry throughout the United States' history of warfare. The Army originally claimed engineers exclusively, but as the U.S. military branches expanded to the sea and sky, the need for military engineering sects in all branches increased. As each branch of the United States military expanded, technology adapted to fit their respective needs.
United States Army Corps of Engineers
Air Force Civil Engineer Support Agency, Rapid Engineer Deployable Heavy Operational Repair Squadron Engineers (RED HORSE), and Prime Base Engineer Emergency Force (Prime BEEF)
The United States Navy Construction Battalion Corps (better known as the Seabees) and Civil Engineer Corps
United States Marine Corps Combat Engineer Battalions
Other nations: Department of the Engineer Troops of the Armed Forces of Armenia
Royal Australian Engineers and the Royal Australian Air Force Airfield Engineers
Corps of Engineers and Military Engineer Services (MES), Bangladesh Army
Canadian Military Engineers
The Danish military engineering corps is almost entirely organized into one regiment, simply named "Ingeniørregimentet" ("The Engineering Regiment").
Pioniertruppe (Bundeswehr)
Engineering Arm, including the Paris Fire Brigade
Indian Army Corps of Engineers
Indonesian Army Corps of Engineers
Irish Army Engineer Corps
Combat Engineering Corps of the Israel Defense Forces
Engineer Regiment (Namibia)
Corps of Royal New Zealand Engineers
Ingeniørbataljonen ("The Engineer Battalion")
Rejimen Askar Jurutera DiRaja ("Royal Engineer Regiment")
Pakistan Army Corps of Engineers and the Military Engineering Service
10th Engineer Brigade
South African Army Engineer Formation
Sri Lanka Engineers and the Engineer Services Regiment
The Le Quy Don Technical University is the main training establishment for the Vietnamese Army's Corps of Engineers
See also:
Related topics:
Notable military engineers:
References:
External links: Headquarters U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
NATO Military Engineering Centre of Excellence |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military exercise | Types:
Command post: A Command Post Exercise (CPX) typically focuses on the battle readiness of staffs such as a particular Unified Combatant Command or one of its components at any level. It may run in parallel with an FTX or its equivalent, or as a stand-alone event for headquarters staff only with heavy emphasis on simulated events.
Field: Historical names for the field exercise, or the full-scale rehearsal of military maneuvers as practice for warfare in the military services of the British Commonwealth include "schemes", while those of the military services United States are known as Field Training Exercises (FTX), or, in the case of naval forces, Fleet Exercises (FLEETEX). In a field exercise or fleet exercise, the two sides in the simulated battle are typically called "red" (simulating the enemy forces) and "blue", to avoid naming a particular adversary. This naming convention originates with the inventors of the table-top war-game (the "Kriegsspiel"), the Prussian Georg von Reisswitz; their army wore Prussian blue, so friendly forces were depicted by the color blue.
Multiple forces: Several different armed forces of the same nation training together are described as having a joint exercise. Those involving forces of multiple nations are described as having a combined exercise or coalition exercise. These are called a bilateral exercise if based on security agreements between two nations, or a multilateral exercise if the agreement is between multiple nations.
Simulation: Other types of exercise include the Tactical Exercise Without Troops (TEWT), also known as a sand table, map, cloth model, or computer simulation exercise. These allow commanders to manipulate models through possible scenarios in military planning. This is also called warfare simulation, or in some instances a virtual battlefield, and in the past has been described as "wargames". Such examples of modern military wargames include DARWARS, a serious game developed since 2003 by DARPA with BBN Technologies, a defense contractor which was involved in the development of packet switching, used for ARPANET, and which developed the first computer modem in 1963.
Military operations and training have included different scenarios a soldier might encounter with morals and different ethics. In one military operation soldiers are frequently asked to engage in combat, humanitarian, and stabilization roles. These increase the ambiguity of a role one may encounter and challenge of ethics. This will also lead the military personnel to have to make a difficult call in challenging circumstances. Even in difficult situations and conditions, military personnel still has to follow rules and regulations such as: 1) when the right thing to do is not immediately clear; 2) when two or more important principles or values support different actions, and 3) when some harm will result, regardless of the actions taken (Defense Ethics Program, Department of National Defense, 2012). These simulations involve crude living conditions, sleep deprivations, time limit, and either lack or ambiguous amount of information.
A subset of simulated exercises is the Table Top Exercise (TTX), typically limited to senior personnel stepping through the decision-making processes they would employ in a crisis, a contingency, or general warfare.
History: The use of military exercises and war games can be found to date back to as early as the early 19th century, wherein it was the officers of the Prussian Army who created the contemporary, tactical form of wargames that have since been more widely used and developed by other military conglomerations throughout the world. Non-tactical forms of wargames have existed for much longer, however, in the forms of tabletop games such as chess and Go.
The modern use of military exercises grew out of the military need to study warfare and to reenact old battles for learning purposes. During the age of Kabinettskriege (Cabinet wars), Frederick the Great, King of Prussia from 1740 to 1786, "put together his armies as a well-oiled clockwork mechanism whose components were robot-like warriors. No individual initiative was allowed to Frederick's soldiers; their only role was to cooperate in the creation of walls of projectiles through synchronized firepower." This was in the pursuit of a more effective army, and such practices made it easier to look at war from a top-down perspective. Disciplined troops should respond predictably, allowing study to be confined to maneuvers and command.
Prussia's victory over the Second French Empire in the Franco-Prussian War (1870–71) is sometimes partly credited to the training of Prussian officers with the wargame Kriegsspiel, which was invented around 1811 and gained popularity with many officers in the Prussian army. These first wargames were played with dice which represented "friction", or the intrusion of less than ideal circumstances during a real war (including morale, meteorology, the fog of war, etc.).
21st century militaries still use wargames to simulate future wars and model their reaction. According to Manuel de Landa, after World War II the Command, Control and Communications (C3) was transferred from the military staff to the RAND Corporation, the first think tank. Around the mid to late 20th century, computer simulated war games were created to replace traditional war gaming methods with the goal of optimizing and speeding up the process and making it possible to analyze more complex scenarios with greater ease. In 1958, the Naval War college installed a computer war game system where their traditional war gaming activities were held. The system was called the Navy Electronic Warfare System, and cost over $10 million to install. The change from traditional war gaming methods to electronic computer simulated ones meant that the value and accuracy of a war game simulation was less dependent on skill and individual experiences, and more dependent on quantitative data and complicated analysis methods.
Von Neumann was employed by the RAND Corporation, and his game theory was used in wargames to model nuclear dissuasion during the Cold War. Thus, the U.S. nuclear strategy was defined using wargames, "SAM" representing the U.S. and "IVAN" representing the Soviet Union.
Early game theory included only zero-sum games, which means that when one player won, the other automatically lost. The prisoner's dilemma, which models the situation of two prisoners in which each one is given the choice to betray or not the other, gave three alternatives to the game:
Neither prisoners betrays the other, and both are given short-term sentences
One prisoner betrays the other, and is freed, while the other gets a long sentence
Both prisoners betray each other, and both are given mid-sized sentences
This model gave the basis for the massive retaliation nuclear doctrine. The zero-sum fallacy and cooperative games would be theorized only later, while the evolution of nuclear technology and missiles made the massive retaliation nuclear strategy obsolete.
List of military exercises:
Current and recurring:
Former, significant:
See also: Aggressor squadron
Maneuver warfare
Flanking maneuver
Live fire exercise
Pincer movement
Simulation
References:
External links: Complete 911 Timeline: Center for Cooperative Research – Military exercises up to 9/11 |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military history | Popular versus academic military history: In terms of the history profession in major countries, military history is an orphan, despite its enormous popularity with the general public. William H. McNeill points out:
This branch of our discipline flourishes in an intellectual ghetto. The 144 books in question [published in 1968-78] fall into two distinct classes: works aimed at a popular readership, written by journalists and men of letters outside academic circles, and professional work nearly always produced within the military establishment.... The study of military history in universities remains seriously underdeveloped. Indeed, lack of interest in and disdain for military history probably constitute one of the strangest prejudices of the profession.
In recent decades University level courses in military history remain popular; often they use films to humanize the combat experience. For example, Eugene P. A. Scleh, history professor at the University of Maine, has explored the advantages and problems of teaching a course of "Modern War and Its Images" entirely through films. Students said they found the documentaries more valuable than the dramas. However, military historians are frustrated by their marginal status in major history departments.
Academic historians concerned with military topics have their own scholarly organization, Society for Military History. Since 1937 it has published The Journal of Military History. Its four issues a year include scholarly articles reviews of new books, and a bibliography of new publications and dissertations. The Society has 2300 members, holds an annual convention, and gives out prizes for the best scholarship.
Historiography of military history: Historiography is the study of the history and method of the discipline of history or the study of a specialised topic. In this case, military history with an eye to gaining an accurate assessment of conflicts using all available sources. For this reason military history is periodised, creating overlaying boundaries of study and analysis in which descriptions of battles by leaders may be unreliable due to the inclination to minimize mention of failure and exaggerate success. Military historians use Historiographical analysis in an effort to allow an unbiased, contemporary view of records.
One military historian, Jeremy Black, outlined problems 21st-century military historians face as an inheritance of their predecessors: Eurocentricity, a technological bias, a focus on leading military powers and dominant military systems, the separation of land from sea and recently air conflicts, the focus on state-to-state conflict, a lack of focus on political "tasking" in how forces are used.
If these challenges were not sufficient for military historians, the limits of method are complicated by the lack of records, either destroyed or never recorded due to their value as a military secret. Scholars still do not know the exact nature of Greek fire, for instance. Researching Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom, for example, have presented unique challenges to historians due to records that were destroyed to protect classified military information, among other reasons. Historians use their knowledge of government regulation and military organization, and employing a targeted and systematic research strategy to piece together war histories. Despite these limits, wars are some of the most studied and detailed periods of human history.
Military historians have often compared organization, tactical and strategic ideas, leadership, and national support of the militaries of different nations.
In the early 1980s, historian Jeffrey Kimball studied the influence of a historian's political position on current events on interpretive disagreement regarding the causes of 20th century wars. He surveyed the ideological preferences of 109 active diplomatic historians in the United States as well as 54 active military historians. He finds that their current political views are moderately correlated with their historiographical interpretations. A clear position on the left-right continuum regarding capitalism was apparent in most cases. All groups agreed with the proposition, "historically, Americans have tended to view questions of their national security in terms of such extremes as good vs. evil." Though the Socialists were split, the other groups agreed that "miscalculation and/or misunderstanding of the situation" had caused U.S. interventionism." Kimball reports that:
Of historians in the field of diplomatic history, 7% are Socialist, 19% are Other, 53% are Liberal, 11% are None and 10% Conservative. Of military historians, 0% are Socialist, 8% are Other, 35% are Liberal, 18% are None and 40% are Conservative.
Online resources: People interested in military history from all periods of time, and all subtopics, are increasingly turning to the Internet for many more resources than are typically available in nearby libraries. Since 1993, one of the most popular sites, with over 4000 members (subscriptions are free) has been H-WAR, sponsored by the H-Net network based at Michigan State University. H-War has six coeditors, and an academic advisory board that sets policy. It sponsors daily moderated discussions of current topics, announcements of new publications and conferences, and reports on developments at conferences. The H-Net family of lists has sponsored and published over 46,000 scholarly book reviews, thousands of which deal with books in military history broadly conceived. Wikipedia itself has a very wide coverage of military history, with over 180,000 articles. Its editors sponsor Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history and encourage readers to join.
Military and war museums: Military museums specialize in military histories; they are often organized from a national point of view, where a museum in a particular country will have displays organized around conflicts in which that country has taken part. They typically take a broad view of warfare's role in the nation's history. They typically include displays of weapons and other military equipment, uniforms, wartime propaganda, and exhibits on civilian life during wartime, and decorations, among others. A military museum may be dedicated to a particular or area, such as the Imperial War Museum Duxford for military aircraft, Deutsches Panzermuseum for tanks, the Lange Max Museum for the Western Front (World War I), the International Spy Museum for espionage, The National World War I Museum for World War I, the "D-Day Paratroopers Historical Center" (Normandy) for WWII airborne, or more generalist, such as the Canadian War Museum or the Musée de l'Armée. For the Italian alpine wall one can find the most popular museum of bunkers in the small museum n8bunker at Olang / Kronplatz in the heard of the dolomites of South Tyrol. The U.S. Army and the state National Guards operate 98 military history museums across the United States and three abroad.
Curators debate how or whether the goal of providing diverse representations of war, in terms of positive and negative aspects of warfare. War is seldom presented as a good thing, but soldiers are heavily praised. David Lowenthal has observed that in today's museums, "nothing seems too horrendous to commemorate". Yet as Andrew Whitmarsh notes, "museums frequently portray a sanitised version of warfare." The actual bomber that dropped the atomic bomb on Japan became the focus of an angry national controversy with veterans attacking curators and historians when the Smithsonian Institution planned to put its fuselage on public display in 1995. The uproar led to cancellation of the exhibit.
Early historians: The documentation of military history begins with the confrontation between Sumer (current Iraq) and Elam (current Iran) c. 2700 BC near the modern Basra. Other prominent records in military history are the Trojan War in Homer's Iliad (though its historicity has been challenged), The Histories by Herodotus (484–425 BC) who is often called the "father of history". Next was Thucydides whose impartiality, despite being an Athenian, allowed him to take advantage of his exile to research the war from different perspectives by carefully examining documents and interviewing eyewitnesses. An approach centered on the analysis of a leader was taken by Xenophon (430–355 BC) in Anabasis, recording the expedition of Cyrus the Younger into Anatolia.
The memoirs of the Roman Julius Caesar (100–44 BC) enable a comparative approach for campaigns such as Commentarii de Bello Gallico and Commentarii de Bello Civili.
Technological evolution: The nature of warfare never changes, only its superficial manifestations. Joshua and David, Hector and Achilles would recognize the combat that our soldiers and Marines have waged in the alleys of Somalia and Iraq. The uniforms evolve, bronze gives way to titanium, arrows may be replaced by laser-guided bombs, but the heart of the matter is still killing your enemies until any survivors surrender and do your will.
New weapons development can dramatically alter the face of war, the cost of warfare, the preparations, and the training of soldiers and leaders. A rule of thumb is that if your enemy has a potentially war winning weapon, you have to either match it or neutralize it.
Ancient era: Chariots originated around 2000 BC. The chariot was an effective, fast weapon; while one man controlled the maneuvering of the chariot, a second bowman could shoot arrows at enemy soldiers. These became crucial to the maintenance of several governments, including the New Egyptian Kingdom and the Shang dynasty and the nation states of the early to middle Zhou dynasty.
Some of the military unit types and technologies which were developed in the ancient world are:
Slinger
Hoplite
Auxiliaries
Infantry
Archery
Chariots
Cavalry
For settled agrarian civilizations, the infantry became the core of military action. The infantry started as opposing armed groups of soldiers underneath commanders. The Greeks and early Romans used rigid, heavily armed phalanxes. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military history | A rule of thumb is that if your enemy has a potentially war winning weapon, you have to either match it or neutralize it.
Ancient era: Chariots originated around 2000 BC. The chariot was an effective, fast weapon; while one man controlled the maneuvering of the chariot, a second bowman could shoot arrows at enemy soldiers. These became crucial to the maintenance of several governments, including the New Egyptian Kingdom and the Shang dynasty and the nation states of the early to middle Zhou dynasty.
Some of the military unit types and technologies which were developed in the ancient world are:
Slinger
Hoplite
Auxiliaries
Infantry
Archery
Chariots
Cavalry
For settled agrarian civilizations, the infantry became the core of military action. The infantry started as opposing armed groups of soldiers underneath commanders. The Greeks and early Romans used rigid, heavily armed phalanxes. The Macedonians and Hellenistic states would adopt phalanx formations with sarissa pikemen. The Romans would later adopt more flexible maniples from their neighbors which made them extremely successful in the field of battle. The kingdoms of the Warring States in East Asia also adopted infantry combat, a transition from chariot warfare from centuries earlier.
Archers were a major component of many ancient armies, notably those of the Persians, Scythians, Egyptians, Nubians, Indians, Chinese, Koreans and Japanese.
Cavalry became an important tool. In the Sicilian Expedition, led by Athens in an attempt to subdue Syracuse, the well-trained Syracusan cavalry became crucial to the success of the Syracusans. Macedonian Alexander the Great effectively deployed his cavalry forces to secure victories. In battles such as the Battle of Cannae of the Second Punic War, and the Battle of Carrhae of the Roman-Persian Wars, the importance of the cavalry would be repeated.
There were also horse archers, who had the ability to shoot on horseback—the Parthians, Scythians, Mongols, and other various steppe people were especially fearsome with this tactic. By the 3rd–4th century AD, heavily armored cavalry became widely adopted by the Parthians, Sasanians, Byzantines, Eastern Han dynasty and Three Kingdoms, etc.
The early Indo-Iranians developed the use of chariots in warfare. The scythed chariot was later invented in India and soon adopted by the Persians.
War elephants were sometimes deployed for fighting in ancient warfare. They were first used in India and later adopted by the Persians. War elephants were also used in the Battle of the Hydaspes River, and by Hannibal in the Second Punic War against the Romans. One of the most important military transactions of the ancient world was Chandragupta Maurya's gift of 500 elephants to Seleucus I Nicator.
Naval warfare was often crucial to military success. Early navies used sailing ships without cannons; often the goal was to ram the enemy ships and cause them to sink. There was human oar power, often using slaves, built up to ramming speed. Galleys were used in the 3rd millennium BC by the Cretans. The Greeks later advanced these ships.
In 1210 BC, the first recorded naval battle was fought between Suppiluliuma II, king of the Hittites, and Cyprus, which was defeated. In the Greco-Persian Wars, the navy became of increasing importance.
Triremes were involved in more complicated sea-land operations. Themistocles helped to build up a stronger Greek navy, composed of 310 ships, and defeated the Persians at the Battle of Salamis, ending the Persian invasion of Greece.
In the First Punic War, the war between Carthage and Rome started with an advantage to Carthage because of their naval experience. A Roman fleet was built in 261 BC, with the addition of the corvus that allowed Roman soldiers to board enemy ships. The bridge would prove effective at the Battle of Mylae, resulting in a Roman victory.
The Vikings, in the 8th century AD, invented a ship propelled by oars with a dragon decorating the prow, hence called the Drakkar. The 12th century AD Song dynasty invented ships with watertight bulkhead compartments while the 2nd century BC Han dynasty invented rudders and sculled oars for their warships.
Fortifications are important in warfare. Early hill-forts were used to protect inhabitants in the Iron Age. They were primitive forts surrounded by ditches filled with water. Forts were then built out of mud bricks, stones, wood, and other available materials. Romans used rectangular fortresses built out of wood and stone. As long as there have been fortifications, there have been contraptions to break in, dating back to the times of Romans and earlier. Siege warfare is often necessary to capture forts.
Middle-ages: Some of the military unit types and technologies which were used in the medieval period are:
Artillery
Cataphract
Condottieri
Fyrd
Rashidun
Mobile guard
Mamluk
Janissary
Knight (see also: Chivalry)
Crossbow
Pikeman
Samurai
Sipahi
Trebuchet
Bows and arrows were often used by combatants. Egyptians shot arrows from chariots effectively. The crossbow was developed around 500 BC in China, and was used heavily in the Middle Ages. The English/Welsh longbow from the 12th century also became important in the Middle Ages. It helped to give the English a large early advantage in the Hundred Years' War, even though the English were eventually defeated. The Battle of Crécy and the Battle of Agincourt are excellent examples of how to destroy an enemy using a longbow. It dominated battlefields for over a century.
Gunpowder: There is evidence for gunpowder evolving slowly from formulations by Chinese alchemists as early as the 4th century, at first as experiments for life force and metal transmutation, and later experiments as pyrotechnics and incendiaries. By the 10th century, the developments in gunpowder led to many new weapons that were improved over time. The Chinese used incendiary devices based on this in siege warfare against the Mongols starting in the mid 13th century. "Pots with wicks of flax or cotton were used, containing a combination of sulfur, saltpeter (potassium nitrate), aconitine, oil, resin, ground charcoal and wax." Joseph Needham argued the Chinese were able to destroy buildings and walls using such devices. Such experimentation was not present in Western Europe, where the combination of saltpeter, sulfur and charcoal were used exclusively for explosives and as a propellant in firearms. What the Chinese often referred to as the "fire drug" arrived in Europe, fully fleshed out, as gunpowder.
Cannons were first used in Europe in the early 14th century, and played a vital role in the Hundred Years' War. The first cannons were simply welded metal bars in the form of a cylinder, and the first cannonballs were made of stone. By 1346, at the Battle of Crécy, the cannon had been used; at the Battle of Agincourt they would be used again.
The first infantry firearms, from fire lances to hand cannons, were held in one hand, while the explosive charge was ignited by a lit match or hot coal held in the other hand. In the mid-15th century came the matchlock, allowing the gun to be aimed and fired while held steady with both hands, as used in the arquebus. Starting about 1500, clever but complicated firing mechanisms were invented to generate sparks to ignite the powder instead of a lit match, starting with the wheel lock, snaplock, snaphance, and finally the flintlock mechanism, which was simple and reliable, becoming standard with the musket by the early 17th century.
At the beginning of the 16th century, the first European fire ships were used. Ships were filled with flammable materials, set on fire, and sent to enemy lines. This tactic was successfully used by Francis Drake to scatter the Spanish Armada at the Battle of Gravelines, and would later be used by the Chinese, Russians, Greeks, and several other countries in naval battles.
Naval mines were invented in the 17th century, though they were not used in great numbers until the American Civil War. They were used heavily in the First and Second World Wars. Air-deployed naval mines were used to mine the North Vietnamese port of Haiphong during the Vietnam War. The Iraqi Navy of Saddam Hussein used naval mines extensively during the Tanker War, as part of the Iran–Iraq War.
The first navigable submarine was built in 1624 by Cornelius Drebbel, it could cruise at a depth of 15 feet (5 m). However, the first military submarine was constructed in 1885 by Isaac Peral.
The Turtle was developed by David Bushnell during the American Revolution. Robert Fulton then improved the submarine design by creating the Nautilus.
The Howitzer, a type of field artillery, was developed in the 17th century to fire high trajectory explosive shells at targets that could not be reached by flat trajectory projectiles. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military history | They were used heavily in the First and Second World Wars. Air-deployed naval mines were used to mine the North Vietnamese port of Haiphong during the Vietnam War. The Iraqi Navy of Saddam Hussein used naval mines extensively during the Tanker War, as part of the Iran–Iraq War.
The first navigable submarine was built in 1624 by Cornelius Drebbel, it could cruise at a depth of 15 feet (5 m). However, the first military submarine was constructed in 1885 by Isaac Peral.
The Turtle was developed by David Bushnell during the American Revolution. Robert Fulton then improved the submarine design by creating the Nautilus.
The Howitzer, a type of field artillery, was developed in the 17th century to fire high trajectory explosive shells at targets that could not be reached by flat trajectory projectiles.
Organizational changes resulting in better training and intercommunication, made the concept combined arms possible, allowing the use of infantry, cavalry, and artillery in a coordinated way.
Bayonets also became of wide usage to infantry soldiers. Bayonet is named after Bayonne, France where it was first manufactured in the 16th century. It is used often in infantry charges to fight in hand-to-hand combat. General Jean Martinet introduced the bayonet to the French army. They were used heavily in the American Civil War, and continued to be used in modern wars like the Invasion of Iraq.
Balloons were first used in warfare at the end of the 18th century. It was first introduced in Paris of 1783; the first balloon traveled over 5 miles (8 km). Previously military scouts could only see from high points on the ground, or from the mast of a ship. Now they could be high in the sky, signalling to troops on the ground. This made it much more difficult for troop movements to go unobserved.
At the end of the 18th century, iron-cased artillery rockets were successfully used militarily in India against the British by Tipu Sultan of the Kingdom of Mysore during the Anglo-Mysore Wars. Rockets were generally inaccurate at that time, though William Hale, in 1844, was able to develop a better rocket. The new rocket no longer needed the rocket stick, and had a higher accuracy.
In the 1860s there were a series of advancements in rifles. The first repeating rifle was designed in 1860 by a company bought out by Winchester, which made new and improved versions. Springfield rifles arrived in the mid-19th century also. Machine guns arrived in the late 19th century. Automatic rifles and light machine guns first arrived at the beginning of the 20th century.
In the later part of the 19th century, the self-propelled torpedo was developed. The HNoMS Rap was the world's first torpedo boat.
Early guns and artillery: The fire lance, the predecessor of the gun, was invented in China between the tenth and eleventh century. The barrel was originally designed out of bamboo shoots, later with metal. Joseph Needham notes "all the long preparations and tentative experiments were made in China, and everything came to Islam and the West fully fledged, whether it was the fire lance or the explosive bomb, the rocket or the metal-barrel handgun and bombard." By the 1320s Europe had guns, but scholars state that the exact time and method of migration from China remains a mystery. Evidence of firearms is found in Iran and Central Asia in the late fourteenth century. It was not until roughly 1442 that guns were referenced in India. Reliable references to guns in Russia begins around 1382.
An illustration of a "pot-shaped gun" found in the Holkham Hall Milemete manuscript dated to 1326 shows earliest advent of firearms in European history. The illustration shows an arrow, set in the pot-shaped gun pointed directly at a structure. Archaeological evidence of such "gun arrows" were discovered in Eltz Castle, "dated by relation to a historical event (a feud with the Archbishop of Trier in 1331–36 leading to a siege), seem to confirm again that this was at least one of the types of guns like the Milemete used in these very early examples."
According to Peter Fraser Purton, the best evidence of the earliest gun in Europe is the Loshult gun, dated to the fourteenth century. Discovered in 1861, the Loshult was made of bronze measured 11.8 inches in length. A replica of the Loshult was created, using similar gunpowder compounds with present-day materials, to determine the effectiveness of the weapon. The Gunpowder Research Group, who designed the recreation, found that at high elevations, the Loshult could fire as far as 1300 meters. Though inaccurate, missing targets further than 200 meters, the Loshult could fire a range of projectiles such as arrows and shot. It was determined that the Loshult could be effectively fired at ranks of soldiers and structures.
Written works from the Cabinet des Titres of the Imperial Library of Paris has found evidence of canons in France in 1338. The works illustrate canons being used on-board ships at the Rouen during that time. "...an iron Fire-arm, which was provided with forty-eight bolts, made of iron and freather; also one pound of saltpetre and half a pound of sulphur to make the powder propel arrows."
Researchers have been unable to determine the sizes of these cannons and others, outside the artifacts recovered. Sir Henry Brackenbury was able to surmise the approximate size of these cannons by comparing receipts for both the firearms and the corresponding amounts of gunpowder purchased. The receipts show a transaction for "25 Livres for 5 canons." Brackenbury was able to deduce, when comparing the costs of the cannons and the gunpowder apportioned, that they each iron cannon weighed approximately 25 lbs, while the brass cannons weighed roughly 22 lbs.
Philip the Bold (1363–1404) is credited with creating the most effective artillery power in Europe in the late fourteenth century, effectively creating the Burgundian estate. Philip's development of a large artillery army made the small country a reputable force against larger empires such as England and France. Philip had achieved this by establishing a large scale artillery manufacturing economy in Burgundy. Philip used his new cache of artillery to help the French capture an English-held fortress of Odruik. The artillery used to take Odruik used cannonballs measuring to about 450 pounds.
Large artillery was a major contributing factor to the fall of Constantinople at the hands of Mehmed the Conqueror (1432–1481). Having resigned his position as ruler due to youth and inexperience in 1446, Mehmed moved to the Ottoman capital of Manisa. After his uncle, Murad II died in 1451, Mehmed once again became Sultan. He turned his attention to claiming the Byzantine capital, Constantinople. Mehmed, like Philip, started mass-producing cannons by enticing craftsmen to his cause with money and freedom. For 55 days, Constantinople was bombarded with artillery fire, throwing cannonballs as large as 800 lbs at its walls. On May 29, 1453, Constantinople fell into Ottoman control.
Early firearm tactics: As guns and artillery became more advanced and prevalent, so to did the tactics by which they were implemented. According to Historian Michael Roberts "...a military revolution began with the broad adoption of firearms and artillery by late sixteenth-century European armies." Infantry with firearms replaced cavalry. Empires adapted their strongholds to withstand artillery fire. Eventually drilling strategies and battlefield tactics were adapted for the evolution in firearms use.
In Japan, at the same time during the sixteenth-century, this military evolution was also taking hold. These changes included a universal adoption of firearms, tactical developments for effective use, logistical restructuring within the military itself, and "the emergence of centralized and political and institutional relationships indicative of the early modern order."
Tactically, beginning with Oda Nobunaga, the technique known as "volleying" or countermarch drills were implemented. Volley fire is an organized implementation of firearms, where infantry are structured in ranks. The ranks will alternate between loading and firing positions, allowing more consistent rates of fire and preventing enemies from taking over a position while members reload.
Historical evidence shows that Oda Nobunaga implemented his volley technique successfully in 1575, twenty years before evidence of such a technique is shown in Europe. The first indications of the countermarch technique in Europe was by Lord William Louis of Nassau (1538–1574) in the mid-1590s.
Korea also seemed to be adapting the volley technique, earlier than even the Japanese. "Koreans seem to have employed some kind of volley principle with guns by 1447, when the Korean King Sejong the Great instructed his gunners to shoot their 'fire barrels' in squads of five, taking turns firing and loading."
This was on display during what Kenneth Swope called the First Great East Asian War, when Japan was trying to take control and subjugate Korea. Toyotomi Hideyoshi (1537–1598) made a failed invasion of Korea, which lasted six years, eventually pushed back by the Koreans with the aid of Ming China. Japan, using overwhelming firepower, had many early victories on the Korean peninsulas. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military history | The first indications of the countermarch technique in Europe was by Lord William Louis of Nassau (1538–1574) in the mid-1590s.
Korea also seemed to be adapting the volley technique, earlier than even the Japanese. "Koreans seem to have employed some kind of volley principle with guns by 1447, when the Korean King Sejong the Great instructed his gunners to shoot their 'fire barrels' in squads of five, taking turns firing and loading."
This was on display during what Kenneth Swope called the First Great East Asian War, when Japan was trying to take control and subjugate Korea. Toyotomi Hideyoshi (1537–1598) made a failed invasion of Korea, which lasted six years, eventually pushed back by the Koreans with the aid of Ming China. Japan, using overwhelming firepower, had many early victories on the Korean peninsulas. Though the Koreans had similar manpower, "the curtain of arrows thrown up by defenders was wiped out by [Japanese] gunfire." After the Japanese were finally pushed back in 1598, sweeping military reforms took place in Korea, largely based on updating and implementing the volley technique with firearms.
It was Qi Jiguang, a Ming Chinese General that provided the original treatise, disseminated to Koreans, that aided in this venture. In these manuals, Qi "...gave detailed instructions in the use of small group tactics, psychological warfare, and other 'modern' techniques." Qi emphasized repetitive drilling, dividing men into smaller groups, separating the strong from weak. Qi's ethos was one of synthesizing smaller groups, trained in various tactical formations, into larger companies, battalions and armies. By doing this they could "operate as eyes, hands, and feet..." aiding to overall unit cohesion.
Modern technologies: At the start of the World Wars, various nations had developed weapons that were a surprise to their adversaries, leading to a need to learn from this, and alter how to combat them. Flame throwers were first used in the First World War. The French were the first to introduce the armored car in 1902. Then in 1918, the British produced the first armored troop carrier. Many early tanks were proof of concept but impractical until further development. In World War I, the British and French held a crucial advantage due to their superiority in tanks; the Germans had only a few dozen A7V tanks, as well as 170 captured tanks. The British and French both had several hundred each. The French tanks included the 13 ton Schneider CA1, with a 75 mm gun, and the British had the Mark IV and Mark V tanks.
On December 17, 1903, the Wright Brothers performed the first controlled, powered, heavier-than-air flight; it went 39 meters (120 ft). In 1907, the first helicopter flew, but it wasn't practical for usage. Aviation became important in World War I, in which several aces gained fame. In 1911 an aircraft took off from a warship for the first time. Landings on a cruiser were another matter. This led to the development of an aircraft carrier with a decent unobstructed flight deck.
Chemical warfare exploded into the public consciousness in World War I but may have been used in earlier wars without as much human attention. The Germans used gas-filled shells at the Battle of Bolimov on January 3, 1915. These were not lethal, however. In April 1915, the Germans developed a chlorine gas that was highly lethal, and used it to moderate effect at the Second Battle of Ypres. Gas masks were invented in matter of weeks, and poison gas proved ineffective at winning battles. It was made illegal by all nations in the 1920s.
World War II gave rise to even more technology. The worth of aircraft grew from mostly reconnaissance to strategic bombing and more. The worth of the aircraft carrier was proved in the battles between the United States and Japan like the Battle of Midway. Radar was independently invented by the Allies and Axis powers. It used radio waves to detect objects. Molotov cocktails were invented by General Franco in the Spanish Civil War, directing the Nationalists to use them against Soviet tanks in the assault on Toledo. The atomic bomb was developed by the Manhattan Project and dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, quickly and controversially ending World War II.
During the Cold War, the main powers engaged in a Nuclear arms race which comprised the making of atomic bombs, hydrogen bombs, and more advanced nuclear bombs. In the space race, both nations attempted to launch human beings into space, to the moon and send satellites. Other technological advances were centered on intelligence (like the spy satellite) and missiles (ballistic missiles, cruise missiles). The nuclear submarine was invented in 1955. This meant submarines no longer needed to surface as often, and could run more quietly. They evolved into underwater missile platforms.
Periods of military history:
Prehistoric warfare: Prehistoric warfare refers to war that occurred between societies without recorded history. The Tollense valley battlefield is the oldest evidence of a large scale battle in Europe. More than 4,000 warriors fought in a battle on the site in the 13th century BC.
Ancient warfare: Much of what we know of ancient history is the history of militaries: their conquests, their movements, and their technological innovations. There are many reasons for this. Kingdoms and empires, the central units of control in the ancient world, could only be maintained through military force. Due to limited agricultural ability, there were relatively few areas that could support large communities, therefore fighting was common.
The Umma–Lagash war was one of the first wars in recorded history, fought between the Sumerian city-states of Lagash and Umma. The border conflict over the fertile Guedena region lasted for several generations.
Weapons and armor, designed to be sturdy, tended to last longer than other artifacts, and thus a great deal of surviving artifacts recovered tend to fall in this category as they are more likely to survive. Weapons and armor were also mass-produced to a scale that makes them quite plentiful throughout history, and thus more likely to be found in archaeological digs.
Such items were also considered signs of prosperity or virtue, and thus were likely to be placed in tombs and monuments to prominent warriors. And writing, when it existed, was often used for kings to boast of military conquests or victories.
Writing, when used by the common man, also tended to record such events, as major battles and conquests constituted major events that many would have considered worthy of recording either in an epic such as the Homeric writings pertaining to the Trojan War, or even personal writings. Indeed, the earliest stories center on warfare, as war was both a common and dramatic aspect of life; the witnessing of a major battle involving many thousands of soldiers would be quite a spectacle, even today, and thus considered worthy both of being recorded in song and art, but also in realistic histories, as well as being a central element in a fictional work.
Lastly, as nation states evolved and empires grew, the increased need for order and efficiency lead to an increase in the number of records and writings. Officials and armies would have good reason for keeping detailed records and accounts involving any and all things concerning a matter such as warfare that, in the words of Sun Tzu, was "a matter of vital importance to the state". For all these reasons, military history comprises a large part of ancient history.
Notable militaries in the ancient world included the Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Ancient Greeks (notably the Spartans and Macedonians), Kushites, Indians (notably the Magadhas, Gangaridais, Gandharas and Cholas), Early Imperial Chinese (notably the Qin and Han dynasties), Xiongnu Confederation, Ancient Romans, and Carthaginians.
The fertile crescent of Mesopotamia was the center of several prehistoric conquests. Mesopotamia was conquered by the Sumerians, Akkadians, Babylonians, Assyrians and Persians. Iranians were the first nation to introduce cavalry into their army.
Egypt began growing as an ancient power, but eventually fell to the Libyans, Nubians, Assyrians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Byzantines and Arabs.
The earliest recorded battle in India was the Battle of the Ten Kings. The Indian epics Mahabharata and Ramayana are centered on conflicts and refer to military formations, theories of warfare and esoteric weaponry. Chanakya's Arthashastra contains a detailed study on ancient warfare, including topics on espionage and war elephants.
Alexander the Great invaded Northwestern India and defeated King Porus in the Battle of the Hydaspes River. The same region was soon re conquered by Chandragupta Maurya after defeating the Macedonians and Seleucids. He also went on to conquer the Nanda Empire and unify Northern India. Most of Southern Asia was unified under his grandson Ashoka the Great after the Kalinga War, though the empire collapsed not long after his reign.
In China, the Shang dynasty and Zhou dynasty had risen and collapsed. This led to a Warring States period, in which several states continued to fight with each other over territory. Philosopher-strategists such as Confucius and Sun Tzu wrote various manuscripts on ancient warfare (as well as international diplomacy). |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military history | Chanakya's Arthashastra contains a detailed study on ancient warfare, including topics on espionage and war elephants.
Alexander the Great invaded Northwestern India and defeated King Porus in the Battle of the Hydaspes River. The same region was soon re conquered by Chandragupta Maurya after defeating the Macedonians and Seleucids. He also went on to conquer the Nanda Empire and unify Northern India. Most of Southern Asia was unified under his grandson Ashoka the Great after the Kalinga War, though the empire collapsed not long after his reign.
In China, the Shang dynasty and Zhou dynasty had risen and collapsed. This led to a Warring States period, in which several states continued to fight with each other over territory. Philosopher-strategists such as Confucius and Sun Tzu wrote various manuscripts on ancient warfare (as well as international diplomacy).
The Warring States era philosopher Mozi (Micius) and his Mohist followers invented various siege weapons and siegecraft, including the Cloud Ladder (a four-wheeled, extendable ramp) to scale fortified walls during a siege of an enemy city. The warring states were first unified by Qin Shi Huang after a series of military conquests, creating the first empire in China.
His empire was succeeded by the Han dynasty, which expanded into Central Asia, Northern China/Manchuria, Southern China, and present day Korea and Vietnam. The Han came into conflict with settled people such as the Wiman Joseon, and proto-Vietnamese Nanyue. They also came into conflict with the Xiongnu (Huns), Yuezhi, and other steppe civilizations.
The Han defeated and drove the Xiongnus west, securing the city-states along the silk route that continued into the Parthian Empire. After the decline of central imperial authority, the Han dynasty collapsed into an era of civil war and continuous warfare during the Three Kingdoms period in the 3rd century AD.
The Achaemenid Persian Empire was founded by Cyrus the Great after conquering the Median Empire, Neo-Babylonian Empire, Lydia and Asia Minor. His successor Cambyses went on to conquer the Egyptian Empire, much of Central Asia, and parts of Greece, India and Libya. The empire later fell to Alexander the Great after defeating Darius III. After being ruled by the Seleucid dynasty, the Persian Empire was subsequently ruled by the Parthian and Sassanid dynasties, which were the Roman Empire's greatest rivals during the Roman-Persian Wars.
In Greece, several city-states rose to power, including Athens and Sparta. The Greeks successfully stopped two Persian invasions, the first at the Battle of Marathon, where the Persians were led by Darius the Great, and the second at the Battle of Salamis, a naval battle where the Greek ships were deployed by orders of Themistocles and the Persians were under Xerxes I, and the land engagement of the Battle of Plataea.
The Peloponnesian War then erupted between the two Greek powers Athens and Sparta. Athens built a long wall to protect its inhabitants, but the wall helped to facilitate the spread of a plague that killed about 30,000 Athenians, including Pericles. After a disastrous campaign against Syracuse, the Athenian navy was decisively defeated by Lysander at the Battle of Aegospotami.
The Macedonians, underneath Philip II of Macedon and Alexander the Great, invaded Persia and won several major victories, establishing Macedonia as a major power. However, following Alexander's death at an early age, the empire quickly fell apart.
Meanwhile, Rome was gaining power, following a rebellion against the Etruscans. During the three Punic Wars, the Romans defeated the neighboring power of Carthage. The First Punic War centered on naval warfare. The Second Punic War started with Hannibal's invasion of Italy by crossing the Alps. He famously won the encirclement at the Battle of Cannae. However, after Scipio invaded Carthage, Hannibal was forced to follow and was defeated at the Battle of Zama, ending the role of Carthage as a power.
After defeating Carthage the Romans went on to become the Mediterranean's dominant power, successfully campaigning in Greece, (Aemilius Paulus decisive victory over Macedonia at the Battle of Pydna), in the Middle East (Lucius Licinius Lucullus, Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus), in Gaul (Gaius Julius Caesar) and defeating several Germanic tribes (Gaius Marius, Germanicus). While Roman armies suffered several major losses, their large population and ability (and will) to replace battlefield casualties, their training, organization, tactical and technical superiority enabled Rome to stay a predominant military force for several centuries, utilizing well trained and maneuverable armies to routinely overcome the much larger "tribal" armies of their foes (see Battles of Aquae Sextiae, Vercellae, Tigranocerta, Alesia).
In 54 BC the Roman triumvir Marcus Licinius Crassus took the offensive against the Parthian Empire in the east. In a decisive battle at Carrhae Romans were defeated and the golden Aquilae (legionary battle standards) were taken as trophies to Ctesiphon. The battle was one of the worst defeats suffered by the Roman Republic in its entire history.
While successfully dealing with foreign opponents, Rome experienced numerous civil wars, notably the power struggles of Roman generals such as Marius and Sulla during the end of the Republic. Caesar was also notable for his role in the civil war against the other member of the Triumvirate (Pompey) and against the Roman Senate.
The successors of Caesar—Octavian and Mark Anthony—also fought a civil war with Caesar's assassins (Senators Brutus, Cassius, etc.). Octavian and Mark Anthony eventually fought another civil war between themselves to determine the sole ruler of Rome. Octavian emerged victorious and Rome was turned into an empire with a huge standing army of professional soldiers.
By the time of Marcus Aurelius, the Romans had expanded to the Atlantic Ocean in the west and to Mesopotamia in the east and controlled Northern Africa and Central Europe up to the Black Sea. However, Aurelius marked the end of the Five Good Emperors, and Rome quickly fell into decline.
The Huns, Goths, and other barbaric groups invaded Rome, which continued to suffer from inflation and other internal strifes. Despite the attempts of Diocletian, Constantine I, and Theodosius I, western Rome collapsed and was eventually conquered in 476. The Byzantine empire continued to prosper, however.
Medieval warfare: When stirrups came into use some time during the Dark Ages militaries were forever changed. This invention coupled with technological, cultural, and social developments had forced a dramatic transformation in the character of warfare from antiquity, changing military tactics and the role of cavalry and artillery.
Similar patterns of warfare existed in other parts of the world. In China around the 5th century armies moved from massed infantry to cavalry based forces, copying the steppe nomads. The Middle East and North Africa used similar, if often more advanced, technologies than Europe.
In Japan, the Medieval warfare period is considered by many to have stretched into the 19th century. In Africa along the Sahel and Sudan states like the Kingdom of Sennar and Fulani Empire employed Medieval tactics and weapons well after they had been supplanted in Europe.
In the Medieval period, feudalism was firmly implanted, and there existed many landlords in Europe. Landlords often owned castles to protect their territory.
The Islamic Arab Empire began rapidly expanding throughout the Middle East, North Africa, and Central Asia, initially led by Rashidun Caliphate, and later under the Umayyads. While their attempts to invade Europe by way of the Balkans were defeated by Byzantium and Bulgaria, the Arabs expanded to the Iberian Peninsula in the west and the Indus Valley in the east. The Abassids then took over the Arab Empire, though the Umayyads remained in control of Islamic Spain.
At the Battle of Tours, the Franks under Charles Martel stopped short a Muslim invasion. The Abassids defeated the Tang Chinese army at the Battle of Talas, but were later defeated by the Seljuk Turks and the Mongols centuries later, until the Arab Empire eventually came to an end after the Battle of Baghdad in 1258.
In China, the Sui dynasty had risen and conquered the Chen dynasty of the south. They invaded Vietnam (northern Vietnam had been in Chinese control since the Han dynasty), fighting the troops of Champa, who had cavalry mounted on elephants. After decades of economic turmoil and a failed invasion of Korea, the Sui collapsed and was followed by the Tang dynasty, who fought with various Turkic groups, the Tibetans of Lhasa, the Tanguts, the Khitans, and collapsed due to political fragmentation of powerful regional military governors (jiedushi). The innovative Song dynasty followed next, inventing new weapons of war that employed the use of Greek Fire and gunpowder (see section below) against enemies such as the Jurchens.
The Mongols under Genghis Khan, Ögedei Khan, Möngke Khan, and Kublai Khan conquered most of Eurasia. They took over China, Persia, Turkestan, and Russia. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military history | They invaded Vietnam (northern Vietnam had been in Chinese control since the Han dynasty), fighting the troops of Champa, who had cavalry mounted on elephants. After decades of economic turmoil and a failed invasion of Korea, the Sui collapsed and was followed by the Tang dynasty, who fought with various Turkic groups, the Tibetans of Lhasa, the Tanguts, the Khitans, and collapsed due to political fragmentation of powerful regional military governors (jiedushi). The innovative Song dynasty followed next, inventing new weapons of war that employed the use of Greek Fire and gunpowder (see section below) against enemies such as the Jurchens.
The Mongols under Genghis Khan, Ögedei Khan, Möngke Khan, and Kublai Khan conquered most of Eurasia. They took over China, Persia, Turkestan, and Russia. After Kublai Khan took power and created the Yuan dynasty, the divisions of the empire ceased to cooperate with each other, and the Mongol Empire was only nominally united.
In New Zealand, prior to European discovery, oral histories, legends and whakapapa include many stories of battles and wars. Māori warriors were held in high esteem. One group of Polynesians migrated to the Chatham Islands, where they developed the largely pacifist Moriori culture. Their pacifism left the Moriori unable to defend themselves when the islands were invaded by mainland Māori in the 1830s.
They proceeded to massacre the Moriori and enslave the survivors. Warrior culture also developed in the isolated Hawaiian Islands. During the 1780s and 1790s the chiefs and alii were constantly fighting for power. After a series of battles the Hawaiian Islands were united for the first time under a single ruler who would become known as Kamehameha I.
Gunpowder warfare: After gunpowder weapons were first developed in Song dynasty China (see also: Technology of the Song dynasty), the technology later spread west to the Ottoman Empire, from where it spread to the Safavid Empire of Persia and the Mughal Empire of India. The arquebus was later adopted by European armies during the Italian Wars of the early 16th century.
This all brought an end to the dominance of armored cavalry on the battlefield. The simultaneous decline of the feudal system—and the absorption of the medieval city-states into larger states—allowed the creation of professional standing armies to replace the feudal levies and mercenaries that had been the standard military component of the Middle Ages.
In Africa, Ahmad ibn Ibrihim al-Ghazi, was the first African commander to use gunpowder on the continent in the Ethiopian–Adal War, that lasted for fourteen years (1529–1543).
The period spanning between the 1648 Peace of Westphalia and the 1789 French Revolution is also known as Kabinettskriege (Princes' warfare) as wars were mainly carried out by imperial or monarchics states, decided by cabinets and limited in scope and in their aims. They also involved quickly shifting alliances, and mainly used mercenaries.
Over the course of the 18th–19th centuries all military arms and services underwent significant developments that included a more mobile field artillery, the transition from use of battalion infantry drill in close order to open order formations and the transfer of emphasis from the use of bayonets to the rifle that replaced the musket, and virtual replacement of all types of cavalry with the universal dragoons, or mounted infantry.
Military Revolution: The Military Revolution is a conceptual schema for explaining the transformation of European military strategy, tactics and technology in the early modern period. The argument is that dramatic advances in technology, government finance, and public administration transformed and modernized European armies, tactics, and logistics. Since warfare was so central to the European state, the transformation had a major impact on modernizing government bureaucracies, taxation, and the national economy. The concept was introduced by Michael Roberts in the 1950s as he focused on Sweden 1560–1660. Roberts emphasized the introduction of muskets that could not be aimed at small targets, but could be very effective when fired in volleys by three ranks of infantry soldiers, with one firing while the other two ranks reloaded. All three ranks march forward to demolish the enemy. The infantry now had the firepower that had been reserved to the artillery, and had mobility that could rapidly advance in the battlefield, which the artillery lacked. The infantry thereby surpassed the artillery in tactical maneuvering on the battlefield. Roberts linked these advances with larger historical consequences, arguing that innovations in tactics, drill and doctrine by the Dutch and Swedes 1560–1660 led to a need for more and better trained troops and thus for permanent forces (standing armies). Armies grew much larger and more expensive. These changes in turn had major political consequences in the level of administrative support and the supply of money, men and provisions, producing new financial demands and the creation of new governmental institutions. "Thus, argued Roberts, the modern art of war made possible—and necessary—the creation of the modern state". In the 1990s the concept was modified and extended by Geoffrey Parker, who argued that developments in fortification and siege warfare caused the revolution. The concept of a military revolution based upon technology has given way to models based more on a slow evolution in which technology plays a minor role to organization, command and control, logistics and in general non-material improvements. The revolutionary nature of these changes was only visible after a long evolution that handed Europe a predominant place in warfare, a place that the industrial revolution would confirm.
The concept of a military revolution in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries has received a mixed reception among historians. Noted military historians Michael Duffy and Jeremy Black have strongly criticised it as misleading, exaggerated and simplistic.
Industrial warfare: As weapons—particularly small arms—became easier to use, countries began to abandon a complete reliance on professional soldiers in favor of conscription. Technological advances became increasingly important; while the armies of the previous period had usually had similar weapons, the industrial age saw encounters such as the Battle of Sadowa, in which possession of a more advanced technology played a decisive role in the outcome. Conscription was employed in industrial warfare to increase the number of military personnel that were available for combat. Conscription was notably used by Napoleon Bonaparte and the major parties during the two World Wars.
Total war was used in industrial warfare, the objective being to prevent the opposing nation to engage in war. Napoleon was the innovator. William Tecumseh Sherman's "March to the Sea" and Philip Sheridan's burning of the Shenandoah Valley during the American Civil War were examples. On the largest scale the strategic bombing of enemy cities and industrial factories during World War II was total warfare.
Modern warfare: Since the 1940s, preparation for a major war has been based on technological arms races involving all sorts of new weapons systems, such as nuclear and biological, as well as computerized control systems, and the opening of new venues, such as seen in the Space race involving the United States, the Soviet Union, and more recently, China.
Modern war also saw the improvement of armored tank technology. While tanks were present in the First World War, and the Second World War, armored warfare technology came to a head with the start of the Cold War. Many of the technologies commonly seen on main battle tanks today, such as composite armor, high caliber cannons, and advanced targeting systems, would be developed during this time.
A distinctive feature since 1945 is the absence of wars between major powers—indeed the near absence of any traditional wars between established countries. The major exceptions were the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971, the Iran–Iraq War 1980–1988, and the Gulf War of 1990–91. Instead actual fighting has largely been a matter of civil wars and insurgencies. The most recent example of a war between two nation states would be the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine.
See also:
Notes and references:
Further reading:
External links:
International Bibliography of Military History of the International Commission of Military History – from Brill.nl
H-WAR, daily discussion group for military historians – from Michigan State University Department of History, H-Net Humanities & Social Sciences Online
Web Sources for Military History – from AmericanHistoryProjects.com
Military History Encyclopedia on the Web |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military intelligence | Levels: Intelligence operations are carried out throughout the hierarchy of political and military activity.
Strategic: Strategic intelligence is concerned with broad issues such as economics, political assessments, military capabilities and intentions of foreign nations (and, increasingly, non-state actors). Such intelligence may be scientific, technical, tactical, diplomatic or sociological, but these changes are analyzed in combination with known facts about the area in question, such as geography, demographics and industrial capacities.
Strategic Intelligence is formally defined as "intelligence required for the formation of policy and military plans at national and international levels", and corresponds to the Strategic Level of Warfare, which is formally defined as "the level of warfare at which a nation, often as a member of a
group of nations, determines national or multinational (alliance or coalition) strategic security objectives and guidance, then develops and uses national resources to achieve those objectives."
Operational: Operational intelligence is focused on support or denial of intelligence at operational tiers. The operational tier is below the strategic level of leadership and refers to the design of practical manifestation. Formally defined as "Intelligence that is required for planning and conducting campaigns and major operations to accomplish strategic objectives within theaters or operational areas." It aligns with the Operational Level of Warfare, defined as "The level of warfare at which campaigns and major operations are planned, conducted, and sustained to achieve strategic objectives within theaters or other operational areas."
The term operation intelligence is used within law enforcement to refer to intelligence that supports long-term investigations into multiple, similar targets. Operational intelligence, in the discipline of law enforcement intelligence, is concerned primarily with identifying, targeting, detecting and intervening in criminal activity. The use within law enforcement and law enforcement intelligence is not scaled to its use in general intelligence or military/naval intelligence, being more narrowed in scope.
Tactical: Tactical intelligence is focused on support to operations at the tactical level and would be attached to the battlegroup. At the tactical level, briefings are delivered to patrols on current threats and collection priorities. These patrols are then debriefed to elicit information for analysis and communication through the reporting chain.
Tactical Intelligence is formally defined as "intelligence required for the planning and conduct of tactical operations", and corresponds with the Tactical Level of Warfare, itself defined as "the level of warfare at which battles and engagements are planned and executed to achieve military objectives assigned to tactical units or task forces".
Tasking: Intelligence should respond to the needs of leadership, based on the military objective and operational plans. The military objective provides a focus for the estimate process, from which a number of information requirements are derived. Information requirements may be related to terrain and impact on vehicle or personnel movement, disposition of hostile forces, sentiments of the local population and capabilities of the hostile order of battle.
In response to the information requirements, analysts examine existing information, identifying gaps in the available knowledge. Where gaps in knowledge exist, the staff may be able to task collection assets to target the requirement.
Analysis reports draw on all available sources of information, whether drawn from existing material or collected in response to the requirement. The analysis reports are used to inform the remaining planning staff, influencing planning and seeking to predict adversary intent.
This process is described as Collection Co-ordination and Intelligence Requirement Management (CCIRM).
Process: The process of intelligence has four phases: collection, analysis, processing and dissemination.
In the United Kingdom these are known as direction, collection, processing and dissemination.
In the U.S. military, Joint Publication 2-0 (JP 2-0) states: "The six categories of intelligence operations are: planning and direction; collection; processing and exploitation; analysis and production; dissemination and integration; and evaluation and feedback."
Collection: Many of the most important facts are well known or may be gathered from public sources. This form of information collection is known as open-source intelligence. For example, the population, ethnic make-up and main industries of a region are extremely important to military commanders, and this information is usually public. It is however imperative that the collector of information understands that what is collected is "information", and does not become intelligence until after an analyst has evaluated and verified this information. Collection of read materials, composition of units or elements, disposition of strength, training, tactics, personalities (leaders) of these units and elements contribute to the overall intelligence value after careful analysis.
The tonnage and basic weaponry of most capital ships and aircraft are also public, and their speeds and ranges can often be reasonably estimated by experts, often just from photographs. Ordinary facts like the lunar phase on particular days or the ballistic range of common military weapons are also very valuable to planning, and are habitually collected in an intelligence library.
A great deal of useful intelligence can be gathered from photointerpretation of detailed high-altitude pictures of a country. Photointerpreters generally maintain catalogs of munitions factories, military bases and crate designs in order to interpret munition shipments and inventories.
Most intelligence services maintain or support groups whose only purpose is to keep maps. Since maps also have valuable civilian uses, these agencies are often publicly associated or identified as other parts of the government. Some historic counterintelligence services, especially in Russia and China, have intentionally banned or placed disinformation in public maps; good intelligence can identify this disinformation.
It is commonplace for the intelligence services of large countries to read every published journal of the nations in which it is interested, and the main newspapers and journals of every nation. This is a basic source of intelligence.
It is also common for diplomatic and journalistic personnel to have a secondary goal of collecting military intelligence. For western democracies, it is extremely rare for journalists to be paid by an official intelligence service, but they may still patriotically pass on tidbits of information they gather as they carry on their legitimate business. Also, much public information in a nation may be unavailable from outside the country. This is why most intelligence services attach members to foreign service offices.
Some industrialized nations also eavesdrop continuously on the entire radio spectrum, interpreting it in real time. This includes not only broadcasts of national and local radio and television, but also local military traffic, radar emissions and even microwaved telephone and telegraph traffic, including satellite traffic.
The U.S. in particular is known to maintain satellites that can intercept cell-phone and pager traffic, usually referred to as the ECHELON system. Analysis of bulk traffic is normally performed by complex computer programs that parse natural language and phone numbers looking for threatening conversations and correspondents. In some extraordinary cases, undersea or land-based cables have been tapped as well.
More exotic secret information, such as encryption keys, diplomatic message traffic, policy and orders of battle are usually restricted to analysts on a need-to-know basis in order to protect the sources and methods from foreign traffic analysis.
Analysis: Analysis consists of assessment of an adversary's capabilities and vulnerabilities. In a real sense, these are threats and opportunities. Analysts generally look for the least defended or most fragile resource that is necessary for important military capabilities. These are then flagged as critical vulnerabilities. For example, in modern mechanized warfare, the logistics chain for a military unit's fuel supply is often the most vulnerable part of a nation's order of battle.
Human intelligence, gathered by spies, is usually carefully tested against unrelated sources. It is notoriously prone to inaccuracy. In some cases, sources will just make up imaginative stories for pay, or they may try to settle grudges by identifying personal enemies as enemies of the state that is paying for the intelligence. However, human intelligence is often the only form of intelligence that provides information about an opponent's intentions and rationales, and it is therefore often uniquely valuable to successful negotiation of diplomatic solutions.
In some intelligence organizations, analysis follows a procedure. First, general media and sources are screened to locate items or groups of interest, and then their location, capabilities, inputs and environment are systematically assessed for vulnerabilities using a continuously-updated list of typical vulnerabilities.
Filing: Critical vulnerabilities are then indexed in a way that makes them easily available to advisors and line intelligence personnel who package this information for policy-makers and war-fighters. Vulnerabilities are usually indexed by the nation and military unit with a list of possible attack methods.
Critical threats are usually maintained in a prioritized file, with important enemy capabilities analyzed on a schedule set by an estimate of the enemy's preparation time. For example, nuclear threats between the USSR and the U.S. were analyzed in real time by continuously on-duty staffs. In contrast, analysis of tank or army deployments are usually triggered by accumulations of fuel and munitions, which are monitored every few days. In some cases, automated analysis is performed in real time on automated data traffic.
Packaging threats and vulnerabilities for decision-makers is a crucial part of military intelligence. A good intelligence officer will stay very close to the policy-maker or war fighter to anticipate their information requirements and tailor the information needed. A good intelligence officer will also ask a fairly large number of questions in order to help anticipate needs. For an important policy-maker, the intelligence officer will have a staff to which research projects can be assigned.
Developing a plan of attack is not the responsibility of intelligence, though it helps an analyst to know the capabilities of common types of military units. Generally, policy-makers are presented with a list of threats and opportunities. They approve some basic action, and then professional military personnel plan the detailed act and carry it out. Once hostilities begin, target selection often moves into the upper end of the military chain of command. Once ready stocks of weapons and fuel are depleted, logistic concerns are often exported to civilian policy-makers.
Dissemination: The processed intelligence information is disseminated through database systems, intel bulletins and briefings to the different decision-makers. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military intelligence | A good intelligence officer will also ask a fairly large number of questions in order to help anticipate needs. For an important policy-maker, the intelligence officer will have a staff to which research projects can be assigned.
Developing a plan of attack is not the responsibility of intelligence, though it helps an analyst to know the capabilities of common types of military units. Generally, policy-makers are presented with a list of threats and opportunities. They approve some basic action, and then professional military personnel plan the detailed act and carry it out. Once hostilities begin, target selection often moves into the upper end of the military chain of command. Once ready stocks of weapons and fuel are depleted, logistic concerns are often exported to civilian policy-makers.
Dissemination: The processed intelligence information is disseminated through database systems, intel bulletins and briefings to the different decision-makers. The bulletins may also include consequently resulting information requirements and thus conclude the intelligence cycle.
Military intelligence organisations: Defence Intelligence Organisation (Australia)
Canadian Forces Intelligence Command (Canada)
Intelligence Branch (Canadian Forces)
Military Intelligence (Czech Republic)
Direction du Renseignement Militaire (France)
Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND – German Federal Intelligence Service) and Militärischer Abschirmdienst (MAD- German Military Counter-Intelligence)
Directorate General of Forces Intelligence (Bangladesh)
Military Intelligence and Reconnaissance (Egypt) (Egypt)
Strategic Intelligence Agency (Indonesia)
Defence Intelligence Agency (India)
Directorate of Military Intelligence
Directorate of Naval Intelligence
Directorate of Air Intelligence
Directorate of Military Intelligence (Ireland)
Aman (Israel)
Centro Intelligence Interforze (Italy)
Malaysian Defence Intelligence Organisation (Malaysia)
Defence Intelligence Agency (Nigeria)
Inter-Services Intelligence and Military Intelligence of Pakistan
Centro de Informações e Segurança Militares (CISMIL – Portugal)
Glavnoye Razvedyvatel'noye Upravleniye (GRU – Russian Military Intelligence)
Military Intelligence Agency (VOA – Serbia)
Defence Intelligence and the Intelligence Corps (UK)
United States Intelligence Community
Defense Intelligence Agency
G-2, US Army unit
Military Intelligence Corps
Defence Intelligence Division of the South African National Defence Force (South Africa)
See also: Intelligence gathering disciplines
List of intelligence gathering disciplines
References:
Further reading: N. J. E. Austin and N. B. Rankov, Exploratio: Military and Political Intelligence in the Roman World From the Second Punic War to the Battle of Adrianople. London: Routledge, 1995.
Julius Caesar, The Civil War. Translated by Jane F. Mitchell. Baltimore, MD: Penguin Books, 1967.
Cassius Dio, Dio's Roman History. Translated by Earnest Cary. New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1916.
Francis Dvornik, Origins of Intelligence Services. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1974.
Terrance Finnegan, "The Origins of Modern Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance: Military Intelligence at the Front, 1914–18", Studies in Intelligence 53#4 (2009) pp. 25–40.
J. F. C. Fuller, A Military History of the Western World, Vol. 1: From the Earliest Times to the Battle of Lepanto. New York: Da Capo Press, 1987.
Richard A. Gabriel and Karen S. Metz, From Sumer to Rome; The Military Capabilities of Ancient Armies. New York: Greenwood Press, 1991.
John Keegan, Intelligence in War. New York: Knopf, 2003.
Charles H. Harris & Louis R. Sadler. The Border and the Revolution: Clandestine Activities of the Mexican Revolution 1910–1920. HighLonesome Books, 1988.
Ishmael Jones, The Human Factor: Inside the CIA's Dysfunctional Intelligence Culture, New York: Encounter Books, 2010 (ISBN 978-1594032233).
Henry Landau, The Enemy Within: The Inside Story of German Sabotage in America. G. P. Putnam Sons, 1937.
Sidney F. Mashbir. I Was An American Spy. Vantage, 1953.
Nathan Miller. Spying for America: The Hidden History of U.S. Intelligence. Dell Publishing, 1989.
Ian Sayer & Douglas Botting. America's Secret Army, The Untold Story of the Counter Intelligence Corps. Franklin Watts Publishers, 1989.
Barbara W. Tuchman, The Zimmermann Telegram. Ballantine Books, 1958.
"Coast Guard Intelligence Looking For a Few Good Men and Women." Commandant's Bulletin (Jun 10 1983), p. 34.
"Coast Guard Investigative Service." Coast Guard (Dec 1996), pp. 24–25.
The Coast Guard at War: Volume XII: Intelligence. Washington, DC: Historical Section, Public Information Division, U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters, January 1, 1949.
Hinsley, Francis H. "British Intelligence in the Second World War: Its Influence on Strategy and Operations". Cambridge University Press, 1990.
Ruiz, Victor H. (2010). "A Knowledge Taxonomy for Army Intelligence Training: An Assessment of the Military Intelligence Basic Officer Leaders Course Using Lundvall's Knowledge Taxonomy". Applied Research Projects, Texas State University, Paper 331.
Alfred Rolington. Strategic Intelligence for the 21st Century: The Mosaic Method. Oxford University Press, 2013.
Creating Intelligence, Neil Garra.
External links:
Office of the Director of National Intelligence
Intelligence Resource Program of the Federation of American Scientists Reference
Joint Publication 2-0
S2 Creating Intelligence |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military justice | Canada: All Commands of the Canadian Forces (CF) (that is, Royal Canadian Navy, Canadian Army, Royal Canadian Air Force, Canadian Joint Operations Command, and Canadian Special Operations Forces Command) are primarily governed by the National Defence Act (NDA). Section 12 of the NDA§ authorizes the governor in council's creation of the Queen's Regulations and Orders (QR&Os). The QR&Os are subordinate legislation having the force of law. Since the principle of delegatus non-potest delegare has not achieved rigid standing in Canada, the QR&Os authorize other military officials to generate orders having similar, but not equal, status. These instruments can be found in the Canadian Forces Administrative Orders and Defence Administrative Orders and Directives; they are used as direction for authorities within the CF to administer the day-to-day considerations of the Forces. For example, officer cadets attending military college are organized and subject to regulations more appropriate for their academic success than the enforcement of discipline, as might be expected of fully trained members. Volume IV, Appendix 6.1 of The Queen's Regulations and Orders for the Canadian Military Colleges (QR Canmilcols) applies.
A judge advocate general (JAG) has headed the Canadian military legal branch since before the First World War. The branch interprets the Canadian Forces' own internal rules and in the Code of Service Discipline, and also international and humanitarian laws and codes of war, such as the Geneva Conventions. In Canadian practice, armed combat is a strictly regulated environment and legal officers are a crucial part of the planning that goes into operational decisions. The Military Law Centre on the grounds of Royal Military College of Canada, staffed with military lawyers, oversees the education of officers and troops in legal matters, trains military lawyers and advises Ottawa on matters of policy and doctrine. Legal education is integrated into the regular training that CF members undergo.
Finland:
Jurisdiction: The Finnish military law concerns the members of the Finnish Defence Forces and the Finnish Border Guard. The military jurisdiction encompasses all military persons: conscripts, students training for a paid military position, females serving voluntarily and paid military personnel. However, military chaplains are outside the criminal military jurisdiction.: § 4
Reservists belong to the military jurisdiction when activated voluntarily or involuntarily. The military jurisdiction starts from the moment when a person reports to duty or was liable to report to duty and lasts to the moment when the person has been discharged from service and, in case of conscripts and involuntarily activated reservists, has also left the military area. During wartime, also civilians serving in the Defence Forces or in civilian institutions that have been put under the direction of Defence Forces are under military jurisdiction.: §§1–2 : §§ 45:27–28 Enemy prisoners of war fall under Finnish military jurisdiction during their imprisonment.: 28
Military crimes: As in Germany, persons under military jurisdiction are under the usual civilian criminal law. The military criminal law, the 45th Chapter of the penal code, encompasses only the crimes which only military persons can commit. The most important of these are various types of "service crime" (Finnish: palvelusrikos, Swedish: tjänstgöringsbrott) which encompasses all voluntary and negligent disobedience of orders and regulations, "guard crime" (Finnish: vartiorikos, Swedish: vakttjänstbrott), encompassing any misdeed during guarding duty, absence without leave (Finnish: luvaton poissaolo, Swedish: olovlig frånvaro), desertion (Finnish: sotakarkuruus, Swedish: överlöpning), diverse forms of disobedience against superiors, misuses of a position as superior and behaviour unsuitable for military person (Finnish: sotilaan sopimaton käyttäytyminen, Swedish: olämpligt uppträdande av krigsman). Other crimes are subject to usual civilian law.: Ch. 45
The military has a jurisdiction to investigate all military crimes proper, and also a number of other crimes that have been specifically listed as belonging to the military jurisdiction.: § 1 These include e.g. various types of murder, assault, theft, fraud, forgery, computer hacking and illegal divulging of classified information. However, they are only under military jurisdiction if the crime has been committed against another military person or against the Defence Forces.: § 2
Unlike other crimes, the military crimes have separate sentence ranges for peace and wartime. During wartime, the crimes carry considerably larger sentence ranges and, if the crime causes the danger to the military unit, the sentence range is even harsher. For example, desertion carries, in the peacetime, a sentence of disciplinary punishment or up to one year in prison. During wartime, it carries a mandatory prison sentence of not more than four years, and, if the crime caused a particularly immediate danger to the unit, a mandatory minimum of one year, with a maximum sentence of ten years.: §§45:10, 20, 23
When the military has jurisdiction over an ordinary crime, and the crime carries fine as a punishment, a disciplinary punishment may be given instead of fine both in summary proceedings and in the courts of law.: §4
Investigation and summary discipline: When the crime falls under military jurisdiction, it is usually investigated by the serviceman's own unit. During such investigation, the serviceman's superior and the company commander have the power to detain the suspect. The battalion commander and military police officers have also the right to arrest the suspect and to conduct searches inside a military area.: Ch. 4
When the company commander or his superior feels that the crime is non-trivial and requires professional investigation, they may submit the issue to the Defence Command for investigation. The Defence Command has, in addition to the power of arrest, the power to use almost all other measures that are available to the Finnish police. If the Defence Command requires the use of the most invasive investigative measures (e.g. wiretaps, use of deep cover agents or computer intrusion) they may either request the police to conduct the measure or hand over the case to the police, as agreed between the investigator and the competent policeman. If the police considers it necessary, they may always take the case over, however.: §§35–39
In the Border Guard, the Border Guard headquarters has the same internal law enforcement authority as the Defence Command in the Defence Forces, in addition to the regular law enforcement powers of the Border Guard.
When the investigation is ready, the case is brought to the company commander or sergeant major or for his superior for consideration. After hearing the suspect, the disposing superior either frees the suspect from suspicion or gives an appropriate punishment within the range allowed to him.: §§46, 51 The range is: §§3, 12
Company sergeant major: a private warning, up to three shifts of extra duty (only to conscripts and involuntarily activated reservists)
Company commander: a private warning, up to five shifts of extra duty, up to 10 days of confinement to the garrison, a public letter of reprimand (Finnish: varoitus, Swedish: varning)
Battalion commander, all of above, and up to fifteen days of confinement to garrison
Brigade commander and his superiors: all of above and up to 30 disciplinary fines, one disciplinary fine being one fifth of the individual's daily gross income, or for conscripts, at least conscript's daily allowance.
During peacetime, professional soldiers (with the exception of certain soldiers deployed to international missions) cannot be given other disciplinary punishment than a public letter of reprimand or a fine.: §9
If the superior does not feel that his powers allow him to give sufficient punishment, he will transfer the matter to the next higher superior. When the brigade commander determines that he cannot give sufficient punishment, he will transfer the matter to the public prosecutor who will commence prosecution in a civilian court.: § 48 If the serviceman feels that the punishment was unjust, he can appeal to the brigade commander. The brigade commander's decision can be appealed to the district court within seven days. However, the appeals will not prevent the execution of the punishment.: Ch. 6 and §69
Trial and appeals: The military crimes that go to court are handled by civilian courts that have military members. The district court has a learned civilian judge and two military members. One of them is an officer and the other a warrant officer, an NCO or a private. The court of appeals, that acts as the first instance for the prosecution of officers with at least major's rank, will have a military member who has at least a major's rank. The Supreme Court of Finland has two officers with at least colonel's rank as members when handling military crimes.: Ch. 3 and §3 These members are not named for a specific case but serve for two-year terms. The military members of the district court are selected by the court of appeals on the motion of the Commander of the Finnish Army. The military members of the Courts of Appeals are selected by the Ministry of Justice on motion of the Ministry of Defence. The military members of the Supreme Court are selected by the President of Finland. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military justice | The district court has a learned civilian judge and two military members. One of them is an officer and the other a warrant officer, an NCO or a private. The court of appeals, that acts as the first instance for the prosecution of officers with at least major's rank, will have a military member who has at least a major's rank. The Supreme Court of Finland has two officers with at least colonel's rank as members when handling military crimes.: Ch. 3 and §3 These members are not named for a specific case but serve for two-year terms. The military members of the district court are selected by the court of appeals on the motion of the Commander of the Finnish Army. The military members of the Courts of Appeals are selected by the Ministry of Justice on motion of the Ministry of Defence. The military members of the Supreme Court are selected by the President of Finland.: §11
The sentences of the courts for military crimes are served in civilian prisons. An exception is formed by the disciplinary arrest, which may be sentenced for up to 30 days and is served in the detention facilities of the convict's garrison.
When the military person holds a permanent or temporary paid position as a state military servant (Finnish: sotilasvirkamies, Swedish: militärtjänsteman), as all officers and NCOs in regular active service do, they will be sentenced to dismissal (Finnish: viraltapano, Swedish: avsättning) in addition to other punishments, if they are convicted of a military or a civilian crime for more than two years in prison and there are no special grounds for leniency. If the sentence is a life sentence, dismissal is mandatory. The court may also sentence dismissal with a shorter prison sentence if the crime shows that the person is unsuitable for state employment.: §2:10
If the military person is no longer in service, the summary disciplinary procedure cannot be used and the military has no longer any law enforcement power over the issue. In such cases, the former service member is investigated by the civilian police but the case is handled by a court with military members. In sentencing, disciplinary punishments cannot be used. Instead if a disciplinary punishment, an ordinary day-fine is sentenced.: §6:1 Typically, this is the case when a reservist is absent from an obligatory refresher exercise or a conscript is, after the commission of crime, declared unfit for duty for medical or security reasons.
Administrative punishment: In addition to judicial dismissal, the Defence Forces and the Border Guard have the option of administratively ending the military person's service if the person is in a paid position. This can happen even if no criminal charges are pressed. In the Defence Forces, the professional serviceman can also be administratively suspended for a period of one to six months. Similarly to state military servants, persons serving in a deployed force on an international mission may be administratively dismissed by the commander of the Finnish contingent. A conscript or a reservist cannot be dismissed but their service can be suspended by the brigade commander if they are suspected of having committed a crime which shows that they may endanger the safety of others. Following this, the person may be declared permanently unfit for duty by the Defence Forces regional office for safety and security reasons.
As an exception to the principle that the military jurisdiction concerns only military persons, the penal code provides for the loss of military rank. Any person who is sentenced to prison for at least two years or to prison for any length of time for a crime of treasonous nature (specifically, crimes in chapters 11 and 12 of the Penal Code, e.g. espionage, high treason and related crimes), shall be sentenced to lose their military rank also. Thus, not only active military persons but also retired personnel, reservists and persons who are too old to belong to reserve may lose their military ranks for crimes of civilian nature.: §2:14a
Statistics: Military crimes are relatively common in Finland. Partly this is due to the fact that the bar of criminality has been set consciously low. The crime of absence without leave is committed by a soldier who is even a minute late, and a slightest wilful or negligent disregard for a standing order or a regulation fulfils the indicia of the "service crime". The legislator has purposefully given the military superiors the legal tools by which to maintain discipline by punishing even the slight appearances of bad conduct if they feel it necessary. On the other hand, handing out unofficial punishments is discouraged in the extreme.
The number of military crimes is yearly somewhat above 4,000. An absolute majority of these are handled by summary measures, i.e. by a punishments given by the military superiors. Only some 250 military crimes in a year end up for handling in district courts.: 92 The number of appeals is vanishingly small. In year 2014, courts of appeals handled only a total of 5 military criminal cases.: 502
Germany: Members of any branch of the Bundeswehr, the German armed forces, are subject to the ordinary civil jurisdiction and unless otherwise stated all civil laws apply to soldiers as well.
The German constitution allows the federal government in art. 96 II to create military courts under special circumstances: in times of war, outside Germany or on a German vessel, acting under a legal judge and only for members of the armed forces. In fact, no such laws have been enacted so far. Instead, suspects of crimes committed abroad are subject to the district attorney of the city of Potsdam. The reason is that the operational headquarters (Einsatzführungskommando) is located there.
Nonetheless, there exist numerous acts that only concern soldiers describing their special status, their rights and duties. The military penal code (Wehrstrafgesetz) applies to soldiers by extending the civil penal code (Strafgesetzbuch) to crimes that can be only committed on military duty: General offenses (such as desertion, illegal use of weapons and more) and offenses that interfere with the military hierarchy (such as mutiny or abuse).
Law enforcing inside any branch is done by the military police, the Feldjäger. When investigating, working for the attorney is equivalent to any German police in civil issues. In cases of both groups involved (on German terrain), regular and military police cooperate. In emergencies, the regular police is authorized to maintain order until the military police has arrived.
Soldiers that violate military regulations may also receive penalties in form of Non-judicial punishment or in severe cases judicial punishments by a special type of court. These procedures are defined by the military discipline code (Wehrdisziplinarordnung, WDO). The WDO describes how to proceed on offenses that are not (yet) covered by the military penal code but clearly against a military regulation. The head of the unit as immediate superior who acts as primary disciplinary master has the exclusive right to choose: non-judicial punishment (such as fines, curfews, arrests up to seven days), forwarding the decision to the next superior officer of the unit (arrest then can be extended up to 21 days) or calling the military service court (Truppendienstgericht) which has the power for further punishment (like degradation and shortening the salary up to five years). The judge of such a court is a civil one, two military officers are attending every case and act as consultants to the judge.
In Germany, there are no federal or military prisons. If a soldier is sentenced to jail for up to six months, the punishment is executed by the soldier's barracks administration. He will remain in arrest for the same time but continue serving in his unit on duty times unless the court has imposed further limits. Otherwise soldiers will be detained in civil state prisons. In the case of a soldier being sentenced to jail for one year or more (six months or more in case of bribery) he will be discharged from the armed forces.
India: India has its own Army Act, Navy Act and Air Force Act.
These laws define the statutory provisions as applicable to men and women in uniform. All these three Acts are available on search from the official website.
There are certain para military forces in India too who have laws akin to the ones applicable to defence services. This includes the Border Security Force Act, Coast Guard Act, Indo-Tibetan Border Police Force Act and the Assam Rifles Act. All such Acts draw their inspiration from the Army Act.
The military courts in India are coming under extreme stress with the establishment of Armed Forces Tribunal in 2007. There is increasing voice in the country for the reform on the lines other liberal democracies are seeing in their military justice system.
United Kingdom: The United Kingdom's arrangements for justice in the armed forces dates back many centuries to the Articles of War. In the late 19th Century this was added to the annual Army Act and embodied in the Naval Discipline Act. The Air Force Act was added in 1918. In 1966 a process of harmonisation started with the introduction of a quinquennial Armed Forces Act. The Armed Forces Act 2006 replaces the three separate service discipline acts and earlier Armed Forces Acts as the system of law under which the Armed Forces operate. In the previous decade the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) had considerable impact on the administration of military justice, particularly the need for the independence of the courts martial system. Nevertheless, the underlying premise of the service justice system is that discipline is a matter for commanders. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military justice | There is increasing voice in the country for the reform on the lines other liberal democracies are seeing in their military justice system.
United Kingdom: The United Kingdom's arrangements for justice in the armed forces dates back many centuries to the Articles of War. In the late 19th Century this was added to the annual Army Act and embodied in the Naval Discipline Act. The Air Force Act was added in 1918. In 1966 a process of harmonisation started with the introduction of a quinquennial Armed Forces Act. The Armed Forces Act 2006 replaces the three separate service discipline acts and earlier Armed Forces Acts as the system of law under which the Armed Forces operate. In the previous decade the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) had considerable impact on the administration of military justice, particularly the need for the independence of the courts martial system. Nevertheless, the underlying premise of the service justice system is that discipline is a matter for commanders.
The Armed Forces Act 2006 completed the harmonisation of service law, and took full effect on 1 November 2009. Guidance about its application and related matters are provided in the Manual of Service Law. One motivating factor behind the changes in the legislation combining discipline acts across the armed forces is the trend towards tri-service operations and defence organisations. It deals with military offences, civil offences committed in some circumstances, offences by civilians associated with the armed forces or with the armed forces overseas (including family members), authority of Commanding Officer to deal with offences summarily, the Court Martial, the Service Civilian Court, custody and appeals. The Act also creates the post of the Director of Service Prosecutions.
Summary dealing by a Commanding Officer (CO) is the central feature, this is acceptable within the ECHR because an accused always has the right to elect trial by the Court Martial. Most cases are dealt with summarily. Typically a CO is a Lieutenant Colonel or equivalent (NATO grade OF-4), but a CO may delegate some powers of summary dealing to a subordinate. The superior officer of a CO, a Higher Authority, may vary a CO's powers of summary dealing. An implication is that every person subject to service law must have a CO, and a CO must have a Higher Authority.
The military judicial system is headed by the Judge Advocate General who is a civilian and part of the Ministry of Justice.
Administrative procedures enable a service man or woman to be discharged for unsatisfactory behaviour in a process similar to that in the private sector. They also allow a superior of any rank to award up to three extra duties or similar to a subordinate for minor infractions. Since being introduced this has significantly reduced the number of cases dealt with summarily.
United States: The United States Constitution authorized the creation of a system of military justice. Article I, Section 8 permits the U.S. Congress to "make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces." Congress issued these rules first in 1806 as the Articles of War. Military justice during the American Civil War was governed by the 1863 Lieber Code. The Articles of War were superseded in 1951 by the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).
The UCMJ is federal law, found in Title 10 United States Code Chapter 47, and implemented by the Manual for Courts-Martial, an executive order issued by the President of the United States in his capacity as Commander-in-Chief of the United States Armed Forces. Court-martial convictions in the United States may be appealed through military courts of appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF), a federal appellate court consisting of five civilian judges appointed by the President of the United States. CAAF decisions are subject to direct review by the Supreme Court of the United States.
The offenses covered by the UCMJ include those encompassed by "high crimes and misdemeanors" which covers officials generally, and includes perjury of oath, abuse of authority, bribery, intimidation, misuse of assets, failure to supervise, dereliction of duty, conduct unbecoming, and refusal to obey a lawful order. It also includes ordinary crimes, but perhaps with different standards of proof and punishment than for civilians, on the grounds that more is expected of military personnel by their oaths of office. Many of the terms used date back to the era during which the code was written.
See also: Court-martial
Laws of war
Martial law
References:
Further reading: Bessner, Daniel; Lorber, Eric (October 2012). "Toward a Theory of Civil-Military Punishment". Armed Forces & Society. 38 (4): 649–668. doi:10.1177/0095327X12437685. S2CID 147068799.
Madsen, Chris (2008). Military Law and Operations. Aurora, Ontario: Canada Law Book. Archived from the original on 11 February 2009. Retrieved 13 March 2009. Loose-leaf publication updated 1–2 times per year.
Schlueter, David A. (2008). Military Justice: Practice and Procedure (7th ed.).
External links: Rule of Law in Armed Conflicts Project |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military logistics | Etymology and definition: The word "logistics" is derived from the Greek adjective logistikos meaning "skilled in calculating", and its corresponding Latin word logisticus. In turn this comes from the Greek logos, which refers to the principles of thought and action. Another Latin root, log-, gave rise around 1380 to logio, meaning to lodge or dwell, and became the French verb loger, meaning "to lodge". Around 1670, the French King Louis XIV created the position of Maréchal des logis, an officer responsible for planning marches, establishing camp sites, and regulating transport and supply. The term logistique soon came to refer to his duties. It was in this sense that Antoine-Henri Jomini referred to the term in his Summary of the Art of War (1838). In the English translation, the word became "logistics".
In 1888, Charles C. Rogers created a course on naval logistics at the Naval War College. In Farrow's Military Encyclopedia (1895), Edward S. Farrow, and instructor in tactics at West Point provided this definition:Bardin considers the application of this word by some writers as more ambitious than accurate. It is derived from Latin logista, the administrator or intendant of the Roman armies. It is properly that branch of the military art embracing all the details for moving and supplying armies. It includes the operations of the ordnance, quartermaster's, subsistence, medical, and pay departments. It also embraces the preparation and regulation of magazines, for opening a campaign, and all orders of march and other orders from the general-in-chief relative to moving and supplying armies.
The term became popularised during the Second World War. In Logistics in World War II: Final Report of the Army Service Forces, Lieutenant General LeRoy Lutes, the commanding general of the Army Service Forces, gave the term a more expansive definition: The word "logistics" has been given many different shades of meaning. A common definition is: "That branch of military art which embraces the details of the transport, quartering, and supply of troops in military operations." As the word is used in the following pages, its meaning is even broader. It embraces all military activities not included in the terms "strategy" and "tactics." In this sense, logistics includes procurement, storage, and distribution of equipment and supplies; transport of troops and cargo by land, sea, and air; construction and maintenance of facilities; communication by wire, radio, and the mails; care of the sick and wounded; and the induction, classification, assignment, welfare and separation of personnel.
NATO uses a more restrictive definition:The science of planning and carrying out the movement and maintenance of forces. In its most comprehensive sense, the aspects of military operations which deal with:
In the 1960s, the term "logistics" began to be used in the business world, where it means physical distribution and supply chain management. This is more restricted than the military definition.
Logistics is an enabler of military operations, not an end in itself. Poor logistics can result in defeat, but even the best logistics cannot guarantee victory. Conversely, the best possible logistics is not always required: fit for purpose can suffice.
Principles: Historian James A. Huston proposed sixteen principles of military logistics:
Equivalence: Strategy, tactics and logistics are inseparable and interdependent facets of military art and science.
Material precedence: Mobilisation of materiel should precede that of personnel, and the provision of logistical units that of combat units.
Forward impetus: The impetus of supply should be from the rear, and combat unit commanders should be spared having to deal with logistical details while still being in control of their logistics.
Mobility: Logistics should facilitate the rapid movement of both combat and logistical units in support of operations.
Dispersion: Multiple sources of supply and lines of communications reduce the enemy interference and congestion of transportation infrastructure.
Economy: Logistical resources are limited, so they must be deployed so as to make the best use of them.
Feasibility: Logistical capabilities are subject to external constraints.
Flexibility: Strategic and operational plans and priorities change and logistical support must change with them.
Relativity: Logistics is relative to time and space.
Continuity: Fundamental changes should not be required to meet an emergency.
Timeliness Logistical tasks must be accomplished so as to take full advantage of opportunities.
Responsibility: Someone must be responsible for logistical performance and outcomes.
Unity of command: Logistics is a function of command and a single authority should be responsible for logistics.
Information: Accurate and timely information is required for effective logistical planning and support.
Quality: Logistics is facilitated by strict quality standards.
Simplicity: Simple solutions are more effective and manageable.
The United States Joint Chiefs of Staff reduced the number of principles to just seven:
Responsiveness: Providing the required support when and where it is needed.
Simplicity: fosters unity and efficiency in planning and execution, and reduces the fog of war and the "friction" caused by combat.
Flexibility: the ability to improvise and adapt to changing situations and requirements.
Economy: using the minimum amount of resources required to bring about an objective.
Attainability: the point at which sufficient supplies, support and distribution capabilities exist to initiate operations at an acceptable level of risk.
Sustainability: the ability to maintain the necessary level and duration of logistics support to achieve objectives.
Survivability: the capacity to prevail in spite of adverse impacts.
Supply options: There are three basic options for the supply of an army in the field, which can be employed individually or in combination.
Obtain supplies in the field: The most basic requirements of an army were food and water. Foraging involved gathering food and fodder for animals in the field. The availability of these tends to be seasonal, with greater abundance around harvest time in agricultural regions. There is also a dependence on geography, for in desert campaigns there may not be food, water or fodder available locally.
Looting was a means of obtaining supplies in the field. It is possible to capture supplies from the enemy or enemy population. An alternative is purchasing, whereby an army takes cash and buys its supplies in the field. Cash can also be obtained in the field through local taxation, backed by the threat of violence. The major drawback of using local sources of supply is that they can be exhausted if an army remains in one place for too long, so a force dependent on local supply needs to keep moving.
The widespread use of resources in the field gives rise to counter-logistics, whereby they are denied to the enemy through devastation of the land and removal or destruction of resources. Pre-emptive purchasing can be used as a form of economic warfare. A besieging force can attempt to starve out a garrison or tempt it to sally through devastation of the surrounding area rather than undertake the more costly operation of assaulting and destroying it, but if it is dependent on local supply then the besieger who might be starved out through their exhaustion.
Carry supplies with the army: A second method is to bring along what is needed, whether by ships, pack animals, wagons or carried on the backs of the soldiers themselves. Since ancient times, troops had carried rations and personal equipment such as weapons, armour, cooking gear and bedrolls. Animals could be driven to accompany the army and consumed for meat. Roads facilitate the movement of wheeled vehicles, and travel by river or sea permits the carriage of large volumes of supplies. This allowed the army some measure of self-sufficiency, and until the development of faster firing weapons in the 19th century most of the ammunition a soldier needed for an entire campaign could be carried on their person or in wagons accompanying the troops. However, this method led to an extensive baggage train which could slow the army's advance.
Ship supplies from the rear: Obtaining supplies in the field and carrying supplies with the army remained the primary means of supply until the 19th century, but even in the 17th century the much larger armies of the period were highly dependent on food supplies being gathered in magazines and shipped to the front. Starting with the Industrial Revolution, new technological, technical and administrative advances permitted supplies to be transported at speeds and over distances never before possible.
At the same time, increased demands for ammunition, and the heavier weight of shells and bombs made it more difficult for armies to carry their requirements, and they soon became dependent on regular replenishment of ammunition from depots. At the same time, mechanisation, with motor vehicles replacing animals, created a demand for fuel and spare parts, neither of which could be obtained locally. This led to a "logistical revolution" which began in the 20th century and drastically improved the capabilities of modern armies while making them highly dependent on this method.
History: The history of military logistics goes back to Neolithic times. The most basic requirements of an army were food and water. Early armies were equipped with weapons used for hunting like spears, knives, axes and bows and arrows, and rarely exceeded 20,000 men due to the practical difficulty of supplying a large number of soldiers. Large armies began to appear in the Iron Age. Animals such as horses, oxen, camels and elephants were used as beasts of burden to carry supplies.
Food, water and fodder for the animals could usually be found or purchased in the field.
The Roman Empire and Maurya Empire in India built networks of roads, but it was far less expensive to transport a ton of grain from Egypt to Rome by sea than 80 kilometres (50 mi) by road. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military logistics | History: The history of military logistics goes back to Neolithic times. The most basic requirements of an army were food and water. Early armies were equipped with weapons used for hunting like spears, knives, axes and bows and arrows, and rarely exceeded 20,000 men due to the practical difficulty of supplying a large number of soldiers. Large armies began to appear in the Iron Age. Animals such as horses, oxen, camels and elephants were used as beasts of burden to carry supplies.
Food, water and fodder for the animals could usually be found or purchased in the field.
The Roman Empire and Maurya Empire in India built networks of roads, but it was far less expensive to transport a ton of grain from Egypt to Rome by sea than 80 kilometres (50 mi) by road. After the fall of the Roman Empire in the fifth century there was the shift from a centrally organised army to a combination of military forces made up of local troops. Feudalism was a distributed military logistics system where magnates of the households drew upon their own resources for men and equipment.
When operating in enemy territory an army was forced to plunder the local countryside for supplies, which allowed war to be conducted at the enemy's expense. However, with the increase in army sizes from the late sixteenth century onward, this reliance on pillage and plunder became problematic, as decisions regarding where and when an army could move or fight became based not on strategic objectives but on whether a given area was capable of supporting the soldiers' needs. Sieges in particular were affected by this, both for an army attempting to lay siege to a town and one coming to its relief. Unless a commander was able to arrange a form of regular resupply, a fortress or town with a devastated countryside could become immune to either operation.
Napoleon made logistics a major part of his strategy. He dispersed his corps along a broad front to maximise the area from which supplies could be drawn. Each day forage parties brought in supplies. This differed from earlier operations living off the land in the size of the forces involved, and because the primary motivation was the emperor's desire for mobility. Ammunition could not as a rule be obtained locally, but it was still possible to carry sufficient ammunition for an entire campaign.
The nineteenth century witnessed technological developments that facilitated immense improvements to the storage, handling and transportation of supplies which made it easier to support and army from the rear. Canning simplified storage and distribution of foods, and reduced waste and the incidence of food-related illness. Refrigeration allowed frozen meat and fresh produce to be stored and shipped. Steamships made water transports faster and more reliable. Railways were a more economical form of transport than animal-drawn carts and wagons, although they were limited to tracks, and therefore could not support an advancing army unless its advance was along existing railway lines. At the same time, the advent of industrial warfare in the form of bolt-action rifles, machine guns and quick-firing artillery sent ammunition consumption soaring during the First World War.
In the twentieth century the advent of motor vehicles powered by internal combustion engines offered an alternative to animal transport for moving supplies forward of the railhead, although many armies still used animals during the Second World War. The development of air transport provided an alternative to both land and sea transport, but with limited tonnage and at high cost. An airlift over "the Hump" helped supply the Chinese war effort, and after the war the 1948 Berlin Air Lift was successful in supplying half of the city. With the subsequent development of large jets, aircraft became the preferred method of moving personnel over long distances, although it was still more economical to move cargo by sea and land. In forward areas, the helicopter was well-suited to moving troops and supplies, especially over rugged terrain.
Models:
Levels: Akin to the three levels of war, there can be considered to be three levels of logistics. Although modern communications and information technology may have blurred the distinction between them, the three-level hierarchy is deeply embedded in the organisational structure of military forces.
Strategic logistics involves logistical activities that are conducted at national and international levels. It includes defining requirements, and arranging for the production and distribution of materiel to operational forces.
Operational logistics involves logistical activities within the theatre of operations. It includes the reception, storage, and distribution of supplies and personnel, the hospitalisation of casualties, the maintenance and repair of equipment, and the operation of the intra-theatre transportation system. The operational level of war can be defined by the amount of logistical independence a formation has. For this reason logistics is most often discussed at the operational level.
Tactical logistics involves the logistical activities of units engaged in combat.
Unlike business logistics, the objective of military logistics is not cost effectiveness of the supply chain, but maximum sustained combat effectiveness. At the tactical level, efficiency is the overriding consideration, whereas at the strategic level effectiveness is the dominant concern.
Analytical tools: The development of computers facilitated the use of analytic tools. Multiple-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) is a sub-discipline of operations research that explicitly evaluates multiple conflicting criteria in decision making. The location of a supply depot could involve multiple considerations and constraints, such as the access to road, rail and sea transport, and travel times to desired delivery destinations. Sometimes the number of alternatives is small and they can be considered individually, but they can also be too large for this to be possible. The consideration of constraints simplifies the decision making. These constraints could be economic, such as cost, but might also be less easily quantified, such as political, strategic or operational considerations. The United States Office of Management and Budget and the Department of Defense call this methodology the Analysis of Alternatives, and require it for military acquisitions.
Logistical planning requires forecasting of future consumption and attrition. There are two types of attrition: material attrition and personnel attrition. The former relates to the loss of equipment through combat, accidents and ordinary wear and tear through usage. Reliability theory can be used to forecast the mean time between failures of equipment and parts. This can be used to develop replacement factors, on which manufacturing and stock levels can be based. In the case of items like subsistence and soap, where demand is highly predictable, it is more convenient to use consumption factors instead. Forecasting of casualties in combat is more difficult, as past experience may not be a reliable guide to future losses, but is required for planning by the medical services. Mathematical models of combat have been developed for this purpose. Lanchester's laws are differential equations that describe the time dependence of two armies' strengths as a function of time.
Mathematical models exist for scheduling of convoys to ensure that vehicles and the goods they carry arrive in time. Vehicle routing models can be used to select routes for timely delivery with minimum exposure to enemy action and without overloading the capacity of transportation networks. Scheduling models can be used to coordinate convoys the share the same routes. There are also models for inventory management that can be used to scheduling and quantity of orders, and stock levels, taking into account factors such as storage capacity, demand rates and delivery lead times.
Notes:
References:
Further reading:
External links: Media related to Military logistics at Wikimedia Commons |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military medicine | Legal status: Military medical personnel engage in humanitarian work and are "protected persons" under international humanitarian law in accordance with the First and Second Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols, which established legally binding rules guaranteeing neutrality and protection for wounded soldiers, field or ship's medical personnel, and specific humanitarian institutions in an armed conflict. International humanitarian law makes no distinction between medical personnel who are members of the armed forces (and who hold military ranks) and those who are civilian volunteers. All medical personnel are considered non-combatants under international humanitarian law because of their humanitarian duties, and they may not be attacked and not be taken as prisoners of war; hospitals and other medical facilities and transports identified as such, whether they are military or civilian, may not be attacked either. The red cross, the red crescent and the red crystal are the protective signs recognised under international humanitarian law, and are used by military medical personnel and facilities for this purpose. Attacking military medical personnel, patients in their care, or medical facilities or transports legitimately marked as such is a war crime. Likewise, misusing these protective signs to mask military operations is the war crime of perfidy. Military medical personnel may be armed, usually with service pistols, for the purpose of self defense or the defense of patients.
Historical significance: The significance of military medicine for combat strength goes far beyond treatment of battlefield injuries; in every major war fought until the late 19th century disease claimed more soldier casualties than did enemy action. During the American Civil War (1860–65), for example, about twice as many soldiers died of disease as were killed or mortally wounded in combat. The Franco-Prussian War (1870–71) is considered to have been the first conflict in which combat injury exceeded disease, at least in the German coalition army which lost 3.47% of its average headcount to combat and only 1.82% to disease. In new world countries, such as Australia, New Zealand, the United States and Canada, military physicians and surgeons contributed significantly to the development of civilian health care.
Improvements in military medicine have increased the survival rates in successive wars, due to improvements in medical evacuation, battlefield medicine and trauma care. Similar improvements have been seen in trauma practices during the Iraq war. Some military trauma care practices are disseminated by citizen soldiers who return to civilian practice. One such practice is where major trauma patients are transferred to an operating theater as soon as possible, to stop internal bleeding, increasing the survival rate. Within the United States, the survival rate for gunshot wounds has increased, leading to apparent declines in the gun death rate in states that have stable rates of gunshot hospitalizations.
Military medicine by country:
North America:
Canada: Royal Canadian Medical Service
Royal Canadian Dental Corps
Canadian Forces Health Services Group
Surgeon General (Canada)
National Defence Medical Centre
United States: U.S. Army
U.S. Navy
U.S. Air Force
Europe:
France: French Defence Health Service
École du service de santé des armées
Belgium: Belgian Medical Component
Germany: Bundeswehr Joint Medical Service
Bundeswehr Medical Academy
Luftwaffe Institute of Aviation Medicine
Naval Medical Institute
Generaloberstabsarzt
Generalstabsarzt
Generalarzt
Oberstarzt
Oberfeldarzt
Oberstabsarzt
Stabsarzt
Oberarzt (military)
Assistenzarzt (military)
Italy: Corpo sanitario dell'Esercito Italiano
Corpo sanitario militare marittimo
Corpo sanitario aeronautico
Servizio sanitario dell'Arma dei carabinieri
Russia:
Serbia: Military Medical Academy
Sweden: Surgeon-General of the Swedish Armed Forces
Medical Corps of the Swedish Armed Forces
Swedish Armed Forces Centre for Defence Medicine
Surgeon-in-Chief of the Swedish Army
Surgeon-in-Chief of the Swedish Navy
Surgeon-in-Chief of the Swedish Air Force
Swedish Army Medical Corps
Swedish Naval Medical Officers' Corps
Swedish Armed Forces Diving and Naval Medicine Centre
Swedish Army Veterinary Corps
United Kingdom:
Asia:
India: Director General Armed Forces Medical Services (India)
Army Medical Corps (India)
Armed Forces Medical College
Command Hospital
Indian Medical Service
Israel:
Sri Lanka: Sri Lanka Army Medical Corps
Thailand: Phramongkutklao College of Medicine
Vietnam: Vietnam Military Medical University (Học Viện Quân Y) in Hanoi
Other regions:
Australia:
South Africa: South African Medical Service
South African Military Health Service
International: International Committee of Military Medicine
Committee of Chiefs of Military Medical Services in NATO (COMEDS)
See also:
References:
Further reading: Bowlby, Sir Anthony and Colonel Cuthbert Wallace. "The Development of British Surgery at the Front." The British Medical Journal 1 (1917): 705–721.
Churchill, Edward D. "Healing by First Intention and with Suppuration: Studies in the History of Wound Healing.” Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences 19 (1964): 193–214.
Churchill, Edward D. “The Surgical Management of the wounded at the time of the Fall of Rome.” Annals of Surgery 120 (1944): 268–283.
Cowdrey, Albert E. Fighting for Life: American Military Medicine in World War II (1994), scholarly history, 400 pp
Cowdrey, Albert E. United States Army in the Korean War: The Medics War (1987), full-scale scholarly official history; online free
Fauntleroy, A.M. "The Surgical Lessons of the European War." Annals of Surgery 64 (1916): 136–150.
Fazal, Tanisha M. (2024). Military Medicine and the Hidden Costs of War. Oxford University Press.
Grissinger, Jay W. "The Development of Military Medicine." Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine 3 (1927): 301–356. online
Harrison, Mark. Medicine and victory: British military medicine in the Second World War (Oxford UP, 2004).
Whayne, Col. Tom F. and Colonel Joseph H. McNinch. “Fifty Years of Medical Progress: Medicine as a Social Instrument: Military Medicine.” The New England Journal of Medicine 244 (1951): 591–601.
Wintermute, Bobby A. Public health and the US military: a history of the Army Medical Department, 1818–1917 (2010).
Primary sources: Kendrick, Douglas B. Memoirs of a Twentieth-Century Army Surgeon (Sunflower University Press, 19920, U.S. Army
External links:
U.S. military medicine
Military Medicine related links from USAF Air University
Association of Military Surgeons of the United States (AMSUS)
Military Medicine, the International Journal of AMSUS
Patriot Medicine, a vertical network for the military medical ecosystem
Military Medicine Through Time. Life and Death in the War Zone | NOVA | PBS
The Borden Institute Homepage
Military Medicine Documents at USU Archive
U.S. Army Preventive Medicine news archive from the 7th Infantry Division (Light) Panorama weekly newspaper 1988.
Virtual Naval Hospital – a digital library of military medicine and humanitarian medicine
http://www.ipernity.com/doc/57114/5652001/in/keyword/487917/self (military medical exams)
Australian military medicine
Australian Military Medicine Association
International Magazine for Military Medicine
MCIF MEDICAL CORPS INTERNATIONAL FORUM International Magazine for Military Medicine
NATO Centre of Excellence for Military Medicine
NATO Centre of Excellence for Military Medicine |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military operation | Types of military operations: Military operations can be classified by the scale and scope of force employment, and their impact on the wider conflict. The scope of military operations can be:
Theater: this describes an operation over a large, often continental, area of operation and represents a strategic national commitment to the conflict, such as Operation Barbarossa, with general goals that encompass areas of consideration outside the military, such as the economic and political impact of military goals on areas concerned.
Campaign: this describes either a subset of the theatre of operation, or a more limited geographic and operational strategic commitment, such as the Battle of Britain, and need not represent total national commitment to a conflict, or have broader goals outside the military impact.
Battle: this describes a subset of a campaign that will have specific military goals and geographic objectives, as well as clearly defined use of forces, such as the Battle of Gallipoli, which operationally was a combined arms operation originally known as the "Dardanelles landings" as part of the Dardanelles Campaign, where about 480,000 Allied troops took part.
Engagement: this describes a tactical combat event or contest for a specific area or objective by actions of distinct units. For example, the Battle of Kursk, also known from its German designation as Operation Citadel, included many separate engagements, several of which were combined into the Battle of Prokhorovka. The Battle of Kursk, in addition to describing the initial German offensive operation, also included two Soviet counter-offensive operations: Operation Kutuzov and Operation Polkovodets Rumyantsev.
Strike: this describes a single attack, upon a specified target. This often forms part of a broader engagement. Strikes have an explicit goal, such as rendering facilities such as airports inoperable, assassinating enemy leaders, or limiting the delivery of supplies to enemy troops.
Definition: Parallel to and reflecting this framework for operations are organized elements within the armed forces which prepare for and conduct operations at various levels of war. While there is a general correlation between the size of units, the area within which they operate, and the scope of mission they perform, the correlation is not absolute. In fact, it is ultimately the mission that a unit performs that determines the level of war within which it operates.
Operational level of war: The operational level of war occupies roughly the middle ground between the campaign's strategic focus and the tactics of an engagement. It describes "a distinct intermediate level of war between military strategy, governing war in general, and tactics, involving individual battles". For example, during World War II, the concept applied to use of Soviet Tank Armies.
See also: Civil-military operations
Effects-Based Operations (EBO)
List of military operations
List of coalition military operations of the Iraq War
List of World War II military operations
Military operation plan
Military operations other than war (MOOTW)
Offensive (military)
Operational View (OV)
Notes:
References: Armstrong, Richard N. Red Army Tank Commanders: The Armored Guards. Atglen, Penn.: Schiffer Military History, 1994. ISBN 0-88740-581-9.
Glantz, David M. Soviet Military Operational Art: In Pursuit of Deep Battle. London: Frank Cass, 1991. ISBN 0-7146-3362-3, ISBN 0-7146-4077-8. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military operations other than war | Overview: MOOTW purposes may include deterring potential aggressors, protecting national interests, and supporting UN objectives.
Peacetime and conflict represent two states of the range of military operations.
Peacetime is a state in which diplomatic, economic, informational, and military powers are employed in combination with each other to achieve national objectives.
Conflict is a unique environment in which the military works closely with diplomatic leaders to control hostilities; and the national objective is focused on the goal of returning to peacetime conditions.
Planners are challenged to find ways to resolve or work around unique arrays of inter-related constraints (e.g. issues related to budgeting, training, and force structure). The uncertainties which are inherent or implied include the varying political aspects which are likely to affect unanticipated MOOTW.
Australia: The Australian Defence Force has turned attention to the study and understanding of a changing geo-strategic environment. MOOTW becomes more important where the options for traditional application of military instruments are growing more limited.
Australian participation in UN peacekeeping operations began in 1947.
Select Australian deployments: 1947 UN Consular Commission to Indonesia
2005 Nias–Simeulue earthquake ("Operation Sumatra Assist"): Emergency relief and medical assistance.
Current Australian deployments include the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA); the UN Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI); the UN Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP); the UN Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO); the UN Integrated Mission in Timor-Leste (UNMIT); the UN Mission in the Sudan (UNMIS); and the UN–African Union Mission in Darfur (UNAMID).
Canada: The curriculum of the Canadian Armed Forces's training programs includes MOOTW. In the 20th century Canadian peacekeeping was well publicised in Canada.
Select Canadian deployments: Cyprus, 1960s
Congo, 1960s
Afghanistan, 2001–2014
China: The non-traditional missions of the People's Liberation Army have evolved as an increasingly used tool of statecraft.
The People's Liberation Army (PLA) established specialized forces for military operations other than war. In the 2013 Science of Military Strategy, PLA writers articulated a Non-War Military Activities (NWMA) concept based on MOOTW which emphasizes "Confrontational," "Law Enforcement," "Aid & Rescue," and "Cooperative" military activities as a source of military strength alongside traditional deterrence and warfighting.
Select Chinese deployments: Somali pirates, 2009: Naval escort missions in waters off Somalia.
Japan: The Japan Self-Defense Forces are affected by the Constitution of Japan, Article 9 of which prohibits the use of war to resolve the country's disputes. This affects their operations, as well as the classifications of some equipment such as the Hyūga-class helicopter destroyer, which are limited to the role of MOOTW.
Select Japanese deployments: Iraq War ("Operation Enduring Freedom"), 2003–2009: Ground Self-Defense Forces, water purification near Basra; Air Self-Defence Forces, cargo and personnel transport; Maritime Self-Defence Forces, supply ships servicing the international flotilla.
United Kingdom: The prescience of Sir Julian Corbett (1854–1922) and his strategic point of view are reflected in contemporary applications of MOOTW, which extend and reinvigorate Corbettian formulations.
The evolution of British tactics in the Malayan Emergency (1948–1960) illustrates lessons learned the hard way. The British developed a strategy with elements similar to MOOTW. Lieutenant General Sir Harold Briggs proposed "two key goals to accomplish in order to end the insurgency—first, to protect the population, and second to isolate them from the guerrillas."
British peacekeeping troops in Bosnia in the late 1990s attended to similar objectives in a process of re-establishing "normalcy."
Selected British deployments: 1948–1960 Malayan Emergency.
1995 post-Bosnian War ("Operation Deliberate Force").
United States: In United States military doctrine, military operations other than war include the use of military capabilities across a range of operations that fall short of war. Because of political considerations, MOOTW operations normally have more restrictive rules of engagement (ROE) than in war.
Although the MOOTW acronym is new, the concepts are not. The RAND database identifies 846 military operations other than war between 1916 and 1996 in which the US Air Force or its predecessors played a noteworthy role.
Select American deployments: 2005 Nias–Simeulue earthquake: Emergency relief and medical assistance.
1990–1994 Operation Promote Liberty: Occupation and peacekeeping mission in Panama after the 1989 United States invasion of Panama.
1991 Operation Eastern Exit: Noncombatant evacuation operation to evacuate diplomatic staff and civilians, from the US and 29 other countries, from the US Embassy in Mogadishu, Somalia as the city plunged into near-anarchy during the Somali Civil War.
2001–2014 Operation Enduring Freedom: Bush Doctrine continuous operation across numerous countries, mainly Afghanistan, Pakistan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan.
2011 military intervention in Libya: UN-authorized no-fly zone enforcement in defense of rebel factions in Libya.
Singapore: The Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) anticipates a continuing need for conventional military competence into the foreseeable future, but missions in which the use of minimal force is the rule rather than the exception are expected to grow in importance. Proficiency in MOOTW requires a much greater and somewhat different set of skill sets than traditional war-fighting. In this context, the SAF is developing new training programmes for small unit leaders. The process of educating and preparing a professional SAF capable of handling a wide spectrum of operations anticipates an increase in MOOTW.
These men will need to ready to become "peacekeepers, goodwill ambassadors and winners of hearts and minds."
In 1999, the Singapore contingent of UN peacekeepers in East Timor was the most extensive MOOTW mission attempted by the SAF. The commitment included three landing ship tanks (LSTs), medical teams, C-130s, military observers and logistics support.
Select Singapore deployments: United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor, 1999–2002. Peacekeeping, medical assistance, logistical support.
2004 Indian Ocean Earthquake and Tsunami, Aceh Province, Sumatra, Indonesia ("Operation Flying Eagle" or OFE): Emergency relief, medical assistance and temporary relocation of victims.
Sweden:
Select Swedish deployments: Swedish Armed Forces conducted supporting operations during the forest fires of 2014 and 2018.
Operation Gloria, 2020–ongoing. Supporting Swedish civil authorities during the COVID-19 pandemic in Sweden.
India: The Indian Army is tasked with many operations other than war such as Operation Sadbhavana (Goodwill) in Jammu and Kashmir and Operation Samaritan in north-east India. Operation Sadbhavana aims to limit the alienation faced by the population and infrastructure destruction in Jammu and Kashmir in areas where the government administration has not been successful due to insurgency. Welfare initiatives include Army Goodwill Schools, educational and motivational tours, health camps, women and youth empowerment and infrastructure development.
The Indian defence forces also takes part in various UN Peacekeeping missions.
See also: Counter-insurgency
Fourth-generation warfare
Low intensity conflict
Grey-zone (international relations)
Notes:
References: Bonn, Keith E. and Anthony E Baker. (2000). Guide to Military Operations Other than War: Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures for Stability and Support operations, Domestic and International. Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania: Stackpole Books. ISBN 978-0-8117-2939-0; OCLC 231842432
Frantzen, Henning-A. (2005). NATO and peace support operations, 1991–1999: policies and doctrines. London: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-34996-3
Segal, Hugh. (2005). Geopolitical Integrity. Institute for Research on Public Policy (IRPP). ISBN 978-0-88645-189-9; OCLC 145767700
"U.S. Joint Doctrine, Joint Force Employment Briefing Modules."
Vick, Allen, John William Stillion and Abram N. Shulsky. (1997). Preparing the U.S. Air Force for Operations Other than War. Santa Monica, California: RAND. ISBN 978-0-8330-2492-3; OCLC 231771508 |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military organization | History: The use of formalized ranks in a hierarchical structure came into widespread use with the Roman Army.
In modern times, executive control, management and administration of military organization is typically undertaken by governments through a government department within the structure of public administration, often known as a ministry of defence or department of defense. These in turn manage military branches that themselves command formations and units specialising in combat, combat support and combat-service support.
Executive control, management and administration: The usually civilian or partly civilian executive control over the national military organization is exercised in democracies by an elected political leader as a member of the government's cabinet, usually known as a minister of defence. In presidential systems, such as the United States, the president is the commander-in-chief, and the cabinet-level defense minister is second in command. Subordinated to that position are often secretaries for specific major operational divisions of the armed forces as a whole, such as those that provide general support services to the military, including their dependants.
Then there are the heads of specific departmental agencies responsible for the provision and management of specific skill- and knowledge-based services such as strategic advice, capability development assessment, or military science provision of research, and design and development of technologies. Within each departmental agency will be found administrative branches responsible for further agency business specialization work.
Military branches: In most countries, the armed forces are divided into three military branches (also service, armed service, or military service): army, navy, and air force.
Many countries have a variation on the standard model of three basic military branches. Some nations also organize their cyber force, emergencies service, medical service, military logistics, space force, marines, and special forces such as commandos or airborne forces as independent armed services. A nation's border guard or coast guard may also be an independent branch of its military, although in many nations border guard or coast guard is a civil law enforcement agency. A number of countries have no navy, for geographical reasons.
In larger armed forces, the cultures between the different branches of the armed forces can be quite different.
Most smaller countries have a single organization that encompasses all armed forces employed by the country in question. Armies of developing countries tend to consist primarily of infantry, while developed countries armies tend to have larger units manning expensive equipment and only a fraction of personnel in infantry units.
In western militaries, a joint force is defined as a unit or formation comprising representation of combat power from two or more branches of the military.
Internal security forces: Gendarmeries, military police and security forces, including equivalents such as paramilitary forces, militia, internal troops and police tactical unit, are an internal security service common in most of the world, but uncommon in countries with English common law histories where civil police are employed to enforce the law, and there are tight restrictions on how the armed forces may be used to assist.
Commands, formations, and units: It is common, at least in the European and North American militaries, to refer to the building blocks of a military as commands, formations, and units.
In a military context, a command is a collection of units and formations under the control of a single officer, although during World War II a command was also a name given to a battlegroup in the United States Army. In general, it is an administrative and executive strategic headquarters that is responsible to the national government or the national military headquarters. It is not uncommon for a nation's services to each consist of their own command (such as Land Component, Air Component, Naval Component, and Medical Component in the Belgian Army), but this does not preclude the existence of commands that are not service-based.
A formation is defined by the U.S. Department of Defense as "two or more aircraft, ships, or units proceeding together under a commander". Fomin in the Great Soviet Encyclopedia emphasised its combined-arms nature: "Formations are those military organisations which are formed from different speciality Arms and Services troop units to create a balanced, combined combat force. The formations only differ in their ability to achieve different scales of application of force to achieve different strategic, operational and tactical goals and mission objectives." It is a composite military organization that includes a mixture of integrated and operationally attached sub-units, and is usually combat-capable. Examples of formations include divisions, brigades, battalions, wings, etc. Formation may also refer to tactical formation, the physical arrangement or disposition of troops and weapons. Examples of formation in such usage include pakfront, panzerkeil, testudo formation, etc.
A typical unit is a homogeneous military organization (either combat, combat-support or non-combat in capability) that includes service personnel predominantly from a single arm of service, or a branch of service, and its administrative and command functions are self-contained. Any unit subordinate to another unit is considered its sub-unit or minor unit. It is not uncommon in the United States for unit and formation to be used synonymously. In Commonwealth practice, formation is not used for smaller organizations such as battalions, which are instead called "units", and their constituent platoons or companies are referred to as sub-units. In the Commonwealth, formations are divisions, brigades, etc.
Different armed forces, and even different branches of service of the armed forces, may use the same name to denote different types of organizations. An example is the "squadron". In most navies a squadron is a formation of several ships; in most air forces it is a unit; in the U.S. Army it is a battalion-sized cavalry unit; and in Commonwealth armies a squadron is a company-sized sub-unit.
Table of organization and equipment: A table of organization and equipment (TOE or TO&E) is a document published by the U.S. Army Force Management Support Agency that prescribes the organization, manning, and equipage of units from divisional size and down, but also including the headquarters of Corps and Armies.
It also provides information on the mission and capabilities of a unit as well as the unit's current status. A general TOE is applicable to a type of unit (for instance, infantry) rather than a specific unit (the 3rd Infantry Division). In this way, all units of the same branch (such as infantry) follow the same structural guidelines.
Modern hierarchy:
Army: The following table gives an overview of some of the terms used to describe army hierarchy in armed forces across the world. Whilst it is recognized that there are differences between armies of different nations, many are modeled on the British or American models, or both. However, many military units and formations go back in history for a long time, and were devised by various military thinkers throughout European history.
For example, the modern Corps was first introduced in France about 1805 by Napoleon as a more flexible tactical grouping of two or more divisions during the Napoleonic Wars.
Rungs may be skipped in this ladder: for example, typically NATO forces skip from battalion to brigade. Likewise, only large military powers may have organizations at the top levels and different armies and countries may also use traditional names, creating considerable confusion: for example, a British or Canadian armored regiment (battalion) is divided into squadrons (companies) and troops (platoons), whereas an American cavalry squadron (battalion) is divided into troops (companies) and platoons. In the French system (used by many African countries) the company is divided into sections (platoons) composed of 3 x "groupes de combat" of 7 soldiers, plus a group of vehicle crews and a HQ that includes 2 x snipers.
Army, army group, region, and theatre are all large formations that vary significantly between armed forces in size and hierarchy position. While divisions were the traditional level at which support elements (field artillery, hospital, logistics and maintenance, etc.) were added to the unit structure, since World War II, many brigades now have such support units, and since the 1980s, regiments also have been receiving support elements. A regiment with such support elements is called a regimental combat team in US military parlance, or a battlegroup in the UK and other forces. Canadian Army doctrine also includes the combat team which is a company of infantry augmented with tanks, or a squadron of tanks augmented with infantry, or the combination of a full company of infantry with a full squadron of tanks.
During World War II the Red Army used the same basic organizational structure. However, in the beginning many units were greatly underpowered and their size was actually one level below on the ladder that is usually used elsewhere; for example, a division in the early-WWII Red Army would have been about the size of most nations' regiments or brigades. At the top of the ladder, what other nations would call an army group, the Red Army called a front. By contrast, during the same period the German Wehrmacht army groups, particularly on the Eastern Front, such as Army Group Centre significantly exceeded the above numbers, and were more cognate with the Soviet Strategic Directions.
Navy: Naval organization at the flotilla level and higher is less commonly abided by, as ships operate in smaller or larger groups in various situations that may change at a moment's notice. However, there is some common terminology used throughout navies to communicate the general concept of how many vessels might be in a unit.
Navies are generally organized into groups for a specific purpose, usually strategic, and these organizational groupings appear and disappear frequently based on the conditions and demands placed upon a navy. This contrasts with army organization where units remain static, with the same men and equipment, over long periods of time. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military organization | At the top of the ladder, what other nations would call an army group, the Red Army called a front. By contrast, during the same period the German Wehrmacht army groups, particularly on the Eastern Front, such as Army Group Centre significantly exceeded the above numbers, and were more cognate with the Soviet Strategic Directions.
Navy: Naval organization at the flotilla level and higher is less commonly abided by, as ships operate in smaller or larger groups in various situations that may change at a moment's notice. However, there is some common terminology used throughout navies to communicate the general concept of how many vessels might be in a unit.
Navies are generally organized into groups for a specific purpose, usually strategic, and these organizational groupings appear and disappear frequently based on the conditions and demands placed upon a navy. This contrasts with army organization where units remain static, with the same men and equipment, over long periods of time.
The five-star ranks of admiral of the fleet and fleet admiral have largely been out of regular use since the 1990s, with the exception of ceremonial or honorary appointments. Currently, all major navies (blue-water and green-water navies) are commanded by an admiral of either four-star rank or three-star rank depending on relative size. Smaller naval forces, such as the Royal New Zealand Navy, or those navies that are effectively coast guards, are commanded by a rear-admiral (two-star rank), commodore (one-star rank) or even a captain.
Aircraft carriers are typically commanded by a captain. Submarines and destroyers are typically commanded by a captain or commander. Some destroyers, particularly smaller destroyers such as frigates (formerly known as destroyer escorts) are usually commanded by officers with the rank of commander. Corvettes, the smallest class of warship, are commanded by officers with the rank of commander or lieutenant-commander. Auxiliary ships, including gunboats, minesweepers, patrol boats, military riverine craft, tenders and torpedo boats are usually commanded by lieutenants, sub-lieutenants or warrant officers. Usually, the smaller the vessel, the lower the rank of the ship's commander. For example, patrol boats are often commanded by ensigns, while frigates are rarely commanded by an officer below the rank of commander.
Historically, navies were far more rigid in structure. Ships were collected in divisions, which in turn were collected in numbered squadrons, which comprised a numbered fleet. Permission for a vessel to leave one unit and join another would have to be approved on paper.
The modern U.S. Navy is primarily based on a number of standard groupings of vessels, including the carrier strike group and the expeditionary strike group.
Additionally, naval organization continues aboard a single ship. The complement forms three or four departments (such as tactical and engineering), each of which has a number of divisions, followed by work centers.
Air force: The organizational structures of air forces vary between nations: some air forces (such as the United States Air Force and the Royal Air Force) are divided into commands, groups and squadrons; others (such as the Soviet Air Force) have an Army-style organizational structure. The modern Royal Canadian Air Force uses Air division as the formation between wings and the entire air command. Like the RAF, Canadian wings consist of squadrons.
Task force: A task force is a unit or formation created as a temporary grouping for a specific operational purpose. Aside from administrative hierarchical forms of organization that have evolved since the early 17th century in Europe, fighting forces have been grouped for specific operational purposes into mission-related organizations such as the German Kampfgruppe or the U.S. Combat Team (Army) and Task Force (Navy) during the Second World War, or the Soviet Operational manoeuvre group during the Cold War. In the British and Commonwealth armies the battlegroup became the usual grouping of companies during the Second World War and the Cold War.
Within NATO, a Joint Task Force (JTF) would be such a temporary grouping that includes elements from more than one armed service, a Combined Task Force (CTF) would be such a temporary grouping that includes elements from more than one nation, and a Combined Joint Task Force (CJTF) would be such a temporary grouping that includes elements of more than one armed service and more than one nation.
See also: Command and control
Military administration
Explanatory notes:
== References == |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military personnel | Terminology: Military personnel who serve in an army or otherwise large land force are referred to as soldiers. Those who serve in a navy, coast guard, or other seagoing force are seamen or sailors. Naval infantry or marines are personnel who serve both on land and at sea, and may be part of a navy or a marine corps. Personnel who serve in air forces are airmen. Space force personnel typically do not have a specific term given how few exist, but in the U.S. Space Force personnel are referred to as guardians.
Designated leaders of military personnel are officers. These include commissioned officers, warrant officers and non-commissioned officers. For naval forces, non-commissioned officers are referred to as petty officers.
Demographics: Military personnel may be conscripted (recruited by compulsion under the law) or recruited by attracting civilians to join the armed forces. Most personnel at the start of their military career are young adults. For example, in 2013 the average age of a United States Army soldier beginning initial training was 20.7 years.
Most personnel are male. The proportion of female personnel varies internationally; for example, it is approximately 3% in India, 10% in the UK, 13% in Sweden, 16% in the U.S., and 27% in South Africa. Many state armed forces that recruit women ban them from ground close-quarters combat roles.
Personnel who join as officers tend to be upwardly mobile young adults from age 18. Most enlisted personnel have a childhood background of relative socio-economic deprivation. For example, after the US suspended conscription in 1973, "the military disproportionately attracted African American men, men from lower-status socioeconomic backgrounds, men who had been in nonacademic high school programs, and men whose high school grades tended to be low". However, a 2020 study suggests that U.S. Armed Forces personnel's socio-economic status are at parity or slightly higher than the civilian population, and that the most disadvantaged socio-economic groups are less likely to meet the requirements of the modern U.S. military. As an indication of the socio-economic background of British Army personnel, in 2015 three-quarters of its youngest recruits had the literacy skills normally expected of an 11-year-old or younger, and 7% had a reading age of 5–7.
Initial training: Military personnel must be prepared to perform tasks that in civilian life would be highly unusual or absent. In particular, they must be capable of injuring and killing other people, and of facing mortal danger without fleeing. This is achieved in initial training, a physically and psychologically intensive process which resocializes recruits for the unique nature of military demands.
According to an expert in military training methods, Lt Col. Dave Grossman, initial training uses four conditioning techniques: role modeling, classical conditioning, operant conditioning, and brutalization. For example, throughout initial training:
Individuality is suppressed (e.g. by shaving the head of new recruits, issuing uniforms, denying privacy, and prohibiting the use of first names);
Daily routine is tightly controlled (e.g. recruits must make their beds, polish boots, and stack their clothes in a certain way, and mistakes are punished);
Continuous stressors deplete psychological resistance to the demands of their instructors (e.g. depriving recruits of sleep, food, or shelter, shouting insults and giving orders intended to humiliate); and
Frequent punishments serve to condition group conformity and discourage poor performance.
The disciplined drill instructor is presented as a role model of the ideal soldier.
In conditions of continuous physical and psychological stress, the trainee group normally forms a bond of mutual loyalty, commonly experienced as an emotional commitment. It has been called a "we-feeling", and helps to commit recruits to their military organisation.
Throughout their initial training, recruits are repeatedly instructed to stand, march, and respond to orders in a ritual known as foot drill, which trains recruits to obey orders without hesitation or question. According to Finnish Army regulations, for example, the close-order drill:
Is essential for the esprit de corps and cohesion for battlefield conditions;
Gets the recruits used to instinctive obedience and following the orders;
Enables large units to be marched and moved in an orderly manner; and
Creates the basis for action in the battlefield.
In order to ensure that recruits will kill if ordered to do so, they are taught to objectify (dehumanize) their opponent as an "enemy target" to "be engaged", which will "fall when hit". They are also taught the basic skills of their profession, such as military tactics, first aid, managing their affairs in the field, and the use of weaponry and other equipment. Training is designed to test and improve the physical fitness of recruits, although the heavy strain on the body also leads to a rate of injury.
Terms of service: Recruits enter a binding contract of service, which may differ according to rank, military branch, and whether the employment is full-time or part-time.
Minimum service period: Full-time military employment normally requires a minimum period of service of several years; between two and six years is typical of armed forces in Australia, the UK and the US, for example, depending on role, branch, and rank. The exception to this rule is a short discharge window, which opens after the first few weeks of training and closes a few months later, and allows recruits to leave the armed force as of right.
Part-time military employment, known as reserve service, allows a recruit to maintain a civilian job while training under military discipline for a minimum number of days per year in return for a financial bounty. Reserve recruits may be called out to deploy on operations to supplement the full-time personnel complement.
After leaving the armed forces, for a fixed period (between four and six years is normal in the UK and U.S., for example), former recruits may remain liable for compulsory return to full-time military employment in order to train or deploy on operations.
Military law: Military law introduces offenses not recognized by civilian courts, such as absence without leave (AWOL), desertion, political acts, malingering, behaving disrespectfully, and disobedience (see, for example, offences against military law in the United Kingdom). Penalties range from a summary reprimand to imprisonment for several years following a court martial. Certain fundamental rights are also restricted or suspended, including the freedom of association (e.g. union organizing) and freedom of speech (speaking to the media). Military personnel in some countries have a right of conscientious objection if they believe an order is immoral or unlawful, or cannot in good conscience carry it out.
Posting and deployment: Personnel may be posted to bases in their home country or overseas, according to operational need, and may be deployed from those bases on exercises or operations anywhere in the world. The length of postings and deployments are regulated. In the UK, for example, a soldier is expected to be on deployment for no more than six months in every 30 months. These regulations may be waived at times of high operational tempo, however.
Benefits: Benefits and perks of military service typically include adventurous training, subsidised accommodation, meals and travel, and a pension. Some armed forces also subsidise recruits' education before, during and/or after military service; examples are the Royal Military College Saint-Jean in Canada, the Welbeck Defence Sixth Form College in the UK, and the GI Bill arrangements in the US Conditions for participation normally apply, including a minimum period of formal military employment.
Appearance: While on duty, military personnel are normally required to wear a military uniform, normally showing their name, rank, and military branch.
See also: Military recruitment
Recruit training
Women in the military
Children in the military
Transgender people and military service
LGBT people and military service
Sexual harassment in the military
Conscientious objector
Conscription
Military specialism
References:
External links:
The dictionary definition of personnel at Wiktionary |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military police | Military police forces by country:
Americas:
Brazil: "Military police" is a law enforcement agency which follows the Brazilian military rules, responsible for preventative policing of the civilian population. Each state has its own Military Police department, each one is a Gendarmerie. However, and despite their name, these corps are not branches of the Brazilian armed forces, instead, they are auxiliary forces and Brazilian army reserves, alongside also the Military Fire Brigades.
Traditional Provost duties are held by different corps within each branch of the Brazilian Armed Forces: Army Police (Polícia do Exército, PE) for the Army, Navy Police (Companhia de Polícia do Batalhão Naval), part of Brazilian Marines, for the Navy, and Air Force Police (Polícia da Aeronáutica, PA) for the Air Force.
Canada: The Canadian Forces Military Police (CF MP) contribute to the effectiveness and readiness of the Canadian Forces (CF) and the Department of National Defence (DND) through the provision of professional police, security and operational support services worldwide.
CFMP are classified as peace officers in the Criminal Code, which gives them the same powers as civilian law enforcement personnel to enforce acts of Parliament on or in relation to DND property or assets. They have the power to arrest anyone who is subject to the Code of Service Discipline (CSD), regardless of position or rank, under the National Defence Act. MPs have the power to arrest and charge non-CSD-bound civilians only in cases where a crime is committed on or in relation to DND property or assets, or at the request of the minister of public safety, commissioner of the Correctional Service of Canada or commissioner of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. Although MP jurisdiction is only on DND property, any civilian accessing these areas falls under MP jurisdiction and is dealt with in the same manner as by any civilian policing agency. If MPs deem that a person, military or civilian, has committed a crime on or in relation to DND property or assets, they have the power to arrest and charge that person under the Criminal Code. The purpose of the CFMP is not to replace a civilian police officer, but rather to support the Canadian Forces through security and policing services. MPs also have the power to enforce the provincial highway traffic acts on all military bases in Canada pursuant to the Government Property Traffic Regulations (GPTR).
Colombia: In Colombia, MPs (Policía Militar in Spanish) are very common. They can be seen guarding closed roads, museums, embassies, government buildings and airports. In the National Army of Colombia they are assigned to the 37 Military Police Battalions, wearing green uniforms with the military police helmet. A Naval Police battalion is in service in the Colombian Marine Infantry. MP units also provide military bands and drum and bugle corps for ceremonial events. The Air Force also has a military police force (Policía Militar Aérea) that is in charge of protecting and enforcing law inside Colombian Air Force bases.
United States: Each branch of the United States Armed Forces (except the US Space Force) maintains its own police force. The U.S. Coast Guard, which in itself is a law enforcement agency, uses a mixture of enlisted rates and ranks qualified as law enforcement officers to patrol, investigate crimes, and enforce laws and regulations on large bases and training centers through the United States Coast Guard Police. The Coast Guard also uses the Coast Guard Investigative Service (CGIS), a mixture of civilian, enlisted, reservists, and officers who are qualified and duly sworn federal law enforcement officers separate from the normal Coast Guard chain of command. CGIS primarily investigates and charges those in its own population with serious crimes, such as rape, assault or forgery, that fall under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).
The following is a list of military police forces:
Military Police Corps/Office of the Provost Marshal General—United States Army
Provost Marshal Office (base law enforcement) and law enforcement battalions (combat support or "field MPs")—United States Marine Corps
Masters-at-Arms (MAs) are enlisted sailors of the U.S. Navy, designated as Naval Security Force (NSF), primarily responsible for law enforcement and force protection. NSF personnel are led by naval commissioned officers from the limited duty officer (LDO) and chief warrant officer (CWO) communities, who are also designated as NSF. Additionally, a host installation's security force (both overseas and in the continental United States) are augmented by sailors on temporary assignment of duty (TEMADD) from their parent units, as part of the Auxiliary Security Force (ASF). Shore patrol personnel are sailors from U.S. naval vessels visiting foreign ports (and some domestic ports) assigned to the shore patrol party or beach guard, responsible for the good order and discipline of sailors from the visiting ship(s) on liberty. Sailors assigned to the shore patrol party or beach guard detachment do not include sailors assigned to the ship's security force, both performing different duties while visiting that country, because of the status of force agreement (SOFA) or rules of engagement (ROE). Prior to the 1970s, master-at-arms and shore patrol were used synonymously to refer to sailors assigned to perform law enforcement and shore patrol duties.
United States Air Force Security Forces (formerly known as Military Police, Air Police and Security Police)—United States Air Force and United States Space Force
The United States Constabulary was a gendarmerie force used to secure and patrol the American occupation zone in Germany immediately after World War II.
Africa:
Algeria: The Algerian People's National Armed Forces has maintained military police units since its founding upon Algerian independence in 1962. The task of the Algerian military police is to maintain law and order within units and hunt down conscripts trying to flee military service, protect and secure military installations, and organize and move large combat units. In the 1990s, three military police battalions were established as combat units, and they have taken part in combat operations.
Botswana: The Botswana Defence Force maintains provosts to enforce order within the ranks who are authorized to carry out arrests and to order other service personnel to arrest someone. Soldiers and officers suspected of committing offenses may be arrested by military personnel of superior rank. An officer may be arrested by another officer of superior rank, while soldiers may be arrested by any officer, warrant officer, or non-commissioned officer.
Arab Republic of Egypt: The Egyptian Army maintains a Military Police Corps consisting of 24 battalions, divided into 12 Inland MP battalions (222nd, 224th, 226th, 228th, 230th, 232nd, 234th, 236th, 238th, 240th, 242nd, 244th) and 12 Field MP battalions (221st, 223rd, 225th, 227th, 229th, 231st, 233rd, 235th, 237th, 239th, 241st, 243rd).
Kenya: The Kenya Army maintains a Military Police Corps which consists of two battalions and the School of Military Police.
Morocco: The Royal Moroccan Gendarmerie, a part of the Royal Moroccan Army, is directly subordinate to the Ministry of Interior. It is divided into 22 Regional Gendarmeries, a Mobile Gendarmerie, Air Gendarmerie, and Maritime Gendarmerie.
Nigeria: The Nigerian Army maintains a military police force, the Nigerian Army Corps of Military Police (NACMP). It is responsible for protecting installations, guarding important personnel as well as military convoys and prisoners, and investigating crimes. Nigerian military police personnel are divided into three fields, and all MPs are required to specialize in at least one: criminal investigations, general policing duties, and K9 handling.
Asia:
Kingdom of Cambodia: The Gendarmerie, or "Military Police", known as the Royal Gendarmerie of Cambodia is a paramilitary unit with about 7,000 soldiers deployed in all provinces. It is headquartered in Phnom Penh. The unit's chain of command is through the Royal Cambodian Armed Forces High Command.
The Royal Gendarmerie of Cambodia is deployed in every province and cities to keep the law and order. Military police in Cambodia play an important role in Cambodia society, keeping law and order in cities along with the National Police.
China: The 1954 PRC Constitution stipulates that the President of the People's Republic of China unifies the national armed forces, and the 1982 PRC Constitution stipulates that the Central Military Commission leads the national armed forces, in addition to the CPC's insistence on the absolute leadership of the Party over the military, so the Chinese People's Liberation Army does not have a military police in the traditional sense. The armed forces, including the various military branches of the PLA and the Chinese People's Armed Police, have their own police pickets units. According to the "Chinese People's Liberation Army Police Regulations", Article 7 stipulates that the "military affairs department of the commanding authority shall be responsible for the management of police operations in the region" in units above the regimental level, and shall dispatch and lead the police pickets to perform police duties in accordance with Article 27. Article 4 of the Police Regulation provides that:
The main tasks of policing are
(1) Maintaining military discipline.
(2) Maintaining order in the operation of military vehicles and traffic safety. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military police | The armed forces, including the various military branches of the PLA and the Chinese People's Armed Police, have their own police pickets units. According to the "Chinese People's Liberation Army Police Regulations", Article 7 stipulates that the "military affairs department of the commanding authority shall be responsible for the management of police operations in the region" in units above the regimental level, and shall dispatch and lead the police pickets to perform police duties in accordance with Article 27. Article 4 of the Police Regulation provides that:
The main tasks of policing are
(1) Maintaining military discipline.
(2) Maintaining order in the operation of military vehicles and traffic safety.
(3) To investigate and deal with impersonation of military personnel, military vehicles and military units in accordance with the prescribed authority
(4) To safeguard the image of the army and the legitimate rights and interests of soldiers out in the field
(5) To carry out temporary guard duty.
It can be seen that the duty of the police picket detachment only involves the military personnel, military vehicles military discipline and other issues; while the legal sense of criminal law enforcement or public security administrative law enforcement authority, but belongs to the military procuratorate or military defense department. Cases of counterfeit military personnel, counterfeit military vehicles and counterfeit military units investigated and dealt with in police picketing are transferred to the jurisdiction of local judicial organs. Jurisprudence holds that in general criminal cases (i.e. not including crimes against military duties), military status does not constitute a special subject. According to Article 4 of the Regulations on Handling Mutual Involvement of Military and Local Criminal Cases implemented by the Supreme People's Court, the Supreme People's Procuratorate, the Ministry of Public Security, the Ministry of State Security, the Ministry of Justice and the General Political Department of the PLA on August 1, 2009, the principle of personal jurisdiction is adopted for military personnel (including active duty military personnel, civilian cadres, military civilian personnel, non-active duty public service personnel, military employees, retired personnel managed by the military, and The investigation, prosecution, trial, and execution of penalties for military personnel (including active duty military personnel, civilian cadres, military civilian personnel, non-active duty public employees, military employees, retired personnel managed by the military, and reserve personnel and other personnel performing military tasks) are under the jurisdiction and execution of military defense departments, military procuratorates, military courts, military prisons, etc.; the investigation, prosecution, trial, and execution of penalties for local personnel are under the jurisdiction of local judicial organs. Included in the Chinese People's Armed Police Force sequence of public security border defense, public security fire, public security guard forces on active duty, in accordance with local personnel to determine the jurisdiction. Special Case: The military police unit established by the Chinese People's Liberation Army in Hong Kong is the same as the police picket detachment in terms of carrying out its tasks.
In January 2016, the Political and Legal Committee of the Central Military Commission was established as part of the deepening reform of the national defense and military forces. The Bureau of Security of the General Political Department of the Chinese People's Liberation Army was subsequently changed to the Bureau of Security of the Political and Legal Committee of the Central Military Commission, which will assume the functions of investigation, public prosecution and trial of military-related violations with the Military Procuratorate of the Chinese People's Liberation Army and the Military Court of the Chinese People's Liberation Army, respectively.
India: The Corps of Military Police (CMP) is the military police of the Indian Army. In addition, the CMP is trained to handle prisoners of war and to regulate traffic, as well as to handle basic telecommunication equipment such as telephone exchanges. They can be identified by their red berets, white lanyards and belts, and they also wear a black brassard with the letters "MP" imprinted in red.
Internal policing duties in a regiment (or a station) are handled by the Regimental Police, who are soldiers of the unit who are assigned to policing tasks for a short period of time. They are essentially used to regulate traffic, and can be identified by a black brassard with the letters "RP" embossed in gold or white.
The Indian Air Force is policed by the Indian Air Force Police. They can be identified by their white peaked caps, white lanyards and belts (with a pistol holster). They used to wear a black brassard with the letters "IAF(P)" imprinted in red, until 2013. Now Indian Air Force Provost and Security officers and IAF(P) wear an arm badge.
The Indian Navy has the Navy Police, and they can be identified by a black brassard with the letters "NP" in gold, with the state emblem placed in between the N and the P.
Indonesia: In Indonesia, the institution which solely has the responsibility and authority concerning the maintenance of discipline and law enforcement towards members of the Indonesian National Armed Forces (TNI) is the Military Police Command (Indonesian: Pusat Polisi Militer TNI abbreviated "Puspom TNI"), an institution directly under the auspices of the Indonesian National Armed Forces Headquarters ("Mabes TNI") which heads the three Military Police corps which are the:
Indonesian Army Military Police Command; (Puspomad)
Indonesian Navy Military Police Command; (Puspomal)
Indonesian Air Force Military Police Command (Puspomau)
They are authorised to enforce military law and conduct crime investigations involving active members of the TNI. Other than conducting law enforcement, MPs which are attached to the Paspampres also conduct escort and Honour guard duties for the head of state, high-ranking military officials, and VVIPs. The Military police are also responsible in supervising prisoners of war (POWs), controlling military prisoners, arresting deserters, managing military traffic, issuing military driving licenses and conduct joint law enforcement operations with the civilian police such as implementing traffic checkpoints and crime investigation to take action towards military personnel caught red-handed in violations.
In Indonesia, the Military Police does not have authority towards civilians as it is the realm of the Indonesian National Police (Polri), and in the other hand, the civilian Police does not have authority to arrest active members of the military, except accompanied by the Military police. If a member of the armed forces is caught red-handed by the civilian police, then the violator will be sent to the nearest Military Police or the Military police would be contacted in order to conduct further legal processes.
The Army, Navy, and Air force have their own Military Police unit which focuses on their own branches, but any Military policemen from either branch can take action towards military members from a different branch if caught red-handed, then the violator will be sent to the Military police of their branch. The Military Police in Indonesia are known locally as Polisi Militer sometimes shortened "PM" or "POM".
The uniforms worn by the Military police varies for the tri-services. The Army Military Police wear dark green, the Navy Military Police wear blue-gray and the Air Force Military Police wear light blue. The beret of all of the three Military police corps in Indonesia is the same which is blue, dragged to the left (except those attached to the Paspampres who wears light blue berets). When wearing camouflage uniform, MPs are identifiable by their white aiguillettes and brassard worn on their upper left sleeve imprinted the word "PM".
Iran: The Central Provost of Islamic Republic of Iran Army is the police service of the Islamic Republic of Iran Armed Forces. It has authority within all branches of the Islamic Republic of Iran Army and has seniority over the designated provosts of the "Sea Police" of the Islamic Republic of Iran Navy and the "Air Police" of the Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force. Separately, the General Provost of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps maintains police authority over the land, air, and sea branches of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and the Basij militia.
Israel: The Military Police Corps (Kheil HaMishtara HaTzva'it), Mem Tzadeh for short, is the military police/provost of the Israel Defense Forces. It is responsible for investigating crimes committed by soldiers, traffic enforcement among military traffic, arresting soldiers suspected of criminal offenses, assisting officers in enforcing discipline, locating deserters, guarding military prisons, and helping man checkpoints. In times of emergency, enemy detainees are held and sorted by the military police. It is a brigade-sized force commanded by a brigadier general.
The corps has very little civilian jurisdiction and for that reason works in conjunction with the Israel Police when civilians are involved. The Israel Border Police, a branch of the civilian police force, is Israel's gendarmerie equivalent.
The civilian police and military police share a computer database. Suspects apprehended by the civilian police on a civilian charge and wearing civilian clothes turning out to be a deserting or AWOL soldier are turned over to the Military Police.
Japan: During World War II, the Kempeitai were the military police of the Imperial Japanese Army and the Tokkeitai were the military police of the Imperial Japanese Navy. They also performed intelligence and secret police functions and were active in Japan and its occupied territories.
Today's Japan Self-Defense Forces maintain military police units called the Keimutai (警務隊), with its personnel called Keimukan (警務官).
Keimu means police affairs.
Kazakhstan: The Military Police in Kazakhstan refers to law enforcement bodies in the Armed Forces of the Republic of Kazakhstan. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military police | The Israel Border Police, a branch of the civilian police force, is Israel's gendarmerie equivalent.
The civilian police and military police share a computer database. Suspects apprehended by the civilian police on a civilian charge and wearing civilian clothes turning out to be a deserting or AWOL soldier are turned over to the Military Police.
Japan: During World War II, the Kempeitai were the military police of the Imperial Japanese Army and the Tokkeitai were the military police of the Imperial Japanese Navy. They also performed intelligence and secret police functions and were active in Japan and its occupied territories.
Today's Japan Self-Defense Forces maintain military police units called the Keimutai (警務隊), with its personnel called Keimukan (警務官).
Keimu means police affairs.
Kazakhstan: The Military Police in Kazakhstan refers to law enforcement bodies in the Armed Forces of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The military police is under the joint jurisdiction of the Ministry of Defense, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the National Security Committee, all of which manage the activities of the military police.
Mongolia: The Mongolian Armed Forces maintain two law enforcement units. The Internal Troops of Mongolia is a paramilitary gendarmerie unit that performs special guard and reserve duties. Among other duties, it guards government installations and serves as a riot police force. The 032 Military Unit engages in law enforcement as well as organizing daily activities and military supplies and services.
Malaysia: The Kor Polis Tentera DiRaja (Royal Military Police Corps) performs military police duties in the Malaysian Army. Apart from enforcing discipline and conduct of members of the Army, the Corps oversees security of designated Army installations, performs escort and ceremonial duties, and assists civil law enforcement authorities. The Kor Polis Tentera is also tasked with crime prevention and investigating criminal activities on Army property or by military personnel.
With its roots in the British Royal Military Police, members of the Kor Polis Tentera DiRaja also wear the distinctive red peaked cap, white lanyard and belt, as well as a black brassard with the letters "PT" imprinted. PT stands for "Polis Tentera", the Malay words for "Military Police". Military police on traffic duty wear armbands sporting the letters "MP" in red.
Pakistan: Since the establishment and inception of the Pakistan Armed Forces, they have maintained their own military police. The Pakistan Army received its share of Muslim personnel from the former Royal Indian Military Police, forming the Pakistan Army Military Police or "MP". Later, the Pakistan Navy established the "naval police" with its centre commissioned at "PNS Nighaban", and the Pakistan Air Force later established the PAF Police to maintain order.
The Pakistan Navy's Naval Police can be identified by their red armbands with the letters "NP" written in white. They are headquartered at PNS Qasim in Karachi.
The Pakistan Army's military police is known as the Pakistan Army Corps of Military Police. They can be identified by their red armbands, white cross belts and white combat helmets with the letters "MP", written in white.
The Pakistan Air Force established its own military police, known as the "Pakistan Air Force Police" commonly referred to as Provost. The PAF Police can be identified by their red armlets, white cross belts and white combat helmets with "PAF Police" written in red.
The MP, NP and the PAF Police do not exercise any jurisdiction over civilians, nor can the civil courts interfere in the operations of the Military Police. In some cases, the Military Police Corps have worked with civilian police agencies if civilians are involved.
Philippines: The Armed Forces of the Philippines currently maintains its own military police distinct from the nation's civilian force, reporting to the Chief of Staff through the service commanding generals.
The American-established (now defunct) Philippine Constabulary (PC) was also known as the Military Police Command. Pursuant to Republic Act 6975 (the DILG Reorganization Act of 1991), the PC and the Integrated National Police merged to form the civilian Philippine National Police, and was placed under the Department of the Interior and Local Government.
Saudi Arabia: Every branch of Armed Forces of Saudi Arabia (Royal Saudi Land Forces, Royal Saudi Air Force, Royal Saudi Naval Forces, Royal Saudi Air Defense Forces and Royal Saudi Strategic Missile Force) have its own Military Police. Saudi Arabian National Guard has its own Military Police. In the Ministry of Interior, the General Directorate of Border Guard, General Directorate of Public Security, General Directorate of Prisons and Facilities Security Forces each has its own military police. In Presidency of State Security, the Saudi Emergency Force and Special Security Forces each has its own military police.
The military police of Directorate of Public Security are a small subset and are charged mainly with keeping peace in areas with high levels of aggression and tension.
All the military police wear red berets.
Sri Lanka: Each branch of the Sri Lankan Armed Forces has its own military police/Provost section. The Sri Lanka Army is policed by the Sri Lanka Corps of Military Police and by Regimental Police, who belong to each individual regiments or corps.
The Military Police force carries out the following missions:
Maintenance of order and discipline: Consists of monitoring, maintaining and, if necessary, re-establishing discipline and military order. This also involves controlling stragglers and refugees in times of war and guarding and escorting prisoners of war.
Security missions: Prevents and deters any threat to or attack against the personnel and property of the armed forces. MPs also provide VIP motorcycle escorts and honor guards, perform close protection missions and escort classified documents and money transports.
The Sri Lanka Navy is policed by the Provost Branch. The Sri Lanka Air Force is policed by the Air Force Police (AFP).
Singapore: In Singapore, the Singapore Armed Forces Military Police Command serves as the law enforcement agency of the Singapore Armed Forces. The command is headed by a colonel, otherwise also known as the provost marshal. Its sub-units included the Military Police Enforcement Unit (including Special Investigations Branch and ceremonial and drill components), the Detention Barracks (DB), The 1st Provost Bn, MP Training School and the Security Support Forces (including Military working Dog Wing, Close Protection and Security Ops Unit). The command also collaborates closely with the Singapore Police Force in terms of policing work duties, investigations, etc.
South Korea: The Republic of Korea Armed Forces maintains a series of separate military police commands for the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps. ROK Army MPs also function as border guards at the Korean Demilitarized Zone.
Taiwan: The ROCMP is responsible for enforcing military law, maintaining military discipline, providing backup for the civilian police force or serving as combat troops during times of emergency, providing security for historical sites (such as the Cihu Mausoleum) and certain government buildings, including the Presidential Office Building in Taipei City, as well as performing counter-terrorism and VIP protection operations. The ROCMP are also charged with the defense of the capital Taipei.
Thailand: In Thailand, each branch of the armed forces has its own military police force. The Royal Thai Navy has the Naval Military Police (สารวัตรทหารเรือ), the Royal Thai Army has the Army Military Police (สารวัตรทหาร), and the Royal Thai Air Force has the Air Force Military Police (สารวัตรทหารอากาศ).
The duties of the Air Military Police Department (กรมทหารสารวัตรทหารอากาศ) are peacekeeping, security, regulating traffic discipline within Air Force installations and housing areas, apprehending deserters, escorting VIPs and investigating crimes under the authority of the Military Court. These investigations include prisoners of war, enemy aliens, refugees and displaced officers within the Air Force and designated areas. It is under supervision of the Commander of the Air Military Police Department.
There is one active Air MP Battalion called the Battalion of Military Air Police (กองพันทหารสารวัตรทหารอากาศ). The Air Military Police Department is one unit under the supervision of the Office of Don Muang RTAF Base Commander (สำนักงานผู้บังคับทหารอากาศดอนเมือง).
Office of Don Muang RTAF Base Commander (สำนักงานผู้บังคับทหารอากาศดอนเมือง)
Air Military Police Department(กรมทหารสารวัตรทหารอากาศ)
Battalion of Military Air Police (กองพันทหารสารวัตรทหารอากาศ)
Vietnam: In Vietnam, the Military Police Brigade 144 (Vietnamese: Kiểm soát Quân sự, lit. 'Military Provost') is under the command of the General Staff of the Vietnam People's Army. The military polices are responsible for guarding and protecting the Presidential Palace, government offices and army offices. They are also responsible for supervising military laws on soldiers and officers. Even though the Brigade 144 is the highest level division in the Military Provost force of Vietnam, there seems to be no unified command for the Military Police under the General Staff, the Ministry of National Defense or another General Department within the Ministry. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military police | 'Military Provost') is under the command of the General Staff of the Vietnam People's Army. The military polices are responsible for guarding and protecting the Presidential Palace, government offices and army offices. They are also responsible for supervising military laws on soldiers and officers. Even though the Brigade 144 is the highest level division in the Military Provost force of Vietnam, there seems to be no unified command for the Military Police under the General Staff, the Ministry of National Defense or another General Department within the Ministry. There are several known Military Police units such as the Military Police Battalion 31 of the Ho Chi Minh City Command, the mentioned Brigade 144 of the General Staff, and the Military Police Battalion 103 under the Hanoi Capital Command. Besides the Provost units, there are also the military investigative agencies that function similarly to the Provosts, such as the Criminal Investigation Bureau and the Investigative Security Agency within the Defense Ministry.
Europe:
Armenia: The Military Police (Armenian: Ռազմական ոստիկանություն; Rrazmakan vostikanut’yun) of Armenia fall under the command of the Ministry of Defence. The Military Police was established in May 1992, by order of the Minister of Defense. The Military Police is considered a division that is separate from the Ministry of Defense. It had no special status until 2007, when a law to define the Military Police status was adopted. Its status is defined in the RA Law on Military Police. According to the law, the Military Police is responsible for the following:
Investigation of military crimes in the armed forces that were committed on the territory of military units or by conscripts in military service;
Deterrence, prevention and stoppage of crimes being planned or committed by military servicemen;
Protection of property that belongs to the authorized body;
Proper exploitation and safe operation of vehicles that belong to the armed forces.
The Military Police Bylaws were approved by the Government of Armenia on 25 December 2008.
Austria: The Austrian Military Police (German: Militärpolizei) of the Austrian Armed Forces (Bundesheer) is located in Vienna and consists of the following elements
Military Police HQ
Fundamentals Division
Training Division
Signal Platoon
Close Protection
3 MP Companies
MP Militia
The Military Police has three locations in Austria. The Military Police Command and one MP Co. are located in Vienna. One MP Co. is in Graz and one in Salzburg.
The Military Police is tasked with law enforcement and the protection of the forces, military events and Armed Forces property. The increasing number of international operations in which Austrian soldiers participate and new threat scenarios hugely expand the spectrum of tasks. In addition to its traditional domestic tasks, the Military Police now also fulfill tasks in international operations. In Austria the Military Police is only tasked with internal Armed Forces matters. Abroad, they are tasked with extensive assignments. It closes the security gap between a conflict that has ended and a functioning society. A large number of experienced specialists and modern equipment are required to meet these demanding tasks.
National tasks include:
Check routines and security checks
Security duty
Traffic control
Close Protection
Force Protection
Law enforcement
Inquiries
International tasks include:
Taking down traffic accidents
Crime scene investigation
Fingerprinting and photographing
Interrogations
Searches/investigations/support in interventions
Detention of dangerous criminals
Crowd and riot control
Operation of detention facilities
Interventions (Special weapons and tactics – SWAT)
Close Protection
Defence against terrorism
Belarus: The military commandants of the Armed Forces of Belarus are regional administrations responsible for military police on a unit's territory. Units are assigned to a specific commandant based on their location. There are 6 military commandants in the Belarusian Armed Forces.
Belgium: The Belgian Army's Military Police Group (Groupe Police Militaire in French; Groep Militaire Politie in Dutch) performs military police duties on behalf of all four components of the Belgian military. The group is headed by a colonel and has 188 members in five MP detachments. Until 1995, the Belgian Rijkswacht/Gendarmerie was, besides its civilian policing tasks, responsible for the nation's Military Police duties.
The Military Police Group staff is located in the Queen Elizabeth Barracks in the Brussels suburb of Evere. Alpha Detachment located at Evere covers the province of Flemish Brabant and the capital, Brussels. Bravo Detachment covers the Walloon Brabant, Hainaut Province and Namur Province areas and is located at Nivelles. Charlie Detachment located at Marche-en-Famenne covers the Liège Province and Belgian Luxembourg areas. Delta Detachment covers the Limbourg and Antwerp Province areas and is located at Leopoldsburg. Echo Detachment located at Lombardsijde covers Western and Eastern Flanders.
The Military Police force carries out the following missions:
Maintenance of order and discipline: Consists of monitoring, maintaining and, if necessary, re-establishing discipline and military order. This also involves controlling stragglers and refugees in times of war and guarding and escorting prisoners of war.
Traffic regulation: Includes traffic monitoring and regulation to ensure the flow of military movements in accordance with plans. This includes route reconnaissance and marking, convoy and oversize vehicle escort and river crossing control. Traffic accident investigations is also a part of the job.
Security missions: Prevents and deters any threat to or attack against the personnel and property of the armed forces. The Military Police force protects, for example, the Palace of the Nation and the Parliaments and Councils of the Regions and the Communities, headquarters and classified conferences. MPs also provide VIP motorcycle escorts and honour guards, perform close protection missions, and escort classified documents and money transports.
The Belgian Military Police has also taken part in multinational peacekeeping missions such as Afghanistan, Kosovo and the Congo. The Federal Police's Military Crime Division (DJMM) performs all investigations involving the armed forces.
In 2003, duties relating to refugees and deserters in wartime were transferred from the then disbanded Gendarmerie to the MPs. Members of the former 4 and 6 MP Companies were merged into the new MP Group, along with some Gendarmes previously assigned MP-related duties.
Belgian MPs are identified by black armbands with the letters MP in white block letters, worn on the left arm.
Bosnia and Herzegovina: Shortly after the formation of the Armed Forces of Bosnia and Herzegovina in 2005, an intentional strategy was made to limit in law and multi-ethnic, crime violation in the armed forces, so to speak, the Military Police, which was formed later on and approved by the Ministry of Defense of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Bulgaria: The first documents reflecting the establishment of interior order bodies in Bulgaria are: Instruction on Establishment of Initial Military Police Governorship, dated 3 July 1877, Instruction on the Rights and Duties of the Constituted Local Police Guards, dated 19 July 1877, and Temporary Regulations on Constituting Police Voluntary Sentries and Armed Guards, dated 8 August 1877.
According to the Instruction on Military Police Governorship in the free Bulgarian lands and regions with army presence, the Military Police enforced the law and order in the rear of the army, suspended possible clashes among members of different religious communities and observed for the proper implementation of commanders instructions.
Croatia: The Croatian Military Police (Croatian: Vojna policija) is a part of the Croatian Armed Forces (Oružane snage Republike Hrvatske). The Croatian Military Police was formed on 27 August 1991, shortly after the National Guard Corps (Zbor narodne garde) – now the Croatian Army – was formed.
Parts of Croatian Military Police are:
NSVP – Military Police Education center "Bojnik Alfred Hill"
66th Military Police Battalion
67th Military Police Battalion
68th Military Police Battalion
69th Military Police Company
70th Military Police Company
71st Military Police Battalion
72nd Military Police Battalion
73rd Military Police Battalion (HRM (Croatian Navy))
74th Military Police Company (HRZ (Croatian Air Force))
75th Military Police Battalion
Czech Republic: The Military Police Corps (Czechoslovakia) (Czech vojenská policie) was set up on 21 January 1991. Within the provisions of the Czechoslovak Law No. 124/1992 Dig. regarding the Military Police, they are responsible for police protection of armed forces, military facilities, military material and other state property controlled by the Ministry of Defence. The Military Police are a professional force. Since 1 January 1993, Czechoslovak Military Police Corps were divided to Czech and Slovak separate Military Police Corps.
The Military Police are headed by a Chief, who directly reports to the Minister of Defence.
As of 1 July 2003, the Military Police officers are equipped with accessories black in colour, including their distinctive feature – the black beret.
The structure is based on the territorial principle. The Military Police subordinated headquarters are located in Prague, Tábor, and Olomouc.
Military police officers are assigned directly to military units, and they form also part of military contingents of the Armed Forces of the Czech Republic in foreign deployments. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military police | Within the provisions of the Czechoslovak Law No. 124/1992 Dig. regarding the Military Police, they are responsible for police protection of armed forces, military facilities, military material and other state property controlled by the Ministry of Defence. The Military Police are a professional force. Since 1 January 1993, Czechoslovak Military Police Corps were divided to Czech and Slovak separate Military Police Corps.
The Military Police are headed by a Chief, who directly reports to the Minister of Defence.
As of 1 July 2003, the Military Police officers are equipped with accessories black in colour, including their distinctive feature – the black beret.
The structure is based on the territorial principle. The Military Police subordinated headquarters are located in Prague, Tábor, and Olomouc.
Military police officers are assigned directly to military units, and they form also part of military contingents of the Armed Forces of the Czech Republic in foreign deployments.
Foreign Deployments:
The military police officers serve within contingents of the Armed Forces of the Czech Republic on foreign operations on the territory of Iraq and on the Balkans, and as of March 2007 its Special Operation Group (SOG) also in southern Afghanistan in the Helmand Province.
Military Police of the Czech republic also contains active reserve units. Members of the active reserve have a civilian profession but several times a year participate in training or other MP activities.
Denmark: In Denmark the military police (Danish: militærpoliti) services are carried out as independent units under each branch. In the army all military police tasks are done as an integral part of the Trænregimentet,
whereas the navy military police is an independent unit under command and control of the commanding officer of the Danish Frogman Corps
and the air force, as a part of the force protection squadron (Squadron 660) of the air force Combat Support Wing.
Unlike the two other branches, the navy military police also handles installation guard duties (which is carried out by regular soldiers in the army and by an installation protection unit under Squadron 660 in the air force) of naval installations as well as certain military installations in the Danish capital region, such as the Danish Defence Command and the Ministry of Defence.
MP personnel typically wear either branch-specific display dress uniforms with white shoulder markings with the text MP or the branch-common daily combat uniform, with a red beret. In the air force the MP-shoulder markings is typically replaced with markings saying either VAGT or GUARD, but for international missions they also use the MP-markings.
MP personnel generally do not have legal authority over civilians in non-military areas but only over military personnel and on military installations (also publicly accessible places like Holmen Naval Base in Copenhagen). On some occasions MP personnel can support civilian police in certain tasks, but will only have slightly more legal authority than civilians—similar to the police home guard.
In the army military police are almost without exception NCOs or officers, whereas the navy and air force rely mainly of Danish ranks OR-1 to OR-3.
Furthermore, the home guard has a police branch, which supports both the civilian Danish police and the military police.
Typical MP jobs are:
Installation/perimeter guard
Personnel protection
Traffic control
Courier services
Prisoner transport
Estonia: The Sõjaväepolitsei are the Military Police of the Estonian Defence Forces.[1] The Estonian MP organization was created in 1994 and is today divided into tactical (patrol) and investigative units. Additionally, conscript-based reserve MP platoons are trained in Guard Battalion every year. MP tasks include investigation of serious disciplinary cases and some armed service-related crimes, supervision of military discipline within the Forces, military traffic control and various security tasks. Within conflict/crises areas (Afghanistan) the MP may provide close protection of the Estonian national representative and other visiting VIPs. When on regular patrol assignment, Estonian MPs wear a black brassard on their right shoulder, with the letters SP in silver, and are usually equipped with an HK USP 9 mm pistol, spare magazines, radio, handcuffs, pepper spray and an expandable police baton.
Finland: The Sotilaspoliisi are the military police of the Finnish Defence Forces. The Finnish MPs wear a black brassard on the left shoulder with the letters 'SP' in white. A military policeman is usually armed with a 9 mm pistol, a baton, pepper spray and handcuffs on their belt. The military police includes both career and conscript personnel, and is primarily used to guard military installations and supervise military traffic. All military police personnel are trained with basic police techniques and usually receive training for fighting in urban areas. In wartime, the tasks are more extensive and include protection of key personnel and targets, especially against enemy special forces, and surveillance, control, pursuit, arrest and destruction missions. For training, almost all brigades have military police companies. The companies are part of and subordinate to the brigade.
The military police has jurisdiction over military personnel, military areas, installations and exercise areas. However, a military police patrol may stop a crime that it witnesses in process in a civilian area. Additionally, if a military police unit is near to a serious crime taking place, such as a robbery or an assault, and the civilian police are delayed, a military police unit that is near to the scene can offer to handle the situation until the civilian police arrive. As with some other Finnish Defence Forces units, the military police can be used to provide assistance to the civilian police when they are undermanned or lack special resources. In such case, the military police may take measures deemed necessary by the civilian police. For example, during the 2005 Helsinki World Athletic Championship Games, military police conscripts and career personnel were placed along the marathon route to prevent the large numbers of spectators from obstructing the runners.
Before and during World War II, Finland did not have military police in peacetime, but only temporary sotapoliisi ("war police"). Ex-police officers were conscripted for police officer duty in the armed forces; usually only the officers had police training. Planning for sotapoliisi was still unfinished at the break of war, so regular reservists could not be conscripted. Thus personnel had to be recruited without regard to quality; conscripts found unfit for field duty for e.g. health reasons, and even those with previous criminal record were recruited, and the reputation suffered.
For a long time, sotapoliisi existed only in wartime. However, improvement to this came eventually: the military police school was founded in 1963, and civilian police background was no longer required.
The crimes committed by military personnel are, as a rule, investigated by the military. Minor infractions are usually investigated by the career personnel of the unit, while more serious crimes are investigated by the investigative section of the General Staff of the Finnish Defence Forces. In minor matters, the company commander or their superiors may use disciplinary powers, but more serious cases are deferred to the civilian prosecutor who will take the case to the district court.
France: The National Gendarmerie acts as both the military police and one of the two national law enforcement forces of France.
Provost missions are assumed by local units for the garrisons of the Ground Army on French soil and by special divisions :
The 1100 personnel of the Maritime Gendarmerie police the Navy (and also acts as a coast guard and water police force). National critical merchant ports are protected by specialized units of the Gendarmerie Maritime, the Naval and Harbor Safety Platoons.
The 860 members of the Air Gendarmerie polices the Air Force fulfills police and security missions in the air bases, and goes on the site of an accident involving military aircraft. This branch is separate from the Air Transport Gendarmerie, which is placed under the dual supervision of the Gendarmerie and the direction of civilian aviation and fulfills police and security missions in civilian airfields and airports. They also perform immigration and emigration checks on military flights.
The 280 personnel of the Ordnance Gendarmerie (Gendarmerie de l'Armement) fulfill police and security missions in the establishments of the France's defence procurement agency (Délégation Générale pour l'Armement) and ensure VIP close-protection for the head of the DGA and a few other high-rankings.
The 50 personnel of the Gendarmerie of the Safety of Nuclear Armaments, backed by 250 members of the Mobile Gendarmerie monitor all the nuclear armaments of the French Republic.
The 70 members of the Provost Gendarmerie (Gendarmerie Prévôtale) conduct judiciary and disciplinary investigations in foreign garrisons.
The Maritime Gendarmerie, Air Gendarmerie, Ordnance Gendarmerie and Provost Gendarmerie are placed under the dual supervision of the Gendarmerie and the relevant military branch. However, for judiciary duties, they are under exclusive command of the relevant court.
In addition to the Gendarmerie, Naval Fusiliers (Fusiliers Marins), Fusilier commandos of the Air Force (Fusiliers Commandos de l'Air) and dedicated regimental platoons maintain order for their respective branches.
Germany: The Feldjäger are the military police of the German Bundeswehr. The term Feldjäger ("field hunter") has a long tradition and dates back to the mid-17th century. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military police | The 70 members of the Provost Gendarmerie (Gendarmerie Prévôtale) conduct judiciary and disciplinary investigations in foreign garrisons.
The Maritime Gendarmerie, Air Gendarmerie, Ordnance Gendarmerie and Provost Gendarmerie are placed under the dual supervision of the Gendarmerie and the relevant military branch. However, for judiciary duties, they are under exclusive command of the relevant court.
In addition to the Gendarmerie, Naval Fusiliers (Fusiliers Marins), Fusilier commandos of the Air Force (Fusiliers Commandos de l'Air) and dedicated regimental platoons maintain order for their respective branches.
Germany: The Feldjäger are the military police of the German Bundeswehr. The term Feldjäger ("field hunter") has a long tradition and dates back to the mid-17th century. Their motto is Suum Cuique ("To each his own", derived from Cicero, De Finibus, Bonorum et Malorum, liber V, 67: "(...) ut fortitudo in laboribus periculisque cernatur, (...), iustitia in suo cuique tribuendo.").
The first modern Feldjäger unit was activated on 6 October 1955 when the bill creating the Bundeswehr was signed. The Feldjäger corps serves all component forces of the German Federal Armed Forces (Bundeswehr) i.e., German Army, German Navy, German Air Force, Zentraler Sanitätsdienst (Joint Medical Corps) and Streitkräftebasis (Joint Support Service). The Military Police Command has its headquarters in Scharnhorst Kaserne in Hanover and is under the operational command of the Bundeswehr's Territorial Tasks Command of the Streitkräftebasis.
The Feldjäger have three regiments of military police stationed around Germany which are subordinate to the Military Police Command.
Greece: The paramilitary Greek Gendarmerie fulfilled most security and order duties in Greece until World War II. In 1951, Law 1746/51 established the framework of the Hellenic Army's Greek Military Police (Greek: Ελληνική Στρατιωτική Αστυνομία or ΕΣΑ, Ellinikí Stratiotikí Astynomía). The organization—and particularly its Special Interrogative Department, EAT-ESA—became notorious for its brutality during the 1967–1974 military junta. Law 276/76 renamed it simply to "Military Police" (Στρατονομία). Corresponding organizations exist also for other two branches of the Greek armed forces: for the Hellenic Air Force (Αερονομία, Aeronomia), founded in 1945 as the Greek Air Force Police (Ελληνική Αεροπορική Αστυνομία, ΕΑΑ), and for the Hellenic Navy (Ναυτονομία, Naftonomia, properly Υπηρεσία Ναυτονομίας or Y.ΝΑ.)
These three forces work together often but are independent from each other. Most of the personnel are draftee soldiers undergoing their regular military service.
Hungary: As part of the Hungarian Defence Forces the Hungarian Military Police (Katonai Rendészet) is a military law enforcement organization with duties of protecting selected objects, investigating accidents involving military vehicles, accompanying military delegations and military forces passing through Hungary, traffic control, personal protection of designated military leaders, performing military police duties in international missions, military law enforcement activities in Hungary.
Ireland: The Irish Military Police (colloquially "PA"s, deriving from the official title, Póilíní Airm) are responsible for the prevention and detection of crime in the Irish Defence Forces. Entry to the PA is restricted to serving members of the Defence Forces. All members of the corps are non-commissioned officers, with officers being transferred in for temporary assignments. Unlike many military police services, they retain responsibility for controlling access to many, but not all, military posts. In addition, they provide a military detachment to the Oireachtas (Houses of Parliament) and have a large ceremonial role. In the past they had a role in training armed elements of the Garda Síochána but in recent times this has decreased. Historically, they were responsible for detaining political prisoners in military prisons (until the handing over of military prisons at Cork, Spike Island, Arbour Hill and the Curragh to the civil authorities) and in the past occasionally provided firing squads for executions (the last time being the Emergency of 1939–1946).
Italy: The Arma dei Carabinieri is a gendarmerie force acting as both the military police and one of the four national police forces in Italy. Formed on 13 July 1814, it has been for almost two centuries the senior branch of the Italian Army, until on 5 October 2000 it became a fully independent Service of the Italian military.
With a strength of about 120,000, the Arma dei Carabinieri is a very large organization, including its own air and naval services, but most of its personnel is used for civilian police duties.
The properly Military Police components of the Arma dei Carabinieri are grouped into the "Divisione Unità Mobili Carabinieri" (Carabinieri Mobile Units Division), organized as follows:
2nd Brigade:
1st Carabinieri Parachutist Regiment "Tuscania"
7th Carabinieri Battalion "Trentino – Alto Adige"
13th Carabinieri Battalion "Friuli – Venezia Giulia"
Gruppo Intervento Speciale.
From these units are drawn most of the elements that form the Carabinieri MP coys, platoons and detachments assigned to all the major Italian Army, Navy and Air Force units, as well as many of the personnel forming the MSU Regiments (Multinational Specialist Units) and the IPUs (Integrated Police Units) serving abroad in support of European Union, NATO and United Nation missions. The Arma dei Carabinieri have gained a very good reputation for the professionalism and organization of their MP units in support of international missions, so much that during the 2004 G8 Sea Island Conference the Carabinieri have been tasked to organize and run the CoESPU (Center of Excellence for Stability Police Units), to centralize the training of multinational MP units for international missions.
The 1st Brigade of the same "Divisione Unità Mobili Carabinieri", organized on 11 Mobile battalions and 1 Cavalry Regiment, does contribute to form the same Military Police components as the 1st Brigade, but is mostly tasked to riot control civilian police duties.
During some NATO military mission abroad, the Italian carabinieri contributed to military police operations with the Multinational Specialized Unit.
The Guardia di Finanza acts as a specialized Military Police force when called upon. Its normal duties include being a force acting in border control, customs duties, and police investigations into financial crimes and illegal drug trafficking.
Netherlands: In the Netherlands, the function of military police is performed by the Koninklijke Marechaussee ("Royal Constabulary"), a separate branch of the military independent of the Army, Navy and Air Force. Besides performing military duties, the Marechaussee is also a gendarmerie force.
The word Marechaussee seems to derive from the old French name Marecheaux given to an ancient court of justice in Paris called the "Tribunal of Constables and Marshals of France". These constables and marshals were to become members of the Gendarmerie, which served as a model for the police forces of both Belgium and the Netherlands. The term Marechaussee was also used for the Continental Army's military police during the American Revolution.
Norway: In Norway, military police are service members of the Norwegian Army, Royal Norwegian Navy or Royal Norwegian Air Force. Since about 2002, all are trained at Sessvollmoen Camp. a portion of MPs in the Army are assigned to the Military Police Battalion, located at Bardufoss, Troms og Finnmark county. The first battalion commander and provost marshal of 6. division Norwegian Army was Maj M Langvik, the current battalion commander is Lieutenant Colonel Jan Henry Norvalls. The battalion consists of approximately 50 officers and NCOs, and 150 privates and corporals. Norwegian MPs first go through a six-month selection/educational period, before being assigned to the battalion or to regimental duties with other units for the remainder of their twelve-month service. Norwegian MPs do not have authority over civilians, except on or in the vicinity of military installations, vehicles or other property or under martial law. They do have authority over military personnel, including in certain circumstances reservists, anywhere, including when such personnel are off duty.
The Heimevernet ("Home Guard") also has MPs in its ranks. Usually each District (regiment) has one or two platoons, consisting exclusively of former regular or conscript military police personnel. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military police | The first battalion commander and provost marshal of 6. division Norwegian Army was Maj M Langvik, the current battalion commander is Lieutenant Colonel Jan Henry Norvalls. The battalion consists of approximately 50 officers and NCOs, and 150 privates and corporals. Norwegian MPs first go through a six-month selection/educational period, before being assigned to the battalion or to regimental duties with other units for the remainder of their twelve-month service. Norwegian MPs do not have authority over civilians, except on or in the vicinity of military installations, vehicles or other property or under martial law. They do have authority over military personnel, including in certain circumstances reservists, anywhere, including when such personnel are off duty.
The Heimevernet ("Home Guard") also has MPs in its ranks. Usually each District (regiment) has one or two platoons, consisting exclusively of former regular or conscript military police personnel.
Norwegian MPs wear a red beret and a red lanyard around the left shoulder extending to the left front pocket. Only personnel currently serving as MPs are allowed to wear this. When on official duty, They have previously worn the MP armband, which is black with "MP" in red letters. It was worn on the left shoulder, following NATO practice. Before that it was worn on the right shoulder. They can also wear white webbing, or a number of items for special duties, like high visibility vests for traffic duty, or as mounted personnel while performing motorcycle escort for the Royal Family or their official guests, etc.
Army canine units are also assigned to the MP battalion, but the personnel in such units are not necessarily MPs. Such personnel do not hold military police authority, and do not wear the MP insignia.
MPs have no other powers over civilians than ordinary members of the public, except inside, or in the immediate vicinity of military installations. More serious cases, like narcotics, are handed over to civilian police for investigation.
Poland: The Military Gendarmerie (Żandarmeria Wojskowa, ŻW) are the MPs for the entire Polish military, established in the 1990s.
Portugal: In Portugal, each branch of the Armed Forces has its own military police force. The Portuguese Navy has the Polícia Naval (Naval Police), the Portuguese Army has the Polícia do Exército (Army Police), and the Portuguese Air Force has the Polícia Aérea (Air Police). The Air Police is an arm of its own inside the Air Force, but the Army Police is only a speciality of the cavalry arm and the Naval Police is a unit of the Marine Corps (Fuzileiros). A military criminal investigation police, common for the three branches of Armed Forces, also exists, this being the Polícia Judiciária Militar (Military Judiciary Police), that is under the direct dependency of the Minister of National Defense.
Portugal, also, has a gendarmerie type force, the Guarda Nacional Republicana (GNR, National Republican Guard), that is a special corps of troops that executes both civil public security missions and military missions. In time of peace, GNR is under operational command of the Minister of Internal Affairs, but in time of war it can be put under the command of the Armed Forces. GNR is not tasked with enforcing the law within the Armed Forces.
Included in the Portuguese Navy organization also exist two special police forces. The first one is the Polícia Maritima (Maritime Police), that serves as a coast guard and maritime law enforcement agency in the scope of the civil role of the Portuguese Navy as the National Maritime Authority. The other one is the Polícia dos Estabelecimentos da Marinha (Navy's Establishments Police), a small gendarmerie type agency responsible for guarding the Lisbon Naval Base and some other naval facilities.
Romania: In Romania, the Romanian Military Police (Poliția Militară) carries out police duties for the Romanian Armed Forces. It usually handles military security and military crimes and it has national jurisdiction. The Romanian military police is organized in four battalions (two of them are headquartered in Bucharest, one in Iași and one in Târgu Mureș).
The Romanian Gendarmerie, although a military force with national jurisdiction, is not tasked with enforcing the law within the armed forces (in contrast to the French Gendarmerie, which acts as both military and national police force).
Russia: The Russian Military Police (Военная полиция России) are the MPs for the entire Russian military. They carry out police duties for the Russian Armed Forces.
In April 2012 Chief Military Prosecutor Sergei Fridinsky said Russia's military police will be instituted in two stages: first, the integration of the relevant Defence Ministry services and second, granting the new agency investigative functions. In early February 2014 Russian President Vladimir Putin signed into law the Law on Military Police, the State Duma adopted on 24 January and approved by the Federation Council on 29 January. During consideration of the bill in the lower house of the parliament, presidential envoy to the State Duma Garry Minkh explained that military police has already been created and running, but its activities are governed by departmental orders. President's initiative is aimed at strengthening the legal framework of the forces. On 27 March 2015, Russian President approved the Official Charter of the military police of the Russian Federation.
The Military Police have five main functions:
Maneuver and mobility support operations
Area security operations
Law and order operations
Internment and resettlement operations
Police intelligence operations
The National Guard of Russia and Federal Security Service has its own military police units.
Serbia: The Military Police (Serbian: Војна Полиција, Vojna Policija) are considered to be among the best qualified and most combat-prepared organizations within the Serbian military. Their responsibilities include counterterrorist operations, combating organized crime, close protection, securing hostages and search and rescue.
Specific training is provided for members of special units of the Military Police. Drills for Military Police units, from squad to battalion, are based on their anticipated tactical employment, including training in putting down civil disorder.
The Military Police Directorate of the General Staff of the Serbian Military is responsible for overseeing the units of the Military Police.
Similar units include:
Military Police Battalion Cobra
Military Police Counter-terrorist Battalion
Spain: Each branch of the Spanish Armed Forces (Army, Navy and Air Force) has its own military police (Policía Militar, Policía Naval and Policía Aerea respectively). They are only recognized as constabularies with jurisdiction over military installations, military operations and military personnel. They have jurisdiction over civilians off of military installations like Civil Guard (Spain). They are also in charge of the security of military installations, play a role as bodyguards of generals, admirals and other relevant military personnel, provide security services to military transports and police military personnel abroad. They have the consideration of authority agents.
The Civil Guard (in Spanish Guardia Civil) is the Spanish gendarmerie force. Along with their civilian law enforcement functions, due to their military nature the Civil Guard is also assigned several functions as a Military Police under the Minister of Defence, the most important of which is Criminal Investigations in military facilities and vessels, other MP functions include traffic and customs enforcement in international missions.
Soviet Union: The Soviet Armed Forces did not have any units technically named 'military police'. Two separate agencies handled military police duties on a day-to-day basis.
The Komendantskaya sluzhba or "Commandant's Service" of the Soviet Army wore a yellow letter "K" on a red patch on the sleeve to indicate their membership of this service—the "de facto" army police.
A second organisation called the Traffic Regulators existed within the Rear Services. Traffic Regulators served to control military highway and motor vehicle traffic. Traffic Regulators also wear a white painted helmet with red stripes to indicate their status and either an armband ar patch with the Cyrillic letter "P" (R).
In the Soviet Navy and (later in the present day Russian Navy) the role of Naval provosts was primarily filled by personnel from the Naval Infantry.
Sweden: The Swedish military police are part of the Life Guards, stationed in Stockholm. There are two MP companies, the 14th and the 15th companies. The 14th MP company serve a so-called GSS/T contract (two years of service over a period of eight years, the remaining time the soldiers can have a civilian job or study) and the 15th MP company serve a so-called GSS/K contract (hired continually for eight years). The Life Guards are also the seat of the Swedish military police unit (MP-enheten) which is responsible for the education of new MPs and is in charge of all MP activities in Sweden. Part of 13th security battalion, which is a counter-intelligence battalion, is also part of the Life Guards and has some soldiers who are trained MPs (mostly corporals and sergeants).
Switzerland: In the Swiss Armed Forces, the Military Police is responsible for law enforcement on military property and for all incidents where military personnel or equipment is involved. Unlike, for example, the United States, a military policeman in Switzerland has the same power to arrest any person that has committed an offense he witnessed or if he has reasonable grounds to believe the person has committed a violent offense. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military police | The Life Guards are also the seat of the Swedish military police unit (MP-enheten) which is responsible for the education of new MPs and is in charge of all MP activities in Sweden. Part of 13th security battalion, which is a counter-intelligence battalion, is also part of the Life Guards and has some soldiers who are trained MPs (mostly corporals and sergeants).
Switzerland: In the Swiss Armed Forces, the Military Police is responsible for law enforcement on military property and for all incidents where military personnel or equipment is involved. Unlike, for example, the United States, a military policeman in Switzerland has the same power to arrest any person that has committed an offense he witnessed or if he has reasonable grounds to believe the person has committed a violent offense.
Furthermore, the military police provides protection of Swiss representatives abroad and is in part responsible for the guarding of embassies and foreign VIPs in Switzerland, as well as maintaining personal security for members of the Swiss Federal Council. In addition, the Swiss Explosive Ordnance Disposal Center is a branch of the MP for the disposal of unexploded ordnance and also participates in various demining operations around the world.
The professional MP units comprise 758 officers and are divided into four Regions, each consisting of two companies and additional groups specialised on criminal investigations and training. The professional MP maintains a standing tactical team, capable of interventions in Switzerland and abroad, headquartered in Bern. In addition, there are four militia MP battalions with a head count of roughly 2000 men. Each MP Battalion has one tactical company who can be called to support either the primary MP tactical team or cantonal police teams if needed.
Unlike regular army personnel, professional military policemen wear olive uniforms in order to provide distinct identification. Militia MP wear the regular Swiss Army TAZ 90 camouflage. Moreover, the (both the professional and the militia) MP is equipped uniquely, armed with Glock side arms, H&K MP5 submachine guns, the Mzgw91 pump-action rifle and the SG553 assault rifle (compared to the standard issue SIG P220 pistol and SIG 550 assault rifle). Professional MP units drive patrol cars similar to those of the civilian police, but also use Piranha and Duro APCs.
Ukraine: The Ukrainian Military Police (VSP) is the military police for the Ukrainian Armed Forces
United Kingdom: In the United Kingdom the term Military Police usually refers to the Royal Military Police. The Royal Military Police is the branch of the Adjutant General's Corps, responsible for policing the British Army (both in the United Kingdom and overseas). The term Service Police refers to the three separate police organisations for each of the three branches of the UK's Armed Forces:
The Royal Navy is policed by the Royal Navy Police (RNP), the members of which are traditionally known as Regulators (or Master-at-Arms if a Chief Petty Officer or Warrant Officer).
The Royal Navy Police also provides Royal Marines specialising as service policemen. Prior to 2009, the Royal Marines Police was an independent organisation.
The British Army is policed by the Royal Military Police (RMP).
In addition to the Royal Military Police, most British Army units have their own Regimental police (RP) and Military Provost Guard Service (MPGS) staff. Sometimes incorrectly referred to as Regimental Police, they do not have any police powers or policing function, but are soldiers responsible for discipline within their own units. They are normally located in the Guardroom.
The Royal Air Force is policed by the Royal Air Force Police (RAFP). The RAFP provides not only a full Policing function, but they also fulfil a security and counter intelligence function for the RAF and the wider defence community.
In addition, each of the three service police has its own Special Investigation Branch (SIB) to undertake investigation of more serious crime and plain-clothes investigations, and use the joint Service Police Crime Bureau operated by the RNP, RMP and RAFP.
Oceania:
Australia: In Australia, Service Police refers to services policing three different military branches:
The 1st Military Police Battalion is the field component of the Military Police and the Domestic Policing Unit is the garrison policing component. In the Australian Army, the Royal Australian Corps of Military Police also performs the role of a secondary communications network in the front battle zone. Army MP's wear a red shoulder patch with MP in black.
In the Royal Australian Navy, the Naval Police Coxswain Branch performs dual roles of performing general police duties, investigation of criminal offences and a secondary role of ships' coxswain staff responsible for administration of ships' personnel.
In the Royal Australian Air Force, the Air Force Police perform the military police role. The Air Force Police organisation falls within Security Forces, therefore their role is largely providing force protection and enforcing military and civilian laws. Air Force Police members wear either a black brassard or patch with white SP meaning Service Police.
The Royal Australian Corps of Military Police train their own working dogs for a more Infantry/combat role.
All major crimes committed by or against personnel of the Australian Defence Force are investigated by the Australian Defence Force Investigative Service.
New Zealand: The Joint Military Police Unit (JMPU) is a tri-service Military Police unit from the Navy, Army, and Air Force.
JMPU comprises military police personnel from the Royal New Zealand Navy Naval Police, Royal New Zealand Military Police, and the Royal New Zealand Air Force Police. Personnel still maintain their own single service identity but operate under a single Provost Marshal and investigate offences against the Armed Forces Discipline Act 1971.
JMPU operates outside of the normal Navy, Army and Air Force command structure. The current Provost Marshal is a Group Captain who reports directly to the Vice Chief of the NZDF.
For all serious and complex investigations that are outside the scope of regular Military Police personnel a specialised unit known as the Special Investigations Branch (SIB) handles all high-profile investigations. SIB personnel attend courses with the New Zealand Police Criminal Investigation Branch. SIB have a similar role to the Australian Defence Force Investigative Service (ADFIS). SIB are also seconded to the NZ Police CIB.
JMPU also provide the close protection function for the NZDF. Only personnel from within the unit are able to attend the Tier 1 course and undergo a rigorous selection process. From time to time NZ Police officers from the Diplomatic Protection Squad and the Armed Offenders Squad have been known to also complete the course.
JMPU complete certain NZ Police courses such as Urgent Duty Driving, Disaster Victim Identification, Basic and Intermediate Crash Investigation with the NZ Police Serious Crash Unit, and some personnel have completed the Diplomatic Protection Squad training course.
JMPU are responsible for all detainee handling both in peacetime and in an operational environment such as custody and escort of POWs. Military Police are responsible for maintaining discipline at the Services Correction Establishment (SCE) which is located at Burnham Military Camp. SCE is the NZDF Military Prison and consists of guards who are all serving members of JMPU. The guards are responsible for rehabilitation of service personnel who have been sent to the facility as a result of serious offences committed against the Armed Forces Discipline Act 1971.
JMPU are identifiable by the blue and white "MP" patch they wear on their uniform and the blue beret as head dress, the wearing of the Blue beret differs from many commonwealth military police units as traditionally a red beret is worn.
JMPU wear their respective service dress for each service. During peacetime JMPU wear either a Multicam Camouflage uniform, or blue uniform with a SRBA vest.
Air force police: Air force police or sometimes known as "Air police" refers to certain units that are part of a country's air force that perform law enforcement duties such as force protection and air patrols, dealing primarily with the enforcement of aviation law at air force bases. It also indirectly plays a part in ensuring the air sovereignty of a country. It serves similarly to military and paramilitary police forces around the world and are commonly set up as a branch of a nation's military police or even a separate institution altogether. In some countries, the Air force police are also responsible for conducting Provost duties in the scope of a country's air force, such as implementing crime investigation and enforcing discipline/order towards members of the Air force.
By country: Royal Australian Air Force Air Force Police
Canadian Forces Military Police The Air Force Military Police Group
Air Gendarmerie
Indian Air Force Police
Indonesian Air Force Military Police Command (Puspomau).
Air Police Group, Japan Air Self-Defense Force
Air Force Police, Royal Air Force Regiment
Royal New Zealand Air Force Police
Polícia Aérea
Military police of the Republic of Korea Air Force
Sri Lanka Air Force
Turkish Air Force
Royal Air Force Police
No. 3 (Royal Auxiliary Air Force) Police Squadron
United States Air Force Security Forces
Venezuela Air Force Police
See also: Military police vehicle
Police tactical unit
Separation of military and police roles
References:
External links: Media related to Military police at Wikimedia Commons |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military policy | Purpose: Military policy identifies threats of hostility and aggression based on intelligence analysis, and defines military scope of national security, defense alliances, combat readiness, military organisation of national forces and their use of military technology.
The national military policy defines the national defense strategy, the "when" of committing national armed forces. The national military policy also defines the strategic posture, the "how", towards any possible threats to national territory, its society, environment, and economy, and defines options available to deal with such threats. The more options a military policy provides to the government, the better it is considered in its formulation. Strategic posture in turn defines the military doctrine of the armed forces. This doctrine may include confronting threats to national interests located outside of the national territory such as shipping lanes. The defense strategy and military doctrine are developed through strategic policy and capability development processes.
Development: A military policy is created through the military policy process of making important organisational decisions, including the identification of priorities and different alternatives such as defence personnel and technology programs or budget priorities, and choosing among them on the basis of the impact they will have on the overall national development. Defence policies can be understood as political, management, financial, administrative and executable mechanisms arranged to reach explicit military goals and objectives.
Applications: Military policy addresses the achievement of its military goals and objectives by making explicit statements about the desired capability in: combat readiness, military organization, political-military relationships (civilian control of the military), the role of the armed forces, command and control, military intelligence and counterintelligence, defence diplomacy, defence capability in terms of (technology, mobility, materiel, and logistics), block obsolescence, professionalism and training, recruiting, social change in the military, standing forces, military reserve forces, and conscriptions.
Military policy differs from rules of engagement which determine when, where, and how military force is to be used by formations and units.
See also: Capability management
National security
Defence Diplomacy
Small arms proliferation
European Union arms embargo on the People's Republic of China
List of National Defense Industries
Private military company
Campaign Against Arms Trade
Canadian Arms trade
List of countries by military expenditures
Permanent arms economy
Military funding of science
Military-industrial complex
Military Keynesianism
Peace dividend
Guns versus butter model
Gunboat diplomacy
Al Yamamah arms deal
Arms control |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military rank | Ancient:
Greek: From 501 BC, the Athenians annually elected ten individuals to the rank of strategos, one for each of the ten "tribes" that had been created with the founding of the democracy. Strategos means "army leader" and is usually translated as "general". Originally these generals worked together with the old polemarchos ("warlord") but over time the latter figure was absorbed into the generalship: each of the ten generals would rotate as polemarch for one day, and during this day his vote would serve as tie-breaker if necessary.
The ten generals were equal to one another; there was no hierarchy among them. However, a basic form of democracy was in effect: for example, at the Battle of Marathon in 490 BC, the generals determined the battle plan by majority vote. Particular assignments might have been given to individual generals; inevitably there was a regular division of responsibilities.
The rank that was subordinate to a top general was a taxiarchos or taxiarhos, something akin to the modern brigadier. In Sparta, however, the title was "polemarchos". Below this was the syntagmatarchis, which can be translated as "leader of a regiment" (syntagma) and was therefore like a modern colonel. Below him was the tagmatarches, a commanding officer of a tagma (near to the modern battalion). The rank was roughly equivalent to the legatus of a Roman legion. Next was the lokhagos, an officer who led an infantry unit called a lokhos that consisted of roughly a hundred men, much the same as in a modern company led by a captain.
A Greek cavalry (hippikon) regiment was called a hipparchia and was commanded by an epihipparch. The unit was split into two and led by two hipparchos or hipparch, but Spartan cavalry was led by a hipparmostes. A hippotoxotès was a mounted archer. A Greek cavalry company was led by a tetrarchès or tetrarch.
The rank and file of the military in most of the Greek city states was composed of ordinary citizens. Heavily armed foot soldiers were called hoplitès or hoplites and a hoplomachos was a drill or weapons instructor.
Once Athens became a naval power, the top generals of the land armies had authority over the naval fleets as well. Under them, each warship was commanded by a trièrarchos or trierarch, a word which originally meant "trireme officer" but persisted when other types of vessels came into use. Moreover, as in modern navies, the different tasks associated with running a ship were delegated to different subordinates. Specifically, the kybernètès was the helmsman, the keleustēs managed the rowing speed, and the trièraulès was the flute player who maintained the strike rate for the oarsmen. Following further specialization, the naval strategos was replaced by a nauarchos, a sea officer equating to an admiral.
With the rise of Macedonia under Philip II of Macedon and Alexander the Great, the Greek military became professional, tactics became more sophisticated and additional levels of ranking developed. Foot soldiers were organized into heavy infantry phalanxes called phalangites. These were among the first troops ever to be drilled, and they fought packed in a close rectangular formation, typically eight men deep, with a leader at the head of each column (or file) and a secondary leader in the middle so that the back rows could move off to the sides if more frontage was needed.
A tetrarchia was a unit of four files and a tetrarchès or tetrarch was a commander of four files; a dilochia was a double file and a dilochitès was a double-file leader; a lochos was a single file and a lochagos was a file leader; a dimoiria was a half file and a dimoirites was a half-file leader. Another name for the half file was a hèmilochion with a hèmilochitès being a half-file leader.
Different types of units, however, were divided differently and therefore their leaders had different titles. For example, under a numbering system by tens, a dekas or dekania was a unit of ten led by a dekarchos, a hekatontarchia was a unit of one hundred led by a hekatontarchos and a khiliostys or khiliarchia was a unit of a thousand led by a khiliarchos.
The cavalry, for which Alexander became most famous (in a military sense), grew more varied. There were heavy cavalry and wing cavalry (ilè) units, the latter commanded by an ilarchos.
Roman: The use of formalized ranks came into widespread use with the Roman legions after the reforms by Marius. Comparisons to modern ranks, however, can only be loose because the Roman army's command structure was very different from the organizational structure of its modern counterparts, which arose from the early modern, Thirty Years' War mercenary companies, rather than from the writings of fourth-century Roman writer Vegetius and Caesar's commentaries on his conquest of Gaul and the civil war.
Military command properly so-called was a political office in Rome. A commander needed to be equipped with imperium, a politico-religious concept. The king who possessed it (the rex sacrorum) was strictly forbidden to have it to avoid a return to the monarchy. In the republic, commanding was confined to consuls or (seldom) to praetors, or in cases of necessity a dictator. Proconsuls, after the establishment of the office, were used. In imperial times, each legion was commanded by the emperor, who was technically either consul or proconsul.
The commander could appoint a deputy, a so-called legate (legatus). The association of "legatus" with "legion" is folk etymology, as the meaning of legatus is "proxy" or "envoy". Legates were typically drawn from the Roman Senate for three-year terms. The political nature of high military command was even reflected here, in that legions were always subordinate to the governor, and only the second and further legions stationed in a province had their own legatus legionis. The real commanders and the legates together were, in modern terms, the general officers.
Immediately beneath the commander (or his legate) were six military tribunes (tribuni militum), five of whom were young men of equestrian rank and one of whom was a nobleman who was headed for the senate. The latter is called laticlavian tribune (tribunus laticlavius) and was second in command. If in modern divisions the deputy commander is a brigadier general, the laticlavian tribune can perhaps be translated with this rank, though he commanded no formation of his own. The other tribunes are called tribuni angusticlavii and are equivalent to staff officers in both senses of the term: of ranks major, lieutenant colonel, colonel, and with administrative duties. They did not command a formation of their own. The term military tribune is even sometimes translated into English as "colonel"—most notably by the late classicist Robert Graves in his Claudius novels and his translation of Suetonius' Twelve Caesars—to avoid confusion with the political "tribunes of the people"; in addition, they must not either be confused with the "military tribunes with consular authority", who in early republican times could replace the consuls.
The third highest officer of a legion, above the angusticlavian tribunes, was the praefectus castrorum. He, too, would have a colonel's rank in modern armies, yet he differed much from the tribunes in that his office was not part of the rather administrative cursus, but normally filled by former centurions. (Modern armies have a similar distinction on a lower scale—i.e., between commissioned and non-commissioned officers.)
The fighting men in the legion were formed into "ranks", rows of men who fought as a unit. Under Marius's new system, legions were divided into ten cohorts (cohortes) (roughly equivalent to battalions and immediately subject to the legion), each consisting of three manipula, each of them of two centuries (a rather small company in modern terms), each consisting of between 60 and 160 men. Each century was led by a centurion (centurio, traditionally translated as captain), who was assisted by a number of junior officers, such as an optio. Centuries were further broken into ten contubernia of eight soldiers each. The manipula were commanded by one of their two centurions, the cohorts by one of their three manipulum's centurions; the most senior cohort-commanding centurions was called primus pilus. The ranks of centurions in the individual cohorts were, in descending order, pilus prior, pilus posterior, princeps prior, princeps posterior, hastatus prior, and hastatus posterior. Individual soldiers were referred to as soldiers (milites) or legionaries (legionarii).
Mongol: See Mongol military tactics and organization.
Turk: There were no ranks in the modern sense of a hierarchy of titles, although the army was organized into a hierarchical command. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military rank | Each century was led by a centurion (centurio, traditionally translated as captain), who was assisted by a number of junior officers, such as an optio. Centuries were further broken into ten contubernia of eight soldiers each. The manipula were commanded by one of their two centurions, the cohorts by one of their three manipulum's centurions; the most senior cohort-commanding centurions was called primus pilus. The ranks of centurions in the individual cohorts were, in descending order, pilus prior, pilus posterior, princeps prior, princeps posterior, hastatus prior, and hastatus posterior. Individual soldiers were referred to as soldiers (milites) or legionaries (legionarii).
Mongol: See Mongol military tactics and organization.
Turk: There were no ranks in the modern sense of a hierarchy of titles, although the army was organized into a hierarchical command. The organization of the army was based on the decimal system, employed by Modun Chanyu. The army was built upon a squad of ten (aravt) led by an appointed chief. Ten of these would then compose a company of a hundred (zuut), also led by an appointed chief. The next unit was a regiment of a thousand (myangat) led by an appointed noyan. The largest organic unit was a ten thousand man unit (tumen) also led by an appointed noyan.
Persian: The army of ancient Persia consisted of manageable military groupings under the individual commands. Starting at the bottom, a unit of 10 was called a dathabam and was led by a dathapatis. A unit of 100 men was a satabam led by a satapatis. A unit of 1,000 was a hazarabam and was commanded by a hazarapatis. A unit of 10,000 was a baivarabam and was commanded by a baivarapatis. The Greeks called such masses of troops a myrias or myriad. Among mounted troops, an asabam was a cavalry unit led by an asapatis.
Historians have discovered the existence of the following ranks in Parthian and Sassanian armies:
Commander-in-chief: Eran spahbod (to be replaced with four spahbods, one for each frontier of the empire during the reign of Khosrau I)
Commander of the cavalry: Aspwargan salar (Parthian) or aswaran salar (Sassanian)
Commander of the archers: Tirbodh
Commander of the infantry: paygan salar
Castellan: Argbadh or argbod
Commander of a frontier march: Marzpawn (Parthian) or marzban (Sassanian)
Marzban of Central Asian marches was called kanarang
Post-classical: Post-classical militaries did not have a unified rank structure; while the feudal lords were in some ways equivalent to modern officers, they did not have a strict hierarchy—a king was conceived of as first among equals, not a monarch as later or ancient societies understood the concept, and all nobles were theoretically equals (hence "peers"). A nobleman was obligated to bring a set number of troops when asked by his liege-lord, a king or merely a higher-ranked noble who had obtained his service by the gift of land. The troops' lord retained at least nominal control over them—many post-classical military planning sessions involved negotiating each lord's role in the coming battle—and each lord was allowed to leave after a predetermined amount of time had passed.
High command in post-classical armies: The command structure of armies was generally loose and varied considerably. Typically, the king and high-ranking lords would call out for all lords to gather their troops for a campaign. They would appoint a renowned noble to organize the assembling forces, the marshal. The term field marshal came from the marshal then leading the army on the march, and being in charge of organizing camps and logistics. Tactics for an upcoming battle were often decided by councils of war among the nobles leading the largest forces. Outside of campaigns, the high constable had authority over the local constables, and commanders of the garrisons of major castles. The high constable might have authority in the army due to his role of head of the regular cavalry.
Origins of modern ranks: As the European and Asian Middle Ages came to an end, the rank structure of post-classical armies became more formalized. The top officers were known as commissioned officers because their rank came from a royal commission. Army commissions were usually reserved for those of high stature—the aristocracy of mainland Europe and the aristocracy and gentry of Great Britain.
The basic unit of the post-classical army was the company, a band of soldiers assigned (or raised) by a vassal lord on behalf of his lord (in later times the king himself). The vassal lord in command of the company was a commissioned officer with the rank of captain. Captain was derived from the Late Latin word capitaneus (meaning "head man" or chief).
The commissioned officer assisting the captain with command of the company was the lieutenant. Lieutenant was derived from the French language; the lieu meaning "place" as in a position; and tenant meaning "holding" as in "holding a position"; thus a "lieutenant" is somebody who holds a position in the absence of their superior. When he was not assisting the captain, the lieutenant commanded a unit called a platoon, particularly a more specialized platoon. The word is derived from the 17th-century French peloton, meaning a small ball or small detachment of men, which came from pelote, a ball.
The commissioned officer carrying the (infantry) company's flag was the ensign. The word ensign was derived from the Latin word insignia. In cavalry companies the equivalent rank was cornet. In English usage, these ranks were merged into the single rank of second lieutenant in the 19th century.
Not all officers received a commission from the king. Certain specialists were granted a warrant, certifying their expertise as craftsmen. These warrant officers assisted the commissioned officers but ranked above the non-commissioned officers (NCOs). They received their authority from superior officers rather than the king. The first NCOs were the armed servants (men-at-arms) of the aristocracy, assigned to command, organize and train the militia units raised for battle. After years of commanding a squad, an NCO could be promoted to sergeant, the highest NCO rank. While a sergeant might have commanded a squad upon promotion, he usually became a staff officer. While commissioned staff officers assisted their commander with personnel, intelligence, operations and logistics, the sergeant was a jack of all trades, concerning himself with all aspects of administration to maintain the enlisted men serving under his commander. Over time, sergeants were differentiated into many ranks as various levels of sergeants were used by the commanders of various levels of units.
A corporal commanded a squad. Squad derived from the Italian word for a "square" or "block" of soldiers. In fact, corporal was derived from the Italian caporal de squadra (head of the squad). Corporals were assisted by lancepesades. Lancepesades were veteran soldiers; lancepesade was derived from the Italian lancia spezzata meaning broken spear—the broken spear being a metaphor for combat experience, where such an occurrence was likely. The first lancepesades were simply experienced privates; who either assisted their corporal or performed the duties of a corporal themselves. It was this second function that made armies increasingly regard their lancepesades as a grade of corporal rather than a grade of private. As a result, the rank of lance corporal was derived from combining lancepesade and corporal.
As the post-classical came to an end, kings increasingly relied on professional soldiers to fill the bottom ranks of their armies instead of militiamen. Each of these professionals began their careers as a private. The private was a man who signed a private contract with the company commander, offering his services in return for pay. The money was raised through taxation; those yeomen (smallholding peasants) who did not fulfill their annual 40-day militia service paid a tax that funded professional soldiers recruited from the yeomanry. This money was handed to the company commanders from the royal treasury, with the company commanders using the money to recruit the troops.
Origins of higher ranks: As armies grew larger, composed of multiple companies, one captain was granted general (overall) authority over the field armies by the king. (National armies were the armies of the kings. Field armies were armies raised by the king to enter the battle field in preparation for major battles.) In French history, lieutenant du roi was a title borne by the officer sent with military powers to represent the king in certain provinces. A lieutenant du roi was sometimes known as a lieutenant général to distinguish him from lieutenants subordinate to mere captains. The sergeant acting as staff officer to the captain general was known as the sergeant major general. This was eventually shortened to major general, while captain general began to be addressed, depending on the military branch, as general of the infantry, general of the cavalry or general of the artillery, and these ones, over time, were shortened to simply general. This is the reason a major outranks a lieutenant, but a lieutenant general outranks a major general. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military rank | (National armies were the armies of the kings. Field armies were armies raised by the king to enter the battle field in preparation for major battles.) In French history, lieutenant du roi was a title borne by the officer sent with military powers to represent the king in certain provinces. A lieutenant du roi was sometimes known as a lieutenant général to distinguish him from lieutenants subordinate to mere captains. The sergeant acting as staff officer to the captain general was known as the sergeant major general. This was eventually shortened to major general, while captain general began to be addressed, depending on the military branch, as general of the infantry, general of the cavalry or general of the artillery, and these ones, over time, were shortened to simply general. This is the reason a major outranks a lieutenant, but a lieutenant general outranks a major general.
In modern times recruits attending basic training, also referred to as boot camp by some branches, are instructed in the hierarchical structure of military rank. Many new enlisted civilians find it difficult to understand the structure of general staff ranks as stated before, it becomes somewhat complicated to understand when applying basic rationale.
As armies grew bigger, heraldry and unit identification remained primarily a matter of the regiment. Brigades headed by brigadier generals were the units invented as a tactical unit by the Swedish king Gustavus Adolphus II ("Gustav II Adolf", who was killed at the battle of Lützen 1632). It was introduced to overcome the normal army structure, consisting of regiments. The so-called "brigada" was a mixed unit, comprising infantry, cavalry and normally artillery, designated for a special task. The size of such brigada was a reinforced company up to two regiments. The brigada was a 17th-century form of the modern "task force". In some armies "brigadier general" has been shortened to "brigadier".
Around the end of the 16th century, companies were grouped into regiments. The officers commissioned to lead these regiments were called "colonels" (column officers). They were first appointed in Spain by King Ferdinand II of Aragon where they were also known as "coronellos" (crown officers) since they were appointed by the Crown. Thus the English pronunciation of the word colonel.
The first colonels were captains granted command of their regiments by commission of the king. The lieutenants of the colonel were the lieutenant colonels. In the 17th century, the sergeant of the colonel was the sergeant major. These were field officers, third in command of their regiments (after their colonels and lieutenant colonels), with a role similar to the older, army-level sergeants major (although on a smaller scale). The older position became known as sergeant major general to distinguish it. Over time, the sergeant was dropped from both titles since both ranks were used for commissioned officers. This gave rise to the modern ranks of major and major general.
The full title of sergeant major fell out of use until the latter part of the 18th century, when it began to be applied to the senior non-commissioned officer of an infantry battalion or cavalry regiment.
Regiments were later split into battalions with a lieutenant colonel as a commanding officer and a major as an executive officer.
Modern: Modern military services recognize three broad categories of personnel.
These are codified in the Geneva Conventions, which distinguish officers, non-commissioned officers, and enlisted men.
Apart from conscripted personnel one can distinguish:
Commissioned officers: Officers are distinguished from other military members (or an officer in training) by holding a commission; they are trained or training as leaders and hold command positions.
Officers are further generally separated into four levels:
General, flag, or air officers
Field or senior officers
Company grade or junior officers
Subordinate officer (naval cadet or officer cadet in the Canadian forces, for example)
General, flag, and air officers: Officers who typically command units or formations that are expected to operate independently for extended periods of time (i.e., brigades and larger, or flotillas or squadrons of ships), are referred to variously as general officers (in armies, marines, and some air forces), flag officers (in navies and coast guards), or air officers (in some Commonwealth air forces).
General-officer ranks typically include (from the most senior) general, lieutenant general, major general, and brigadier general, although there are many variations like division general or (air-, ground-) force general.
Flag-officer ranks, named after the traditional practice of showing the presence of such an officer with a flag on a ship and often land, typically include (from the most senior) admiral, vice admiral and rear admiral. In some navies, such as Canada's, the rank of commodore is a flag rank.
In the United Kingdom and most other Commonwealth air forces, air-officer ranks usually include air chief marshal, air marshal, air vice-marshal and air commodore. For some air forces, however, such as those of Canada, United States and many other air forces, general officer rank titles are used. In the case of the United States Air Force, that service was once part of the U.S. Army and evolved as a separate service in 1947, carrying over its extant officer rank structure. Brazil and Argentina use a system of general officer ranks based on the term brigadier.
In some forces, there may be one or more superior ranks to the common examples, above, that are given distinguishing titles, such as field marshal (most armies of the world, notably excluding the United States) or general of the army (mainly the United States because "marshal" is used as a peace officer's designation), fleet admiral (U.S. Navy), Marshal of the Royal Air Force, or other national air force. These ranks have often been discontinued, such as in Germany and Canada, or limited to wartime or honorific promotion, such as in the United Kingdom and the United States.
In various countries, particularly the United States, these may be referred to as "star ranks" for the number of stars worn on some rank insignia: typically one-star for brigadier general or equivalent with the addition of a star for each subsequent rank. In the United States, five stars has been the highest rank regularly attainable (excluding the marines and coast guard, which have traditionally served as branches of the navy in times of war and thus under the command of a fleet admiral). There also exists the specialty ranks of General of the Armies of the United States and Admiral of the Navy which at their inception were considered senior four star officers but came to be considered six-star rank after the creation of five star officers. To date only one officer has held a six star rank in his lifetime, John J. Pershing. George Washington was posthumously promoted to the post in 1976. Additionally, Admiral George Dewey was promoted to admiral of the navy but died well before statute made it senior to an admiral of the fleet upon the latter's inception.
Some titles are not genuine ranks, but either functions assumed by generals or honorific titles. For instance, in the French Army général de corps d'armée is a function assumed by some généraux de division, and maréchal de France, which is a distinction denoting the most superior military office, but one that has often neutered the practical command powers of those on whom it is conferred. In the United States Navy, a commodore currently is a senior captain commanding a squadron, air group, or air wing that is too small for a rear admiral to command, although that name has historically been used as a rank. The title (not rank) of commodore can also indicate an officer who is senior to a ship's captain (since only the ship's commanding officer is addressed as captain while under way). Marine captains are sometimes referred to as major to distinguish themselves while shipboard, although this reference is not employed in the U.S. Navy or U.S. Marine Corps.
Field or senior officers: Field officers, also called "field-grade officers" or "senior officers", are officers who typically command units that can be expected to operate independently for short periods of time (i.e., infantry battalions, cavalry or artillery regiments, warships, air squadrons). Field officers also commonly fill staff positions of superior commands.
The term field(-grade) officer is primarily used by armies and marines; air forces, navies and coast guards generally prefer the term "senior officer." The two terms are not necessarily synonymous because the former is frequently used to describe any officer who holds a command position from a platoon to a theater.
Typical army and marine field officer ranks include colonel, lieutenant colonel, major and, in the British army, captains holding an adjutant's or operations officer appointment. In many Commonwealth countries the field rank of brigadier is used, although it fills the position held by brigadier general in other countries. In the United States Army, warrant officers who hold the rank of CW3–CW4 are field grade officers; CW5s are senior field grade officers.
Naval and coast guard senior officer ranks include captain and commander. In some countries, the more senior rank of commodore is also included. In others lieutenant commanders, as equivalents to army and marine majors, are considered senior officers.
Commonwealth air force senior officer ranks include group captain, wing commander, and squadron leader, where such ranks are still used.
Company grade or junior officers: The ranks of junior officers are the three or four lowest ranks of officers. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military rank | Typical army and marine field officer ranks include colonel, lieutenant colonel, major and, in the British army, captains holding an adjutant's or operations officer appointment. In many Commonwealth countries the field rank of brigadier is used, although it fills the position held by brigadier general in other countries. In the United States Army, warrant officers who hold the rank of CW3–CW4 are field grade officers; CW5s are senior field grade officers.
Naval and coast guard senior officer ranks include captain and commander. In some countries, the more senior rank of commodore is also included. In others lieutenant commanders, as equivalents to army and marine majors, are considered senior officers.
Commonwealth air force senior officer ranks include group captain, wing commander, and squadron leader, where such ranks are still used.
Company grade or junior officers: The ranks of junior officers are the three or four lowest ranks of officers. Units under their command are generally not expected to operate independently for any significant length of time. Company grade officers also fill staff roles in some units. In some militaries, however, a captain may act as the permanent commanding officer of an independent company-sized army unit, for example a signal or field engineer squadron, or a field artillery battery.
Typical army company officer ranks include captain and various grades of lieutenant. Typical naval and coast guard junior officer ranks include grades of lieutenant commander, lieutenant, lieutenant junior grade, sub-lieutenant and ensign. Commonwealth (excluding Canada) air force junior officer ranks usually include flight lieutenant, flying officer, and pilot officer.
Subordinate or student officer: Officers in training in the Canadian Armed Forces are either naval cadet for naval training or officer cadet for army or air force training.
In the US and several other western forces, officers in training are referred to as student officers, and carry the rank of cadet (army and air force) or midshipman (navy, and in some countries, marines). These officers may be serving at a military academy, or, as common in the United States, as members of a military training unit attached to a civilian college or university, such as an ROTC unit. This is due to a requirement that commissioned officers have at least a four-year collegiate undergraduate degree.
The British Army refers to its trainee officers as officer cadets, who rank as private soldiers at the start of their training, with no authority over other ranks (except when appointed to carry out a role as part of training). Officer cadets are addressed to as "Mister" or "Miss" until the completion of the early stages of their training at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst (at which point cadets "pass out" and formally gain their commissions), thereafter other ranks (non-officers) will address them as "Sir" or "Ma'am".
While cadet has always been a rank of limited authority and prestige (cadets and US Navy midshipmen have no authority over commissioned personnel, warrants, or officers, only subordinate cadets), midshipman has historically been a rank with limited leadership responsibility, particularly in the Royal Navy (where cadets are commissioned at the start of their training, unlike their army counterparts). This tradition was continued by the US Navy after its original adoption of the rank, but now US Navy midshipmen are limited in the same manner as cadets in the other US services. Additionally, US Marine officers in training are also midshipmen, trained and educated alongside their naval counterparts, and wear distinctive insignia to indicate their branch of service.
US Coast Guard Academy students are referred to as "cadets", while those attending the military branch's officer candidate school are "officer candidates".
In the US an alternative to spending four years as a cadet or midshipmen is for college graduates with a four-year degree to attend officer candidate school, an intensive twelve-week training course designed to convert college graduates into military officers. Each service has at least one, and usually several, officer candidate school facilities. Students at these programs are called officer candidates.
Warrant officers: Warrant officers (as receiving authority by virtue of a warrant) are a hybrid rank treated slightly differently in each country or service. Warrant officers may either be effectively senior non-commissioned officers or an entirely separate grade between commissioned and non-commissioned officers, usually held by specialist personnel.
In the United States, warrant officers are appointed by warrant then commissioned by the President of the United States at the rank of chief warrant officer. Warrant officers range from WO1–CW5. A warrant officer is not a chief warrant officer until they reach W2. CW3–CW4 are field grade officers. Warrant officers in the rank or grade of CW5 are senior field grade officers.
Enlisted personnel: Enlisted personnel are personnel below commissioned rank and make up the vast majority of military personnel. They are known by different names in different countries, such as other ranks (ORs) in the United Kingdom and some Commonwealth countries, and non-commissioned members (NCMs) in Canada.
Non-commissioned officers: Non-commissioned officers (NCOs) are enlisted personnel, under the command of an officer, granted delegated authority to supervise other military members or assigned significant administrative responsibilities. They are responsible for the care and direct control of junior military members, often functioning in the smaller field units as executive officers.
Even the most senior NCO officially ranks beneath the most junior commissioned officer or warrant officer. However, most senior NCOs have more experience, possibly including combat, than junior officers. In many armies, because junior officers have a great amount of responsibility and authority but little operational experience, they are paired with senior NCO advisers. In some organizations, senior NCOs may have formal responsibility and informal respect beyond that of junior officers, but less than that of warrant officers. Many warrant officers come from the ranks of mid-career NCOs. In some countries warrant ranks replace senior enlisted ranks.
NCO ranks typically include a varying number of grades of sergeant and corporal (air force, army and marines), or chief petty officer and petty officer (navy and coast guard). In many navies the term 'rating' is used to designate specialty, while rank denotes pay grade.
In some countries warrant officers come under the non-commissioned officer branch (senior non-commissioned officiers).
Other enlisted: Personnel with no command authority usually bear titles such as private, airman or aircraftman, or seaman (starting with seaman recruit in the United States Navy and Coast Guard). In the United States Marine Corps individuals of all ranks regardless of command status may be referred to as "marine". In the United States Air Force individuals of all ranks regardless of command status may be referred to as "airman". Shortly after the Sailor's Creed was formally instituted, Secretary of the Navy John Dalton directed that the word sailor should be capitalized when referring to any uniformed member of the Navy. In some countries and services, personnel in different branches have different titles. These may have a variety of grades, such as private first class, but these usually only reflect variations in pay, not increased authority. These may or may not technically be ranks, depending on the country or service. Each rank gives the individual an indication of how long and how well they have served in combat and training.
Appointment: Appointment is the instrument by virtue of which the person exercises their authority. Officers are appointed by a royal commission in most monarchies or a presidential commission in many other countries. In the Commonwealth, warrant officers hold a royal or presidential warrant. In the United States, officers are appointed by the president, with the advice and consent of the United States Senate. Most officers are approved en bloc by voice vote, but flag officers are usually required to appear before the Armed Services Committee and answer questions to the satisfaction of its members, prior to a vote on their commission.
NCOs are appointed by an instrument of appointment, a written document, often a certificate, usually from the service head. Entry into service is often referred to as enlistment throughout the English-speaking world, even in countries where soldiers do not technically enlist.
Sometimes personnel serve in an appointment which is higher than their actual rank. For instance, commodore used to be an appointment of captain in the Royal Navy and lance corporal used to be an appointment of private in the British Army.
Types of rank: There are a number of different forms of rank; from highest to lowest degree, they are:
Substantive or permanent: the fully paid and confirmed rank, with eligibility for the corresponding pension and benefits
Retired or retained: usually granted to those officers of the rank of lieutenant in the navy, or captain in the army, or above, and enlisted, who have reached the end of their service obligation and have not been dishonorably discharged or dismissed from the service. A retired rank is usually kept for life, if the officer concerned so wishes. In the Commonwealth of Nations, such an officer will also hold the style of Esquire, if they do not hold a higher title. In the United Kingdom, an officer of the regular service placed on the retired list or on the reserve will be shown in his/her substantive rank. An officer of the rank of lieutenant, captain, flight lieutenant or above leaving the reserve, or having no reserve liability is permitted to use their rank a courtesy title if they have completed 3 years service in the active list.
Veterans rank is different in each country. Members of the United States military maintain their highest rank after discharge or retirement. 10 U.S. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military rank | A retired rank is usually kept for life, if the officer concerned so wishes. In the Commonwealth of Nations, such an officer will also hold the style of Esquire, if they do not hold a higher title. In the United Kingdom, an officer of the regular service placed on the retired list or on the reserve will be shown in his/her substantive rank. An officer of the rank of lieutenant, captain, flight lieutenant or above leaving the reserve, or having no reserve liability is permitted to use their rank a courtesy title if they have completed 3 years service in the active list.
Veterans rank is different in each country. Members of the United States military maintain their highest rank after discharge or retirement. 10 U.S. Code § 772(e) states: A person not on active duty who served honorably in time of war in the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps may bear the title and wear the uniform of the highest grade held by him during that war. After a war, regular serving members of the military holding war substantive or temporary rank often revert to their former, substantive rank and all others often end their service. However, the holder may be granted permission to permanently retain the rank they held when the conflict ended.
Temporary: usually granted for a specific task or mission. The holder holds the rank while occupying that position. Despite the name, temporary rank may be held for a considerable period of time, perhaps even years. In wartime, temporary ranks are often common. In the United Kingdom, the rank of brigadier was long considered a temporary rank; while its holder was addressed as "brigadier," he would retain the substantive rank of colonel or lieutenant-colonel if not selected for promotion to general officer rank. Sub-classes of temporary rank (from highest to lowest) include:
War substantive: a temporarily confirmed rank only held for the duration of that war, though war substantive rank may be treated as substantive when considering the holder's eligibility for subsequent promotions and appointments.
Acting is where the holder assumes the pay and allowances appropriate to the acting rank, but a higher commanding officer may revert the holder to previous rank held. This is normally for a short period of time while the permanent occupant of the office is absent. During wartime, acting ranks are frequently held on an emergency basis, while peacetime holders of acting ranks are often those who must hold their permanent rank for a sufficient period before being confirmed in their new higher rank.
Brevet: an honorary promoted rank, without the full official authority or pay appropriate to the rank.
Local or theater: a form of temporary rank restricted to a specific location instead of a specific duty.
Honorary: Often granted on retirement, or in certain special cases to honour a deserving civilian. Generally, honorary rank is treated as if it were substantive, but usually does not grant a corresponding wage or pension (increase). Certain members of the British royal family that serve in the military have honorary ranks in other services, but retain their original rank. Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, is a major in the British Army, but has an honorary rank of lieutenant commander in the Royal Navy, and squadron leader in the Royal Air Force.
Size of command:
Rank and unit size: To get a sense of the practical meaning of these ranks—and thus to be able to compare them across the different armed services, different nations, and the variations of titles and insignia—an understanding of the relative levels and sizes of each command is helpful. The ranking and command system used by U.S. Marine ground forces or U.S. Army infantry units can serve as a template for this purpose. Different countries will often use their own systems that do not match the presentation here.
Under this system, starting from the bottom and working up, a corporal leads a fireteam consisting of three other individuals. A sergeant leads a squad consisting of three fireteams. As a result, a full squad numbers 13 individuals. Squads usually have numbered designations (e.g., 1st Squad).
Generally, in most armies and marine units, a lieutenant or equivalent rank leads a platoon, which can consist of three or four squads. For example, in U.S. Marine infantry units, rifle platoons usually consist of three rifle squads of 13 men each, with a Navy corpsman, the platoon leader, and a platoon sergeant (i.e., a staff sergeant who serves as second-in-command). An infantry platoon can number from 42 to 55 individuals, depending on the service. Platoons are usually numbered (e.g., 1st Platoon) or named after their primary function (e.g., service platoon).
A captain or equivalent rank commands a company, usually consisting of four platoons (three line platoons and one heavy weapons platoon). His headquarters can include a first sergeant and as many as seven others. As such, a company can comprise from roughly 175 to 225 individuals. Equivalent units also commanded by captains are batteries (for field artillery units) and detachments. In English speaking countries, a company (or troop in the cavalry, and battery in the artillery) is usually designated by a letter (e.g., "A Company"). In non-English speaking countries, they are usually numbered. In most Commonwealth armies a company is commanded by a major, assisted by a captain.
A lieutenant colonel or equivalent rank commands a battalion or a squadron, often consisting of four companies, plus the various members of his headquarters. A battalion is around 500–1,500 men and usually consists of between two and six companies.
A colonel or equivalent commands a regiment or group, often consisting of two or more battalions (for an infantry unit) or five to six air groups (for a wing). Battalions and regiments are usually numbered, either as a separate battalion or as part of a regimental structure (e.g., 1-501st Infantry in the US Army).
The next level has been a brigade, commanded by a brigadier general, and containing two or more regiments or three to eight battalions. In the U.S. Army, a brigade is roughly equal to or a little larger than a regiment, consisting of three to seven battalions. Strength typically ranges from 1,500 to 3,500 personnel. In the U.S. Marines, brigades are only formed for certain missions. In size and nature they are larger and more varied collections of battalions than is common for a regiment, fitting them for their traditional role as the smallest formation able to operate independently on a battlefield without external logistical tactical support. Brigades are usually numbered (e.g., 2nd Brigade).
The level above regiment and brigade is the division, commanded by a major general and consisting of from 10,000 to 20,000 persons. The 1st Marine Division, for example, is made up of four marine regiments (of the type described above), one assault amphibian battalion, one reconnaissance battalion, two light armored reconnaissance battalions, one combat engineer battalion, one tank battalion, and one headquarters battalion—totalling more than 19,000 marines. (Within the headquarters battalion are one headquarters company, one service company, one military police company, one communications company, and one truck company.) An equivalent elsewhere within the same marine expeditionary force (MEF) might be an MEF logistics group (MLG), which is not a regimental-sized unit (as the word "group" implies), but rather a large support unit consisting of several battalions of support personnel. Divisions are normally numbered, but can be named after a function or personage.
The command sizes for any given rank will vary widely. Not all units are as troop intensive as infantry forces need to be. Tank and artillery crews, for example, involve far fewer personnel. Numbers also differ for non-combat units such as quartermasters, cooks, and hospital staff. Beyond this, in any real situation, not all units will be at full strength and there will be various attachments and detachments of assorted specialists woven throughout the system.
In the U.S. Army, the level above division is a corps. It is commanded by a lieutenant general. In many armies, a corps numbers around 60,000, usually divided into three divisions. Corps (and similar organizations) are normally designated with Roman numerals and their nationality when operating in a combined (international) force—e.g., V (US) Corps, VIII (ROK) Corps, II MEF, I Canadian Corps.
During World War II, due to the large scale of combat, multiple corps were combined into field armies commanded in theory by a general (four stars), but often by a lieutenant general (three stars), and comprising as many as 240,000 troops. Armies are numbered by spelled-out numerals or functional titles, using their nationality in "combined" forces (e.g., Eighth United States Army, Third ROK Army, British Army of the Rhine). These were in their turn formed into army groups, these being the largest field organization handled by a single commander in modern warfare. Army groups included between 400,000 and 1,500,000 troops. Army groups received Arabic numeral designations and national designations when combined- e.g. 21st Army Group. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military rank | During World War II, due to the large scale of combat, multiple corps were combined into field armies commanded in theory by a general (four stars), but often by a lieutenant general (three stars), and comprising as many as 240,000 troops. Armies are numbered by spelled-out numerals or functional titles, using their nationality in "combined" forces (e.g., Eighth United States Army, Third ROK Army, British Army of the Rhine). These were in their turn formed into army groups, these being the largest field organization handled by a single commander in modern warfare. Army groups included between 400,000 and 1,500,000 troops. Army groups received Arabic numeral designations and national designations when combined- e.g. 21st Army Group.
Military ranks and insignia of various nations:
See also: List of comparative military ranks
Ranks of nobility and peerage
UK and US military ranks compared
Shoulder mark
References:
Citations:
Sources:
External links: United States Military Rank Insignia, Background, & Description
Glossary of Ancient Greek Military Terms
US Military Ranks, Ratings, and Grades by Branch (with insignia)
Military rank
US Military ranks and rank insignia
British Army ranks and responsibilities
Military ranks |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military recruitment | Demographics:
Gender: Across the world, a large majority of recruits to state armed forces and non-state armed groups are male. The proportion of female personnel varies internationally; for example, it is approximately 3% in India, 10% in the UK, 13% in Sweden, 16% in the US, and 27% in South Africa.
While many states do not recruit women for ground close combat roles (i.e. roles which would require them to kill an opponent at close quarters), several have lifted this ban in recent years, including larger Western military powers such as France, the UK, and US.
Compared with male personnel and female civilians, female personnel face substantially higher risks of sexual harassment and sexual violence, according to British, Canadian, and US research.
Some states, including the UK, US and Canada have begun to recognise a right of transgender people to serve openly in their armed forces, although this development has met with political and cultural resistance.
Age group: State armed forces set minimum and maximum ages for recruitment. In practice, most military recruits are young adults; for example, in 2013 the average age of a United States Army soldier beginning initial training was 20.7 years.
Child recruitment: Under the Convention on the Rights of the Child, a child means a person aged under 18.
The minimum age at which children may be recruited or conscripted under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court is 15. States which have ratified the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict (OPAC) may not conscript children at all, but may enlist children aged 16 or above provided that they are not used to participate directly in hostilities.
Historically, the use of children for military purposes has been widespread—see Children in the military—but has been in decline in the 21st century. According to Child Soldiers International, as of 2017 approximately two-thirds of states worldwide had committed to restrict military recruitment to adults from age 18, and at least 60 non-state armed groups had signed agreements to stop or reduce the use of children for military purposes. The organization reported that the so-called Straight 18 standard – the restriction of all military employment to adults – had been emerging as a global norm since 2001.
However, Child Soldiers International also reported in 2018 that at least 46 states were recruiting personnel below the age of 18. Most of these states were recruiting from age 17, including Australia, China, France, Germany, Saudi Arabia and the United States (US); approximately 20 were recruiting from age 16, including Brazil, Canada, and the United Kingdom (UK).
Most states which recruit children under the age of 18 have undertaken not to deploy them routinely on military operations, having ratified the OPAC treaty. According to the Secretary-General of the United Nations (UNSG), in 2016 14 states were still recruiting and using children in active armed conflicts: Afghanistan, Central African Republic, Colombia, Democratic Republic of Congo, Iraq, Mali, Myanmar, Nigeria, Philippines, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.
The UNSG also reported that non-state armed groups were recruiting and using children in armed conflict in India, Pakistan, Palestine, Libya, Philippines and Thailand.
Cross-cultural studies suggest that, in general, children and young people are drawn to military employment for similar reasons: war, economic motivation, education, family and friends, politics, and identity and psychosocial factors.
Socio-economic background: The hope of escaping socio-economic deprivation is one of the main factors attracting young people to military employment. (Thus the obsolete English-language term "bezonian" may mean "raw recruit" or "pauper".) After the US suspended conscription in 1973, "the military disproportionately attracted African American men, men from lower-status socioeconomic backgrounds, men who had been in nonacademic high school programs, and men whose high school grades tended to be low". However, a 2020 study suggests that the socio-economic status of U.S. Armed Forces personnel is at parity with or slightly higher than the civilian population and that the most disadvantaged socio-economic groups are less likely to meet the requirements of the modern U.S. military. A study found that technological, tactical, operational and doctrinal changes have led to a change in the demand for personnel. As an indication of the socio-economic background of British Army personnel, as of 2015 three-quarters of its youngest recruits had the literacy skills normally expected of an 11-year-old or younger, and 7% had a reading age of 5–7. The British Army's recruitment drive in 2017 targeted working-class families with an average annual income of £10,000.
Recruitment for officers typically draws on upwardly-mobile young adults from age 18, and recruiters for these roles focus their resources on high-achieving schools and universities. (Canada is an exception, recruiting high-achieving children from age 16 for officer training.)
Outreach and marketing:
Early years: The process of attracting children and young people to military employment begins in their early years. In Germany, Israel, Poland, the UK, the US, and elsewhere, the armed forces visit schools frequently, including primary schools, to encourage children to enlist once they become old enough to do so. For example, a poster used by the German armed forces in schools reads: "After school you have the world at your feet, make it safer." ["Nach der Schule liegt dir die Welt zu Füßen, mach sie sicherer."] In the US, recruiters have right of access to all schools and to the contact details of students, and are encouraged to embed themselves into the school community. A former head of recruitment for the British Army, Colonel (latterly Brigadier) David Allfrey, explained the British approach in 2007:Our new model is about raising awareness, and that takes a ten-year span. It starts with a seven-year-old boy seeing a parachutist at an air show and thinking, 'That looks great.' From then the army is trying to build interest by drip, drip, drip.
Popular culture: Recruiters use action films and videogames to promote military employment. Scenes from Hollywood blockbusters (including Behind Enemy Lines and X-Men: First Class) have been spliced into military advertising in the US, for example. In the US and elsewhere, the armed forces commission bespoke videogames to present military life to children and have created the U.S. Army Esports initiative as an outreach program using esports.
Military schools and youth organisations: Many states operate military schools, cadet forces, and other military youth organisations. For example, Russia operates a system of military schools for children from age 10, where combat skills and weapons training are taught as part of the curriculum. The UK is one of many states that subsidise participation in cadet forces, where children from age 12 play out a stylised representation of military employment. The United States offers Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps to high school students as an extracurricular activity.
Advertising: Armed forces commission recruitment advertising across a wide range of media, including television, radio, cinema, online including social media, the press, billboards, brochures and leaflets, Employment websites and through merchandising.
Public realm: Recruiters use civic space to promote their military organisation. Among the methods used are recruitment stalls in public spaces, air shows; military amusement parks, such as Patriot Park in Russia; national days, such as the Belgian national day and military parade; and annual armed forces days.
Messaging: Recruitment marketing seeks to appeal to potential recruits in the following ways:
Traditionally masculine associations. Historically and today, recruitment materials frequently associate military life with that of a traditionally masculine warrior, which is officially encouraged as a martial ideal. For example, Cold War US Army slogans included "Join the army, Be a man" and "The army will make a man out of you"; in 2007 a new slogan was introduced: "There's strong. Then there's army strong". Similarly, recruiters describe the Israeli infantryman as "discovering all your strengths"; and the British is "harder, faster, fitter, stronger".
Teamwork and belonging. Some armed forces appeal to potential recruits with the promise of teamwork and camaraderie. An example is the British Army, which introduced the slogan "This is belonging" in 2017.
Patriotic service. Some armed forces present military life as a patriotic service. For example, the slogan for the German Bundeswehr is "We. Serve. Germany." ["Wir. Dienen. Deutschland."], and an advertisement for the Israeli Defense Forces encourages potential recruits to "Above all, fight [kravi] for your country, because there is no place better than Israel."
Challenge and adventure. Military life is promised to be exciting, including world travel and adventurous training. In 2015, the British Army presentation to schools included prominent images of scuba diving and snowboarding, for example.
Education and skills. The armed forces are often presented as a means to learn new skills. For example, the Swedish armed forces encourage potential recruits with the promise of "education that leads to a job where you can make a difference".
Application process: Typically, candidates for military employment apply online or at a recruitment centre.
Many eligibility criteria normally apply, which may be related to age, nationality, height and weight (body mass index), medical history, psychiatric history, illicit drug use, criminal record, academic results, proof of identity, satisfactory references, and whether any tattoos are visible. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military recruitment | "], and an advertisement for the Israeli Defense Forces encourages potential recruits to "Above all, fight [kravi] for your country, because there is no place better than Israel."
Challenge and adventure. Military life is promised to be exciting, including world travel and adventurous training. In 2015, the British Army presentation to schools included prominent images of scuba diving and snowboarding, for example.
Education and skills. The armed forces are often presented as a means to learn new skills. For example, the Swedish armed forces encourage potential recruits with the promise of "education that leads to a job where you can make a difference".
Application process: Typically, candidates for military employment apply online or at a recruitment centre.
Many eligibility criteria normally apply, which may be related to age, nationality, height and weight (body mass index), medical history, psychiatric history, illicit drug use, criminal record, academic results, proof of identity, satisfactory references, and whether any tattoos are visible. A minimum standard of academic attainment may be required for entry, for certain technical roles, or for entry to train for a leadership position as a commissioned officer. Candidates who meet the criteria will normally also undergo aptitude test, medical examination, psychological interview, job interview and fitness assessment.
Depending on whether the application criteria are met, and depending also on which military units have vacancies for new recruits, candidates may or may not be offered a job in a certain role or roles. Candidates who accept a job offer then wait for their recruit training to begin. Either at or before the start of their training, candidates swear or affirm an oath of allegiance and/or sign their joining papers.
The period between the initial application to swearing the oath may be several weeks or months. During this time many candidates drop out. For example, in 2017 about 1 in 20 applicants to the British Army were eventually enlisted.
Most state armed forces that enlist minors (persons under the age of 18) are required by law to obtain the informed consent of one or both parents or legal guardians before their child's enlistment can take place. In practice, consent is indicated on a form, which parents/guardians sign.
Once enlistment has taken place, recruits are subject to military terms of service and begin their initial training.
Terms of service: Recruits enter a binding contract of service, which for full-time personnel typically requires a minimum period of service of several years, with the exception of a short discharge window, near the beginning of their service, allowing them to leave the armed force as of right. Part-time military employment, known as reserve service, allows a recruit to maintain a civilian job while training under military discipline for a minimum number of days per year. After leaving the armed forces, for a fixed period (between four and six years is normal in the UK and US, for example), former recruits may remain liable for compulsory return to full-time military employment in order to train or deploy on operations.
From the point of their enlistment/commissioning, personnel become subject to military law, which introduces offences not recognised by civilian courts, such as disobedience. Penalties range from a summary reprimand to imprisonment for several years following a court martial.
Personnel may be posted to bases in their home country or overseas, according to operational need, and may be deployed from those bases on exercises or operations anywhere in the world.
Perks of military service typically include adventurous training; subsidised accommodation, meals and travel; and a pension. Some armed forces also subsidise recruits' education before, during and/or after military service, subject to conditions such as an obligatory minimum period of formal military employment; examples are the St Jean military college in Canada, the Welbeck Defence Sixth Form College in the UK, and the GI Bill arrangements in the US.
Counter-recruitment: Counter-recruitment refers to activity opposing military recruitment, or aspects of it. Among its forms are political advocacy, consciousness-raising, and direct action. The rationale for counter-recruitment activity may be based on any of the following reasons:
The view that war is immoral - see pacifism.
The view that some military organizations are a tool of imperialism - see anti-imperialism.
Evidence from Australia, Canada, France, the UK, and the US that abusive behaviour such as bullying, racism, sexism and sexual violence, and homophobia are common in military organizations. See, for example, Women in the military and Sexual orientation and gender identity in military service.
Evidence from the UK and US that military training and employment lead to higher rates of mental health and behavioural problems than are usually found in civilian life, particularly after personnel have left the armed forces.
Evidence from Germany, Israel, the UK, and the US that recruiting practices sanitise war, glorify the role of military personnel, and obscure the risks and obligations of military employment, thereby misleading potential recruits, particularly adolescents from socio-economically deprived backgrounds.
Evidence from Germany, the UK, and elsewhere that recruiters target, and capitalise on the precarious position of socio-economically deprived young people as potential recruits.
The fact that some armed forces rely on children aged 16 or 17 to fill their ranks, and evidence from Australia, Israel, the UK and from the Vietnam era in the US that these youngest recruits are most likely to be adversely affected by the demands and risks of military life.
Armed forces spokespeople have defended the status quo by recourse to the following:
The view that military organizations provide a valuable public service.
Anecdotal evidence that military employment benefits young people.
The view that duty of care policies protect recruits from harm.
Recruitment slogans and images:
Slogans: Armed forces have made effective use of short slogans to inspire young people to enlist, with themes ranging from personal development (particularly personal power), societal service, and patriotic duty. For example, as of 2017 current slogans included:
'Live a Life Less Ordinary.' (Indian Army)
'Army strong.' (US Army).
'Be the Best.' (British Army).
'Dare to be extraordinary.' (Canadian armed forces).
'We. Serve. Germany.' ['Wir. Dienen. Deutschland.'] (German armed forces).
'For me, for others.' ['Pour moi, pour les autres.'] (French Army).
Posters: A recruitment poster is a poster used in advertisement to recruit people into an organization, and has been a common method of military recruitment.
Recruitment centres:
In India: From the times of the British Raj, recruitment in India has been voluntary. Using Martial Race theory, the British recruited heavily from selected communities for service in the colonial army. The largest of the colonial military forces the British Indian Army of the British Raj until Military of India, was a volunteer army, raised from the native population with British officers. The Indian Army served both as a security force in India itself and, particularly during the World Wars, in other theaters. About 1.3 million men served in the First World War. During World War II, the British Indian Army would become the largest volunteer army in history, rising to over 2.5 million men in August 1945.
In the United Kingdom: During both world wars and a period after the second, military service was mandatory for at least some of the British population. At other times, techniques similar to those outlined above have been used. The most prominent concern over the years has been the minimum age for recruitment, which has been 16 for many years. This has now been raised to 18 in relation to combat operations. In recent years, there have been various concerns over the techniques used in (especially) army recruitment in relation to the portrayal of such a career as an enjoyable adventure.
In the United States: The American military has had recruiters since the time of the colonies in the 1700s. Today there are thousands of recruiting stations across the United States, serving the Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force. Recruiting offices normally consist of 2–8 recruiters between the ranks of E-5 and E-7. When a potential applicant walks into a recruiting station his or her height and weight are checked and their background investigated. A fingerprint scan is conducted and a practice ASVAB exam is given to them. Applicants cannot officially swear their enlistment oath in the recruiting office. This is conducted at a Military Entrance Processing Station (MEPS).
Wartime recruitment strategies in the US: Prior to the outbreak of World War I, military recruitment in the US was conducted primarily by individual states. Upon entering the war, however, the federal government took an increased role.
The increased emphasis on a national effort was reflected in World War I recruitment methods. Authors Peter A. Padilla and Mary Riege Laner define six basic appeals to these recruitment campaigns: patriotism, job/career/education, adventure/challenge, social status, travel, and miscellaneous. Between 1915 and 1918, 42% of all army recruitment posters were themed primarily by patriotism. And though other themes – such as adventure and greater social status – would play an increased role during World War II recruitment, appeals to serve one's country remained the dominant selling point.
Recruitment without conscription: In the aftermath of World War II military recruitment shifted significantly. With no war calling men and women to duty, the United States refocused its recruitment efforts to present the military as a career option, and as a means of achieving a higher education. A majority – 55% – of all recruitment posters would serve this end. And though peacetime would not last, factors such as the move to an all-volunteer military would ultimately keep career-oriented recruitment efforts in place. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military recruitment | Between 1915 and 1918, 42% of all army recruitment posters were themed primarily by patriotism. And though other themes – such as adventure and greater social status – would play an increased role during World War II recruitment, appeals to serve one's country remained the dominant selling point.
Recruitment without conscription: In the aftermath of World War II military recruitment shifted significantly. With no war calling men and women to duty, the United States refocused its recruitment efforts to present the military as a career option, and as a means of achieving a higher education. A majority – 55% – of all recruitment posters would serve this end. And though peacetime would not last, factors such as the move to an all-volunteer military would ultimately keep career-oriented recruitment efforts in place. The Defense Department turned to television syndication as a recruiting aid from 1957 to 1960 with a filmed show, Country Style, USA.
On February 20, 1970, the President's Commission on an All-Volunteer Armed Force unanimously agreed that the United States would be best served by an all-volunteer military. In supporting this recommendation, the committee noted that recruitment efforts would have to be intensified, as new enlistees would need to be convinced rather than conscripted. Much like the post-World War II era, these new campaigns put a stronger emphasis on job opportunity. As such, the committee recommended "improved basic compensation and conditions of service, proficiency pay, and accelerated promotions for the highly skilled to make military career opportunities more attractive." These new directives were to be combined with "an intensive recruiting effort." Finalized in mid-1973, the recruitment of a "professional" military was met with success. In 1975 and 1976, military enlistments exceeded expectations, with over 365,000 men and women entering the military. Though this may, in part, have been the result of a lack of civilian jobs during the recession, it nevertheless stands to underline the ways in which recruiting efforts responded to the circumstances of the time.
Indeed, recommendations made by the President's Commission continue to work in present-day recruitment efforts. Understanding the need for greater individual incentive, the US military has re-packaged the benefits of the GI Bill. Though originally intended as compensation for service, the bill is now seen as a recruiting tool. Today, the GI Bill is "no longer a reward for service rendered, but an inducement to serve and has become a significant part of recruiter's pitches."
While uniformed military recruiters screen and process recruits into the military, advertising agencies design and implement military recruitment strategy, campaigns, and advertisements: As of fiscal year 2020, Young & Rubicam was in charge of this for the Navy, Wunderman Thompson for the Marine Corps, DBB Chicago for the Army, and GSD&M for the Air Force.
Recruiting methods: Recruitment can be conducted over the telephone with organized lists, through email campaigns and from face to face prospecting. While telephone prospecting is the most efficient, face to face prospecting is the most effective. Military recruiters often set up booths at amusement parks, sports stadiums and other attractions. In recent years social media has been more commonly used.
Controversy:
See also:
Related military articles: Military service
Women in the military
Children in the military
LGBT people and military service
Transgender people and military service
Conscription
Impressment
Counter-recruitment
Recruit training
Military science
Recruitment methods and campaigns:
United States: Conscription in the United States
America's Army (recruitment game)
Slogans of the United States Army
Other states: UK: Be All You Can Be
Canada First Defence Strategy
References:
Further reading:
Manigart, Philippe.
"Risks and Recruitment in Postmodern Armed Forces: The Case of Belgium."
Armed Forces & Society, Jul 2005; vol. 31: pp. 559–582.
http://afs.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/31/4/559
Dandeker, Christopher and Alan Strachan.
"Soldier Recruitment to the British Army: a Spatial and Social Methodology for Analysis and Monitoring."
Armed Forces & Society, Jan 1993; vol. 19: pp. 279–290.
http://afs.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/19/2/279
Snyder, William P.
"Officer Recruitment for the All-Volunteer Force: Trends and Prospects."
Armed Forces & Society, Apr 1984; vol. 10: pp. 401–425.
http://afs.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/10/3/401
Griffith, James.
"Institutional Motives for Serving in the U.S. Army National Guard: Implications for Recruitment, Retention, and Readiness."
Armed Forces & Society, Jan 2008; vol. 34: pp. 230–258.
http://afs.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/34/2/230
Fitzgerald, John A.
"Changing Patterns of Officer Recruitment at the U.S. Naval Academy."
Armed Forces & Society, Oct 1981; vol. 8: pp. 111–128.
http://afs.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/8/1/111
Eighmey, John.
"Why Do Youth Enlist?: Identification of Underlying Themes."
Armed Forces & Society, Jan 2006; vol. 32: pp. 307–328.
http://afs.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/32/2/307 |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military reserve force | History: Some countries' 18th-century military systems included practices and institutions which functioned as a reserve force, even if they were not designated as such. For example, the half-pay system in the British Army provided the country with trained, experienced officers not on active duty during peacetime but available during wartime. The Militia Act of 1757 gave Britain an institutional structure for a reserve force. Although contemporaries debated the effectiveness of the British militia, its mobilization in several conflicts increased Britain's strategic options by freeing regular forces for overseas theaters.
Reservists first played a significant role in Europe after the Prussian defeat in the Battle of Jena–Auerstedt. On 9 July 1807, in the Treaties of Tilsit, Napoleon forced Prussia to drastically reduce its military strength and cede large amounts of territory. The Prussian army was limited to a maximum of 42,000 men.
The Krumpersystem, introduced to the Prussian Army by military reformer Gerhard von Scharnhorst, gave recruits a brief period of training which could be expanded during wartime. Prussia could draw upon a large number of trained soldiers in subsequent wars, and the system was retained by the Imperial German Army into the First World War. By the time of the German Empire, reservists were given "war arrangements" after completion of their military service with instructions for the conduct of reservists in wartime.
Sources of reserve personnel: In countries such as the United States, reservists are often former military members who reached the end of their enlistment or resigned their commission. Service in the reserve for a number of years after leaving active service is required in the enlistment contracts and commissioning orders of many nations.
Reservists can also be civilians who undertake basic and specialized training in parallel with regular forces while retaining their civilian roles. They can be deployed independently, or their personnel may make up shortages in regular units. Ireland's Army Reserve is an example of such a reserve.
With universal conscription, most of the male population may be reservists. All men in Finland belong to the reserve until 60 years of age, and 65 percent of each age cohort of men are drafted and receive at least six months of military training. Ten percent of conscripts are trained as reserve officers. Reservists and reserve officers are occasionally called up for refresher exercises, but receive no monthly salary or position. South Korean males who finish their national service in the armed forces or in the national police are automatically placed on the reserve roster, and are obligated to take several days of annual military training for seven years.
Uses: In wartime, reserve personnel may provide replacements for combat losses or be used to form new units. Reservists can provide garrison duty, manning air defense, internal security and guarding of important points such as supply depots, prisoner of war camps, communications nodes, air and sea bases and other vital areas, freeing regular troops for service on the front.
In peacetime, reservists can be used for internal-security duties and disaster relief, sparing the regular military forces. In many countries where military roles outside warfare are restricted, reservists are exempted from these restrictions.
Personnel:
Enlisted personnel: In countries with a volunteer army, reserve enlisted personnel are soldiers, sailors, and airmen who have signed contracts to perform military service on a part-time basis. They have civilian status, except for the days when they are carrying out their military duties (usually two or three days each month and attendance at a two-to-four-week military training camp once per year). Most reserve enlisted personnel are former active duty soldiers, sailors, and airmen, but some join the reserve without an active-duty background. When their contract expires, a reserve soldier, sailor or airman becomes a retired soldier, sailor or airman.
In countries with conscription, reserve enlisted personnel are soldiers, sailors, and airmen who are not on active duty and have not reached the upper age limit established by law. In addition to the upper age limit, intermediate age limits determine the priority of wartime mobilization (younger ages are more subject to mobilization). These limits divide the reserve into categories, such as the Swiss Auszug, Landwehr, and Landsturm. Reserve soldiers, sailors, and airmen are subject to mandatory short-term military training in peacetime, as regulated by law. Reserve soldiers, sailors, and airmen have civilian status, except for military training in peacetime and wartime mobilization. A reserve soldier, sailor or airman becomes a retired soldier, sailor or airman at the upper age limit.
In countries which combine conscription and a volunteer military, reserve soldiers, sailors, and airmen are divided into two categories: reservists and reserve enlisted personnel. Reservists sign a contract to perform military service on a part-time basis. Reserve enlisted personnel are not on active duty, have not signed a contract to perform military service as reservists, and have not reached the upper age limit. Reservists have civilian status, except when they are performing military duties. Reserve enlisted personnel have civilian status, except for military training in peacetime and wartime mobilization. Reservists are first subject to mobilization in wartime. Reserve enlisted soldiers, sailors, and airmen are divided into categories which determine the priority of wartime mobilization (younger personnel are mobilized first), such as Первый разряд (first category), Второй разряд (second category) and Третий разряд (third category) in Russia. A reservist becomes a reserve soldier, sailor or airman when their contract expires, and retires at the upper age limit.
Non-commissioned officers: In countries with a volunteer military, reserve non-commissioned officers are military personnel with relevant rank who have contracted to perform military service on a part-time basis. They have civilian status, except for military duty. Most reserve non-commissioned officers are former active-duty NCOs, but some become reserve NCOs without an active-duty background. When the contract expires, a reserve NCO becomes a retired NCO. The main sources of reserve NCOs are:
Movement from active-duty to reserve service, preserving NCO rank
Military schools, which prepare career NCOs who join the reserve after their active-duty service
Promotion from enlisted rank during reserve service
Reserve NCO courses
In countries with conscription, reserve NCOs are military personnel with relevant rank who are not on active duty and have not reached the upper age limit. In addition to the upper age limit, intermediate age limits determine the priority of wartime mobilization (younger ages are subject to mobilization first). Reserve NCOs are subject to mandatory short-term military training in peacetime. They have civilian status, except for military training in peacetime and wartime mobilization. A reserve NCO becomes a retired NCO at the upper age limit. Their main sources of NCOs are:
Promotion from enlisted rank during active-duty service, following demobilization
Promotion from enlisted rank during short-term military training in peacetime
Military schools
Reserve NCO courses
In countries which combine conscription and a volunteer military, reserve NCOs are divided into two categories: non-commissioned officers-reservists and reserve non-commissioned officers. Non-commissioned officers-reservists have signed a contract to perform military service on a part-time basis. Reserve non-commissioned officers are not on active duty, have not signed a contract to perform military service as reservists, and have not reached the upper age limit. Non-commissioned officers-reservists have civilian status, except for the days when they are carrying out their military duties. Reserve non-commissioned officers have civilian status, except for military training in peacetime and wartime mobilization. Non-commissioned officers-reservists are subject to mobilization in wartime first. Reserve non-commissioned officers (non-reservists) are divided into categories which determine the priority of wartime mobilization (younger ages are subject to mobilization first) – Первый разряд, Второй разряд, and Третий разряд in Russia. Upon expiration of the contract, a non-commissioned officer-reservist becomes a reserve non-commissioned officer. A reserve NCO becomes a retired NCO at the upper age limit. The main sources of reserve NCOs are:
Promotion from enlisted rank during active duty service, following demobilization
Promotion from enlisted rank during short-term military training in peacetime
Military schools
Promotion from enlisted rank during reserve service
Reserve NCO courses
Warrant officers: In countries with a volunteer military, reserve warrant officers are military personnel with relevant rank who have signed a contract to perform military service on a part-time basis. They have civilian status, except for the days when they are carrying out their military duties. Most reserve warrant officers are former active duty warrant officers. The main sources of reserve warrant officers are military schools and reserve warrant-officers courses.
In countries with conscription, reserve warrant officers are military personnel with the relevant rank who are not on active duty and have not reached the upper age limit. In addition to the upper-age limit, intermediate age limits determine wartime mobilization priority; younger officers are mobilized first. The main sources of reserve warrant officers are promotion during active-duty service or short-term peacetime training, assessment after demobilization, military schools, and reserve warrant-officer courses. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military reserve force | They have civilian status, except for the days when they are carrying out their military duties. Most reserve warrant officers are former active duty warrant officers. The main sources of reserve warrant officers are military schools and reserve warrant-officers courses.
In countries with conscription, reserve warrant officers are military personnel with the relevant rank who are not on active duty and have not reached the upper age limit. In addition to the upper-age limit, intermediate age limits determine wartime mobilization priority; younger officers are mobilized first. The main sources of reserve warrant officers are promotion during active-duty service or short-term peacetime training, assessment after demobilization, military schools, and reserve warrant-officer courses.
Commissioned officers: In countries with a volunteer military, reserve officers are personnel with an officer's commission who have signed a contract to perform part-time military service. They have civilian status, except when carrying out their military duties. Most reserve officers are former active-duty officers, but some become reserve officers after promotion. The main sources of reserve officers are:
Military schools, colleges and academies, which prepare career officers (who join the reserve after concluding active duty)
Military educational units in civilian higher-education institutions of higher education, such as the US' Reserve Officers' Training Corps
Reserve officer's courses
Direct commission
In countries with conscription, reserve officers are officers who are not on active duty and have not reached the upper age limit. The main sources of reserve officers are:
Training and assessment at the end of conscript service. About eight percent of Finnish conscripts become reserve officers after one year of service.
Military educational units in civilian higher-education institutions, such as military departments (Ukrainian: військова кафедра) in Ukraine and military faculties (Belarusian: ваенны факультэт) in Belarus
Military schools, colleges and academies, which prepare career officers (who join the reserve after concluding active duty)
Reserve-officer courses
In countries with conscription and volunteers, the main sources of reserve officers are:
Military educational units in civilian higher-education institutions such as Russia's military training centers (Russian: военный учебный центр), which prepare officers (who join the reserve after graduation or after concluding active duty)
Military schools, colleges and academies, which prepare career officers (who join the reserve after concluding active duty)
Reserve-officer courses
Training and assessment at the conclusion of conscript service
Advantages: Military reserve personnel quickly increase available manpower substantially with trained personnel. Reservists may contain experienced combat veterans who can increase the quantity and quality of a force. Reservists also tend to have training in professions outside the military, and skills attained in a number of professions are useful in the military. In many countries, reserve forces have capable people who would not otherwise consider a career in the military.
A large reserve pool can allow a government to avoid the costs, political and financial, of new recruits or conscripts. Reservists are usually more economically effective than regular troops, since they are called up as needed, rather than being always on duty. Preparations to institute a call-up (obvious to adversaries) can display determination, boost morale, and deter aggression.
Many reservists see voluntary training as merely for supplemental income or a hobby, and so reservists are inexpensive to maintain, their cost being limited to training and occasional deployments. The skills of reservists have been valuable in peacekeeping because they can be employed for the reconstruction of infrastructure, and tend to have better relations with the civilian population than career soldiers.
Disadvantages: Reservists are usually provided with second-line equipment which is no longer used by the regular army, or is an older version of that in current service. Reservists also have little experience with newer weapons systems. Reservists who are retired service personnel are sometimes considered less motivated than regular troops. Reservists who combine a military and civilian career, such as members of the United Kingdom's Army Reserve, experience time demands not experienced by regular troops which affect their availability and length of service.
Forces by country:
See also: Military reserve
National Guard
State defense force
Militia
Maritime militia
References:
== Further reading == |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military robot | History: Broadly defined, military robots date back to World War II and the Cold War in the form of the German Goliath tracked mines and the Soviet teletanks. The introduction of the MQ-1 Predator drone was when "CIA officers began to see the first practical returns on their decade-old fantasy of using aerial robots to collect intelligence".
The use of robots in warfare, although traditionally a topic for science fiction, is being researched as a possible future means of fighting wars. Already several military robots have been developed by various armies. Some believe the future of modern warfare will be fought by automated weapons systems. The U.S. military is investing heavily in the RQ-1 Predator, which can be armed with air-to-ground missiles and remotely operated from a command center in reconnaissance roles. DARPA has hosted competitions in 2004 & 2005 to involve private companies and universities to develop unmanned ground vehicles to navigate through rough terrain in the Mojave Desert for a final prize of 2 million.
Artillery has seen promising research with an experimental weapons system named "Dragon Fire II" which automates loading and ballistics calculations required for accurate predicted fire, providing a 12-second response time to fire support requests. However, military weapons are prevented from being fully autonomous; they require human input at certain intervention points to ensure that targets are not within restricted fire areas as defined by Geneva Conventions for the laws of war.
There have been some developments towards developing autonomous fighter jets and bombers. The use of autonomous fighters and bombers to destroy enemy targets is especially promising because of the lack of training required for robotic pilots, autonomous planes are capable of performing maneuvers which could not otherwise be done with human pilots (due to high amount of G-force), plane designs do not require a life support system, and a loss of a plane does not mean a loss of a pilot. However, the largest drawback to robotics is their inability to accommodate for non-standard conditions. Advances in artificial intelligence in the near future may help to rectify this.
In 2020 a Kargu 2 drone hunted down and attacked a human target in Libya, according to a report from the UN Security Council’s Panel of Experts on Libya, published in March 2021. This may have been the first time an autonomous killer robot armed with lethal weaponry attacked human beings.
Examples:
In current use:
In development: MIDARS, a four-wheeled robot outfitted with several cameras, radar, and possibly a firearm, that automatically performs random or preprogrammed patrols around a military base or other government installation. It alerts a human overseer when it detects movement in unauthorized areas, or other programmed conditions. The operator can then instruct the robot to ignore the event, or take over remote control to deal with an intruder, or to get better camera views of an emergency. The robot would also regularly scan radio frequency identification tags (RFID) placed on stored inventory as it passed and report any missing items.
Tactical Autonomous Combatant (TAC) units, described in Project Alpha study Unmanned Effects: Taking the Human out of the Loop.
Autonomous Rotorcraft Sniper System is an experimental robotic weapons system being developed by the U.S. Army since 2005. It consists of a remotely operated sniper rifle attached to an unmanned autonomous helicopter. It is intended for use in urban combat or for several other missions requiring snipers. Flight tests are scheduled to begin in summer 2009.
The "Mobile Autonomous Robot Software" research program was started in December 2003 by the Pentagon who purchased 15 Segways in an attempt to develop more advanced military robots. The program was part of a $26 million Pentagon program to develop software for autonomous systems.
Effects and impact:
Advantages: Autonomous robotics would save and preserve soldiers' lives by removing serving soldiers, who might otherwise be killed, from the battlefield. Lt. Gen. Richard Lynch of the United States Army Installation Management Command and assistant Army chief of staff for installation stated at a 2011 conference:
As I think about what’s happening on the battlefield today ... I contend there are things we could do to improve the survivability of our service members. And you all know that’s true.
Major Kenneth Rose of the US Army's Training and Doctrine Command outlined some of the advantages of robotic technology in warfare:
Machines don't get tired. They don't close their eyes. They don't hide under trees when it rains and they don't talk to their friends ... A human's attention to detail on guard duty drops dramatically in the first 30 minutes ... Machines know no fear.
Increasing attention is also paid to how to make the robots more autonomous, with a view of eventually allowing them to operate on their own for extended periods of time, possibly behind enemy lines. For such functions, systems like the Energetically Autonomous Tactical Robot are being tried, which is intended to gain its own energy by foraging for plant matter. The majority of military robots are tele-operated and not equipped with weapons; they are used for reconnaissance, surveillance, sniper detection, neutralizing explosive devices, etc. Current robots that are equipped with weapons are tele-operated so they are not capable of taking lives autonomously. Advantages regarding the lack of emotion and passion in robotic combat is also taken into consideration as a beneficial factor in significantly reducing instances of unethical behavior in wartime. Autonomous machines are created not to be "truly 'ethical' robots", yet ones that comply with the laws of war (LOW) and rules of engagement (ROE). Hence the fatigue, stress, emotion, adrenaline, etc. that affect a human soldier's rash decisions are removed; there will be no effect on the battlefield caused by the decisions made by the individual.
Risks: Human rights groups and NGOs such as Human Rights Watch and the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots have started urging governments and the United Nations to issue policy to outlaw the development of so-called "lethal autonomous weapons systems" (LAWS). The United Kingdom opposed such campaigns, with the Foreign Office declaring that "international humanitarian law already provides sufficient regulation for this area".
In July 2015, over 1,000 experts in artificial intelligence signed a letter calling for a ban on autonomous weapons. The letter was presented in Buenos Aires at the 24th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-15) and was co-signed by Stephen Hawking, Elon Musk, Steve Wozniak, Noam Chomsky, Skype co-founder Jaan Tallinn and Google DeepMind co-founder Demis Hassabis, among others.
Psychology: American soldiers have been known to name the robots that serve alongside them. These names are often in honor of human friends, family, celebrities, pets, or are eponymic. The 'gender' assigned to the robot may be related to the marital status of its operator.
Some affixed fictitious medals to battle-hardened robots, and even held funerals for destroyed robots. An interview of 23 explosive ordnance detection members shows that while they feel it is better to lose a robot than a human, they also felt anger and a sense of loss if they were destroyed. A survey of 746 people in the military showed that 80% either 'liked' or 'loved' their military robots, with more affection being shown towards ground rather than aerial robots. Surviving dangerous combat situations together increased the level of bonding between soldier and robot, and current and future advances in artificial intelligence may further intensify the bond with the military robots.
In fictional media:
Pictures:
See also: DARPA Grand Challenge
Lethal autonomous weapon
Human-in-the-loop
Missile guidance
Multi Autonomous Ground-robotic International Challenge
Network-centric warfare
Powered exoskeleton
Roboethics
Robot combat
Robot Wars (disambiguation)
Supersoldier
Telerobotics
Three Laws of Robotics
Unmanned combat air vehicle
US battlefield UAVs
References:
External links: "Biomass military robot in development"
EATR: Energetically Autonomous Tactical Robot - Phase II Project
Ethical and legal concerns: Gerhard Dabringer (Hg.), Ethica Themen: Ethical and Legal Aspects of Unmanned Systems. Interviews, Wien 2010
Public Say It's Illegal to Target Americans Abroad as Some Question CIA Drone Attacks, according to Fairleigh Dickinson University PublicMind poll - February 7, 2013
The future of warfare: Why we should all be very afraid (2014-07-21), Rory Tolan, Salon
Archive on air wars, Geographical Imaginations
Logical Limitations to Machine Ethics, with Consequences to Lethal Autonomous Weapons. Also discussed in: Does the Halting Problem Mean No Moral Robots?
Robots in War: Issues of Risk and Ethics - 2009
Organizations: United States Joint Forces Command website: "Leading the transformation of the U.S. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military robot | ), Ethica Themen: Ethical and Legal Aspects of Unmanned Systems. Interviews, Wien 2010
Public Say It's Illegal to Target Americans Abroad as Some Question CIA Drone Attacks, according to Fairleigh Dickinson University PublicMind poll - February 7, 2013
The future of warfare: Why we should all be very afraid (2014-07-21), Rory Tolan, Salon
Archive on air wars, Geographical Imaginations
Logical Limitations to Machine Ethics, with Consequences to Lethal Autonomous Weapons. Also discussed in: Does the Halting Problem Mean No Moral Robots?
Robots in War: Issues of Risk and Ethics - 2009
Organizations: United States Joint Forces Command website: "Leading the transformation of the U.S. military"
irobot.com, builder of the PackBot and the R-Gator systems
Boston Dynamics, builder of BigDog
News articles/press releases: USJFC: 'Robotics to play major role in future warfighting'
"From bomb disposal to waste disposal" Archived 2015-07-09 at the Wayback Machine Robots help deal with hazards, emergencies and disasters (International Electrotechnical Commission, July 2011)
"War robots still in Iraq", DailyTech, April 17, 2008
New Model Army Soldier Rolls Closer to Battle (SWORDS)
TALON Small Mobile Robot
TWG Military Robots
Carnegie Mellon University's snooping robot going to Iraq
PackBot Battlefield robotic Platform Archived 2015-04-05 at the Wayback Machine
Miniature Unmanned Aerial Systems - UAV
Guardium Autonomous Security Vehicle
Unmanned Ground Systems from Israel Archived 2015-05-01 at the Wayback Machine
High-Tech Military in Due Course Archived 2007-03-11 at the Wayback Machine
Launching a new kind of warfare
Gerry J. Gilmore (January 24, 2006). "Army's Veteran Bomb-Disposal Robot Now 'Packs Heat'". American Forces Press Service. Retrieved 2008-02-02.
As Wars End, Robot Field Faces Reboot April 11, 2012 |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military science | History: Even until the Second World War, military science was written in English starting with capital letters, and was thought of as an academic discipline alongside physics, philosophy and the medical sciences. In part this was due to the general mystique that accompanied education in a world where, as late as the 1880s, 75% of the European population was illiterate. The ability by the officers to make complex calculations required for the equally complex "evolutions" of the troop movements in linear warfare that increasingly dominated the Renaissance and later history, and the introduction of the gunpowder weapons into the equation of warfare only added to the veritable arcana of building fortifications as it seemed to the average individual.
Until the early 19th century, one observer, a British veteran of the Napoleonic Wars, Major John Mitchell, thought that it seemed nothing much had changed from the application of force on a battlefield since the days of the Greeks. He suggested that this was primarily so because as Clausewitz suggested, "unlike in any other science or art, in war the object reacts".
Until this time, and even after the Franco-Prussian War, military science continued to be divided between the formal thinking of officers brought up in the "shadow" of the Napoleonic Wars and younger officers like Ardant du Picq who tended to view fighting performance as rooted in the individual's and group psychology and suggested detailed analysis of this. This set in motion the eventual fascination of the military organisations with application of quantitative and qualitative research to their theories of combat; the attempt to translate military thinking as philosophic concepts into concrete methods of combat.
Military implements, the supply of an army, its organization, tactics, and discipline, have constituted the elements of military science in all ages; but improvement in weapons and accoutrements appears to lead and control all the rest.
The breakthrough of sorts made by Clausewitz in suggesting eight principles on which such methods can be based, in Europe, for the first time presented an opportunity to largely remove the element of chance and error from command decision making process. At this time emphasis was made on the topography (including trigonometry), military art (military science), military history, organisation of the army in the field, artillery and the science of projectiles, field fortifications and permanent fortifications, military legislation, military administration and manoeuvres.
The military science on which the model of German combat operations was built for the First World War remained largely unaltered from the Napoleonic model, but took into the consideration the vast improvements in the firepower and the ability to conduct "great battles of annihilation" through rapid concentration of force, strategic mobility, and the maintenance of the strategic offensive better known as the Cult of the offensive. The key to this, and other modes of thinking about war, remained analysis of military history and attempts to derive tangible lessons that could be replicated again with equal success on another battlefield as a sort of bloody laboratory of military science. Few were bloodier than the fields of the Western Front between 1914 and 1918. The person who probably understood Clausewitz better than most, Marshal Foch, initially participated in events that nearly destroyed the French Army.
It is not, however, true to say that military theorists and commanders were suffering from some collective case of stupidity. Their analysis of military history convinced them that decisive and aggressive strategic offensive was the only doctrine of victory, and feared that overemphasis of firepower, and the resultant dependence on entrenchment would make this all but impossible, and leading to the battlefield stagnant in advantages of the defensive position, destroying troop morale and willingness to fight. Because only the offensive could bring victory, lack of it, and not the firepower, was blamed for the defeat of the Imperial Russian Army in the Russo-Japanese War. Foch thought that "In strategy as well as in tactics one attacks".
In many ways military science was born as a result of the experiences of the Great War. "Military implements" had changed armies beyond recognition with cavalry to virtually disappear in the next 20 years. The "supply of an army" would become a science of logistics in the wake of massive armies, operations and troops that could fire ammunition faster than it could be produced, for the first time using vehicles that used the combustion engine, a watershed of change. Military "organisation" would no longer be that of the linear warfare, but assault teams, and battalions that were becoming multi-skilled with the introduction of machine guns and mortars and, for the first time, forcing military commanders to think not only in terms of rank and file, but force structure.
Tactics changed, too, with infantry for the first time segregated from the horse-mounted troops, and required to cooperate with tanks, aircraft and new artillery tactics. Perception of military discipline, too, had changed. Morale, despite strict disciplinarian attitudes, had cracked in all armies during the war, but the best-performing troops were found to be those where emphasis on discipline had been replaced with display of personal initiative and group cohesiveness such as that found in the Australian Corps during the Hundred Days Offensive. The military sciences' analysis of military history that had failed European commanders was about to give way to a new military science, less conspicuous in appearance, but more aligned to the processes of science of testing and experimentation, the scientific method, and forever "wed" to the idea of the superiority of technology on the battlefield.
Currently military science still means many things to different organisations. In the United Kingdom and much of the European Union the approach is to relate it closely to the civilian application and understanding. For example, in Belgium's Royal Military Academy, military science remains an academic discipline, and is studied alongside social sciences, including such subjects as humanitarian law. The United States Department of Defense defines military science in terms of specific systems and operational requirements, and include among other areas civil defense and force structure.
Employment of military skills: In the first instance military science is concerned with who will participate in military operations, and what sets of skills and knowledge they will require to do so effectively and somewhat ingeniously.
Military organization: Develops optimal methods for the administration and organization of military units, as well as the military as a whole. In addition, this area studies other associated aspects as mobilization/demobilization, and military government for areas recently conquered (or liberated) from enemy control.
Force structuring: Force structuring is the method by which personnel and the weapons and equipment they use are organized and trained for military operations, including combat. Development of force structure in any country is based on strategic, operational, and tactical needs of the national defense policy, the identified threats to the country, and the technological capabilities of the threats and the armed forces.
Force structure development is guided by doctrinal considerations of strategic, operational and tactical deployment and employment of formations and units to territories, areas and zones where they are expected to perform their missions and tasks. Force structuring applies to all armed services, but not to their supporting organisations such as those used for defense science research activities.
In the United States force structure is guided by the table of organization and equipment (TOE or TO&E). The TOE is a document published by the U.S. Department of Defense which prescribes the organization, manning, and equipage of units from divisional size and down, but also including the headquarters of corps and armies.
Force structuring also provides information on the mission and capabilities of specific units, as well as the unit's current status in terms of posture and readiness. A general TOE is applicable to a type of unit (for instance, infantry) rather than a specific unit (the 3rd Infantry Division). In this way, all units of the same branch (such as infantry) follow the same structural guidelines which allows for more efficient financing, training, and employment of like units operationally.
Military education and training: Studies the methodology and practices involved in training soldiers, NCOs (non-commissioned officers, i.e. sergeants and corporals), and officers. It also extends this to training small and large units, both individually and in concert with one another for both the regular and reserve organizations. Military training, especially for officers, also concerns itself with general education and political indoctrination of the armed forces.
Military concepts and methods: Much of capability development depends on the concepts which guide use of the armed forces and their weapons and equipment, and the methods employed in any given theatre of war or combat environment.
Military history: Military activity has been a constant process over thousands of years, and the essential tactics, strategy, and goals of military operations have been unchanging throughout history. As an example, one notable maneuver is the double envelopment, considered to be the consummate military maneuver, notably executed by Hannibal at the Battle of Cannae in 216 BCE, and later by Khalid ibn al-Walid at the Battle of Walaja in 633 CE.
Via the study of history, the military seeks to avoid past mistakes, and improve upon its current performance by instilling an ability in commanders to perceive historical parallels during battle, so as to capitalize on the lessons learned. The main areas military history includes are the history of wars, battles, and combats, history of the military art, and history of each specific military service.
Military strategy and doctrines: Military strategy is in many ways the centerpiece of military science. It studies the specifics of planning for, and engaging in combat, and attempts to reduce the many factors to a set of principles that govern all interactions of the field of battle. In Europe these principles were first defined by Clausewitz in his Principles of War. As such, it directs the planning and execution of battles, operations, and wars as a whole. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military science | Via the study of history, the military seeks to avoid past mistakes, and improve upon its current performance by instilling an ability in commanders to perceive historical parallels during battle, so as to capitalize on the lessons learned. The main areas military history includes are the history of wars, battles, and combats, history of the military art, and history of each specific military service.
Military strategy and doctrines: Military strategy is in many ways the centerpiece of military science. It studies the specifics of planning for, and engaging in combat, and attempts to reduce the many factors to a set of principles that govern all interactions of the field of battle. In Europe these principles were first defined by Clausewitz in his Principles of War. As such, it directs the planning and execution of battles, operations, and wars as a whole. Two major systems prevail on the planet today. Broadly speaking, these may be described as the "Western" system, and the "Russian" system. Each system reflects and supports strengths and weakness in the underlying society.
Modern Western military art is composed primarily of an amalgam of French, German, British, and American systems. The Russian system borrows from these systems as well, either through study, or personal observation in the form of invasion (Napoleon's War of 1812, and The Great Patriotic War), and form a unique product suited for the conditions practitioners of this system will encounter. The system that is produced by the analysis provided by military art is known as doctrine.
Western military doctrine relies heavily on technology, the use of a well-trained and empowered NCO cadre, and superior information processing and dissemination to provide a level of battlefield awareness that opponents cannot match. Its advantages are extreme flexibility, extreme lethality, and a focus on removing an opponent's C3I (command, communications, control, and intelligence) to paralyze and incapacitate rather than destroying their combat power directly (hopefully saving lives in the process). Its drawbacks are high expense, a reliance on difficult-to-replace personnel, an enormous logistic train, and a difficulty in operating without high technology assets if depleted or destroyed.
Soviet military doctrine (and its descendants, in CIS countries) relies heavily on masses of machinery and troops, a highly educated (albeit very small) officer corps, and pre-planned missions. Its advantages are that it does not require well educated troops, does not require a large logistic train, is under tight central control, and does not rely on a sophisticated C3I system after the initiation of a course of action. Its disadvantages are inflexibility, a reliance on the shock effect of mass (with a resulting high cost in lives and material), and overall inability to exploit unexpected success or respond to unexpected loss.
Chinese military doctrine is currently in a state of flux as the People's Liberation Army is evaluating military trends of relevance to China. Chinese military doctrine is influenced by a number of sources including an indigenous classical military tradition characterized by strategists such as Sun Tzu, Western and Soviet influences, as well as indigenous modern strategists such as Mao Zedong. One distinctive characteristic of Chinese military science is that it places emphasis on the relationship between the military and society as well as viewing military force as merely one part of an overarching grand strategy.
Each system trains its officer corps in its philosophy regarding military art. The differences in content and emphasis are illustrative. The United States Army principles of war are defined in the U.S. Army Field Manual FM 100–5. The Canadian Forces principles of war/military science are defined by Land Forces Doctrine and Training System (LFDTS) to focus on principles of command, principles of war, operational art and campaign planning, and scientific principles.
Russian Federation armed forces derive their principles of war predominantly from those developed during the existence of the Soviet Union. These, although based significantly on the Second World War experience in conventional war fighting, have been substantially modified since the introduction of the nuclear arms into strategic considerations. The Soviet–Afghan War and the First and Second Chechen Wars further modified the principles that Soviet theorists had divided into the operational art and tactics. The very scientific approach to military science thinking in the Soviet union had been perceived as overly rigid at the tactical level, and had affected the training in the Russian Federation's much reduced forces to instil greater professionalism and initiative in the forces.
The military principles of war of the People's Liberation Army were loosely based on those of the Soviet Union until the 1980s when a significant shift begun to be seen in a more regionally-aware, and geographically-specific strategic, operational and tactical thinking in all services. The PLA is currently influenced by three doctrinal schools which both conflict and complement each other: the People's war, the Regional war, and the Revolution in military affairs that led to substantial increase in the defense spending and rate of technological modernisation of the forces.
The differences in the specifics of military art notwithstanding, military science strives to provide an integrated picture of the chaos of battle, and illuminate basic insights that apply to all combatants, not just those who agree with your formulation of the principles.
Military geography: Military geography encompasses much more than simple protestations to take the high ground. Military geography studies the obvious, the geography of theatres of war, but also the additional characteristics of politics, economics, and other natural features of locations of likely conflict (the political "landscape", for example). As an example, the Soviet–Afghan War was predicated on the ability of the Soviet Union to not only successfully invade Afghanistan, but also to militarily and politically flank the Islamic Republic of Iran simultaneously.
Military systems: How effectively and efficiently militaries accomplish their operations, missions and tasks is closely related not only to the methods they use, but the equipment and weapons they use.
Military intelligence: Military intelligence supports the combat commanders' decision making process by providing intelligence analysis of available data from a wide range of sources. To provide that informed analysis the commanders information requirements are identified and input to a process of gathering, analysis, protection, and dissemination of information about the operational environment, hostile, friendly and neutral forces and the civilian population in an area of combat operations, and broader area of interest. Intelligence activities are conducted at all levels from tactical to strategic, in peacetime, the period of transition to war, and during the war.
Most militaries maintain a military intelligence capability to provide analytical and information collection personnel in both specialist units and from other arms and services. Personnel selected for intelligence duties, whether specialist intelligence officers and enlisted soldiers or non-specialist assigned to intelligence may be selected for their analytical abilities and intelligence before receiving formal training.
Military intelligence serves to identify the threat, and provide information on understanding best methods and weapons to use in deterring or defeating it.
Military logistics: The art and science of planning and carrying out the movement and maintenance of military forces. In its most comprehensive sense, it is those aspects or military operations that deal with the design, development, acquisition, storage, distribution, maintenance, evacuation, and disposition of material; the movement, evacuation, and hospitalization of personnel; the acquisition or construction, maintenance, operation, and disposition of facilities; and the acquisition or furnishing of services.
Military technology and equipment: Military technology is not just the study of various technologies and applicable physical sciences used to increase military power. It may also extend to the study of production methods of military equipment, and ways to improve performance and reduce material and/or technological requirements for its production. An example is the effort expended by Nazi Germany to produce artificial rubbers and fuels to reduce or eliminate their dependence on imported POL (petroleum, oil, and lubricants) and rubber supplies.
Military technology is unique only in its application, not in its use of basic scientific and technological achievements. Because of the uniqueness of use, military technological studies strive to incorporate evolutionary, as well as the rare revolutionary technologies, into their proper place of military application.
Military and society: This speciality examines the ways that military and society interact and shape each other. The dynamic intersection where military and society meet is influenced by trends in society and the security environment. This field of study can be linked to works by Clausewitz ("War is the continuation of politics by other means") and Sun Tzu ("If not in the interest of the state, do not act" ). The contemporary multi and interdisciplinary field traces its origin to World War II and works by sociologists and political scientists. This field of study includes "all aspects of relations between armed forces, as a political, social and economic institution, and the society, state or political ethnic movement of which they are a part". Topics often included within the purview of military and society include: veterans, women in the military, military families, enlistment and retention, reserve forces, military and religion, military privatization, civil-military relations, civil-military cooperation, military and popular culture, military and the media, military and disaster assistance, military and the environment and the blurring of military and police functions.
Recruitment and retention: In an all-volunteer military, the armed forces relies on market forces and careful recruiting to fill its ranks. It is thus, very important to understand factors that motivate enlistment and reenlistment. Service members must have the mental and physical ability to meet the challenges of military service and adapt to the military's values and culture. Studies show that enlistment motivation generally incorporates both self-interest (pay) and non-market values like adventure, patriotism, and comradeship.
Veterans: The study of veterans or members of the military who leave and return to the society is one of the most important subfields of the military and society field of study. Veterans and their issues represent a microcosm of the field. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military science | Recruitment and retention: In an all-volunteer military, the armed forces relies on market forces and careful recruiting to fill its ranks. It is thus, very important to understand factors that motivate enlistment and reenlistment. Service members must have the mental and physical ability to meet the challenges of military service and adapt to the military's values and culture. Studies show that enlistment motivation generally incorporates both self-interest (pay) and non-market values like adventure, patriotism, and comradeship.
Veterans: The study of veterans or members of the military who leave and return to the society is one of the most important subfields of the military and society field of study. Veterans and their issues represent a microcosm of the field. Military recruits represent inputs that flow from the community into the armed forces, veterans are outputs that leave the military and reenter society changed by their time as soldiers, sailors, marines and airmen. Both society and veteran face multiple layers of adaptation and adjustment upon their reentry.
The definition of veteran is surprisingly fluid across countries. In the US, veteran's status is established after a service member has completed a minimum period of service. Australia requires deployment to a combat zone. In the UK "Everyone who has performed military service for at least one day and drawn a day's pay is termed a veteran." The study of veterans focuses much attention on their, sometimes, uneasy transition back to civilian society. "Veterans must navigate a complex cultural transition when moving between environments," and they can expect positive and negative transition outcomes. Finding a good job and reestablishing a fulfilling family life is high on their resettlement agenda.
Military life is often violent and dangerous. The trauma of combat often results in post-traumatic stress disorder as well as painful physical health challenges which often lead to homelessness, suicide, substance, and excessive alcohol use, and family dysfunction. Society recognizes its responsibilities to veterans by offering programs and policies designed to redress these problems. Veterans also exert an influence on society often through the political process. For example, how do veterans vote and establish party affiliation? During the 2004 presidential election veterans were basically bipartisan. Veterans who fought in Croatia's war of independence voted for the nationalist parties in greater numbers.
Reserve forces: Reserve forces are service members who serve the armed forces on a part-time basis. These men and women constitute a "reserve" force that countries rely on for their defense, disaster support, and some day-to-day operations etc. In the United States an active reservist spends a weekend a month and two weeks a year in training. The size of a county's reserve force often depends on the type of recruitment method. Nations with a volunteer force tend to have a lower reserve percentage.
Recently the role of the reserves has changed. In many countries it has gone from a strategic force, largely static, to an operational force, largely dynamic. After WWII, relatively large standing forces took care of most operational needs. Reserves were held back strategically and deployed in times of emergency for example during the Cuban missile crisis. Subsequently, the strategic and budget situation changed and as a result the active duty military began to rely on reserve force, particularly for combat support and combat service support. Further large-scale military operation, routinely mobilize and deploy reservists
Lomsky-Feder et al (2008p. 594) introduced the metaphor of reserve forces as transmigrants who live "betwixt and between the civilian and military worlds". This metaphor captures "their structural duality" and suggests dynamic nature of reservist experience as they navigate commitments to their often conflicting civilian and military worlds. Given their greater likelihood of lengthy deployment, reservists face many of the same stresses as active duty but often with fewer support services.
University studies: Universities (or colleges) around the world also offer a degree(s) in military science:
Belgium: Royal Military Academy (Belgium)- BA Social and Military Science; MA Social and Military Science
Israel:
Tel Aviv University – MA in Security.
Bar-Ilan University – MA in Military, Security and Intelligence.
Finland:
National Defence University – Bachelor, Master, and PhD in Military science
France:
Sciences Po, Paris School of International Affairs - Master in International Security.
New Zealand:
Massey University, Centre for Defence and Security Studies – BA in Defence Studies.
Victoria University of Wellington – Centre for Strategic Studies – Master of Strategic Studies (MSS).
Slovenia:
University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Social Studies – BA, MA and PhD in Defence studies; PhD in Military-Social Sciences
United Kingdom:
King's College London – MA in International Security and Strategy; MA, MPhil/PhD in Defence Studies
University of Hull – MA in Strategy and International Security
University of St Andrews - MLitt in Strategic Studies
Sri Lanka
Sri Lanka Military Academy - (Bachelor and Master's degree in Military Studies) Military training school Diyatalawa, Sri Lanka
South Africa
South African Military Academy / University of Stellenbosch - Bachelor of Military Science (BMil), Master of Military Science (MMil), MPhil in Security Management
United States:
United States Air Force Academy – Major in Military and Strategic Studies; Minor in Nuclear Weapons and Strategy
United States Military Academy – Major in Defense and Strategic Studies
Hawaii Pacific University – Major in Diplomacy and Military Studies
Missouri State University – Minor in Military Studies
International military sciences or studies associations: There are many international associations with the core purpose of bringing scholars in the field of Military Science together. Some are inter-disciplinary and have a broad scope, whilst others are confined and specialized focusing on more specific disciplines or subjects. Some are integrated in larger scientific communities like the International Sociological Association (ISA) and the American Psychological Association (APA) where others have grown out of military institutions or individuals who have had a particular interest in areas of military science and are military, defense or armed forces oriented. Some of these associations are:
American Psychological Association; Division 19: Society for Military Psychology (APA-Div19)
European Research Group on Military and Society (ERGOMAS)
Inter-University Seminar on Armed Forces and Society (IUS)
International Congress on Soldiers Physical Performance (ICSPP)
International Military Testing Association (IMTA)
International Society of Military Sciences (ISMS)
International Sociological Association; RC01 Armed Forces and Conflict Resolution
Military studies journals: The following are notable journals in the field:
See also: Military doctrine
Military theory
War
List of basic military science and technology topics
List of military inventions
List of military writers
Philosophy of war
References: Notes
Bibliography
External links:
Military Technology
US Military/Government Texts
The Logic of Warfighting Experiments by Kass (CCRP, 2006)
Complexity, Networking, and Effects Based Approaches to Operations by Smith (CCRP, 2006)
Understanding Command and Control by Alberts and Hayes (CCRP, 2006)
The Agile Organization by Atkinson and Moffat (CCRP, 2005)
Power to the Edge by Alberts and Hayes (CCRP, 2003)
Network Centric Warfare by Alberts et al. (CCRP, 1999) |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Military science fiction | Characteristics: Traditional military values of courage under fire, sense of duty, honor, sacrifice, loyalty, and camaraderie are often emphasized. The action is typically described from the point of view of a soldier in a science fictional setting of or near battle. Typically, the technology is more advanced than that of the present and described in detail. In some stories, however, technology is fairly static, and weapons that would be familiar to present-day soldiers are used, but other aspects of society have changed. Technology may not be emphasized in such stories as much as other aspects of the characters' military lives, cultures, or societies. For example, women may be accepted as equal partners for combat roles, or preferred over men.
When the "extravagan[t]" depictions of war in space operas faded along with pulp fiction more generally, military science fiction developed with a "more disciplined and more realistic notion of the kind of armies which might fight interplanetary and interstellar wars, and the kinds of weapons they might use".
In many stories, the usage or advancement of a specific technology plays a role in advancing the plot, such as deploying a new weapon or spaceship. Some works draw heavy parallels to human history and how a scientific breakthrough or new military doctrine can significantly change how war is fought, the outcome of a battle, and the fortunes of the combatants. Many works explore how human progress, discovery, and suffering affect military doctrine or battle, and how the protagonists and antagonists reflect on and adapt to such changes.
Many authors have either used a galaxy-spanning fictional empire as a background for the story, or have explored the growth and/or decline of such an empire. The capital of a galactic empire is sometimes a "core world," such as a planet relatively near a galaxy's centrally-located supermassive black hole, which has advanced considerably in science and technology compared to current human civilization. Characterizations of these empires can vary wildly from malevolent forces that attack sympathetic victims, to apathetic or amoral bureaucracies, to more reasonable entities focused on social progress.
A writer may posit a form of faster-than-light travel in order to facilitate the enormous scale of interstellar war. The long spans of time (e.g., decades or centuries) required for human soldiers to travel interstellar distances, even at relativistic speeds, and the consequences for the characters, is a dilemma examined by authors such as Joe Haldeman and Alastair Reynolds. Other writers such as Larry Niven have created plausible interplanetary conflict based on human colonization of the asteroid belt and outer planets by means of technologies utilizing the laws of physics as currently understood.
Definitions by contrast: Several subsets of military science fiction share characteristics of the space opera subgenre, concentrating on large-scale space battles with futuristic weapons in an interstellar war. Many stories can be considered to be in one or both the military science fiction and space opera subgenres, such as The Sten Chronicles by Allan Cole and Chris Bunch, Ender's Game series by Orson Scott Card, Honorverse by David Weber, Deathstalker by Simon R. Green, and Armor by John Steakley.
At one extreme, a military science fiction story can speculate about war in the future, in space, or involving space travel, or the effects of such a war on humans; at the other, a story with a fictional military plot may have relatively superficial science fictional elements. The term "military space opera" may occasionally denote this latter style, as used for example by critic Sylvia Kelso when describing Lois McMaster Bujold's Vorkosigan Saga. Examples that feature aspects of both military science fiction and space opera include the Battlestar Galactica franchise and Robert A. Heinlein's 1959 novel Starship Troopers.
A key distinction of military science fiction from space opera is that space operas focus more on adventurous stories and melodrama, while military science fiction focuses more on warfare and technical aspects. The principal characters in a space opera are also not military personnel, but civilians or paramilitary. Stories in both subgenres often concern an interstellar war in which humans fight themselves and/or nonhuman entities. Military science fiction, however, is not necessarily set in outer space or on multiple worlds, as in space opera and the space Western.
Both military science fiction and the space Western may consider an interstellar war and oppression by a galactic empire as the story's backdrop. They may focus on a lone gunslinger, soldier, or veteran in a futuristic space frontier setting. Western elements and conventions in military science fiction may be explicit, such as cowboys in outer space, or more subtle, as in a space colony requiring defense against attack out on the frontier. Gene Roddenberry described Star Trek: The Original Series as a Space Western (or more poetically, as "Wagon Train to the stars"). The TV series Firefly and its cinematic follow-up Serenity literalized the Western aspects of the space Western subgenre as popularized by Star Trek: it features frontier towns, horses, and a visual style evocative of classic John Ford Westerns. Worlds that have been terraformed may be depicted as presenting similar challenges as that of a frontier settlement in a classic Western. Six-shooters and horses may be replaced by ray guns and rockets.
A "thematic subdivision" of MSF are works where "ex-military protagonists [are] drawing on their battle experience for tough and violent operations in (more or less) civilian life", typically in a law enforcement setting. Some examples include Richard Morgan's Takashi Kovacs book such as Altered Carbon (2002) and Elizabeth Bear's Jenny Casey books, such as Hammered (2004).
History:
19th century and up to early 20th century: Precursors for military science fiction can be found in "future war" stories dating back at least to George Chesney's story "The Battle of Dorking" (1871). Written just after the Prussian victory in the Franco-Prussian War, it describes an invasion of Britain by a German-speaking country in which the Royal Navy is destroyed by a futuristic wonder-weapon ("fatal engines").
Other works of military science fiction followed, including H.G. Wells's "The Land Ironclads". It described tank-like "land ironclads," 80-to-100-foot-long (24 to 30 m) armoured fighting vehicles that carry riflemen, engineers, and a captain, and are armed with semi-automatic rifles.
Post-WWII era: Eventually, as science fiction became an established and separate genre, military science fiction established itself as a subgenre. One such work is H. Beam Piper's Uller Uprising (1952) (based on the events of the Sepoy Mutiny). Robert A. Heinlein's Starship Troopers (1959) is another work of military science fiction, along with Gordon Dickson's Dorsai (1960), and these are thought to be mostly responsible for popularizing this subgenre's popularity among young readers of the time.
The Vietnam War led to the "polarization of the sf community", which can be seen in the June 1968 issue of Galaxy Science Fiction, in which one page of pro-war sf authors listed their names and on another page, anti-war sf authors put their names.
The Vietnam War has been noted by the Encyclopedia of Science Fiction as having impacted anthologies such as In the Field of Fire (1987) and novels such as The Healer's War (1988) by Elizabeth Ann Scarborough and Dream Baby (1989) by Bruce McAllister.
The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction states that the Vietnam War's influence can be seen indirectly in novels such as Joe Haldeman's The Forever War (published in Analog over 1972–1975) and Lucius Shepard's Life During Wartime (1987).
The Vietnam War resulted in veterans with combat experience deciding to write science fiction, including Joe Haldeman and David Drake. Throughout the 1970s, works such as Haldeman's The Forever War and Drake's Hammer's Slammers helped increase the popularity of the genre. Short stories also were popular, collected in books such as Combat SF, edited by Gordon R. Dickson. This anthology includes one of the first Hammer's Slammers stories, as well as one of the BOLO stories by Keith Laumer and one of the Berserker stories by Fred Saberhagen. This anthology seems to have been the first time these stories specifically dealing with war as a subject were collected and marketed as such. The series of anthologies with the group title There Will be War edited by Pournelle and John F. Carr (nine volumes from 1983 through 1990) helped keep the category active, and encouraged new writers to add to it.
David Drake wrote stories about future mercenaries, including the Hammer's Slammers series (1979), which follows the career of a future mercenary tank regiment. Drake's series which "helped initiate a fashion for sf about mercenaries", including The Warrior's Apprentice (1986) by Lois McMaster Bujold.
A twist was introduced in Harry Turtledove's Worldwar series depicting an alternate history in which WWII is disrupted by extraterrestrials invading Earth in 1942, forcing humans to stop fighting each other and unite against this common enemy. Turtledove depicts the tactics and strategy of this new course of the war in detail, showing how American, British, Soviet, and German soldiers and Jewish guerrillas (some of them historical figures) deal with this extraordinary new situation, as well as providing a not unsympathetic detailed point of view of individual invader warriors. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.