Thinking about the Operational Level
Dec 2005, Vol. 150, No. 6
By John Kiszley
The operational level is one of the four levels of war or conflict identified in British Defence Doctrine: grand-strategic, military-strategic, operational and tactical. Sometimes referred to as the theatre level, the operational level is that ‘at which campaigns and major operations are planned, conducted and sustained to accomplish strategic objectives within theatres or areas of operations’. The skilful orchestration of military resources and activities for this purpose is called operational art. The operational level is the vital link between tactics and strategy. As the Soviet theorist Aleksandr Svechin neatly put it, ‘Tactics make the steps from which operational leaps are assembled; strategy points out the path’. Without consideration of the operational level, it is easy to see the achievement of strategic success as merely the sum of tactical victories, and but a small step from there to believing that every successful battle fought leads to strategic success. But, in the words of Bernard Brodie, ‘War is a question not of winning battles, but of winning campaigns’. Yet the British military only incorporated this ‘vital link’ into its doctrine in the 1980s, over half a century after the militaries of some other nations, notably the Soviet Union, did so.Why was this? What was the impact? And what do we have to learn from the experience? This article sets out to answer these questions.
Add your comments
By John Kiszley
The operational level is one of the four levels of war or conflict identified in British Defence Doctrine: grand-strategic, military-strategic, operational and tactical. Sometimes referred to as the theatre level, the operational level is that ‘at which campaigns and major operations are planned, conducted and sustained to accomplish strategic objectives within theatres or areas of operations’. The skilful orchestration of military resources and activities for this purpose is called operational art. The operational level is the vital link between tactics and strategy. As the Soviet theorist Aleksandr Svechin neatly put it, ‘Tactics make the steps from which operational leaps are assembled; strategy points out the path’. Without consideration of the operational level, it is easy to see the achievement of strategic success as merely the sum of tactical victories, and but a small step from there to believing that every successful battle fought leads to strategic success. But, in the words of Bernard Brodie, ‘War is a question not of winning battles, but of winning campaigns’. Yet the British military only incorporated this ‘vital link’ into its doctrine in the 1980s, over half a century after the militaries of some other nations, notably the Soviet Union, did so.Why was this? What was the impact? And what do we have to learn from the experience? This article sets out to answer these questions.
You need 4 credits to access this item
If you are a member or registered user, please login
Not already a member and have not yet registered?
Add your comments
Copyright © 2009 RUSI