Freedom of Action

Fundamental Considerations. In providing for proper apportionment of fighting strength, a commander may attain the end in view by increasing the physical, mental, or moral elements of his own strength, relative to the enemy's, or by decreasing the enemy's strength through imposing restrictions on hostile freedom of action.

Freedom of action will enable a commander to prosecute his plan in spite of restrictive influences. That enemy interference will, to a greater or less extent, impose restrictions on freedom of action is to be expected. Restrictions may also be imposed by physical conditions existing in the theater of operations, and by deficiencies and omissions which are within the field of responsibility of the commander to correct.

Even with fighting strength adequate to overcome enemy opposition and physical handicaps, deficiencies and omissions within a commander's own field may become effective checks to further progress unless avoided through the exercise of foresight. To this end, it is desirable to consider certain possibilities which are likely to promote freedom of action if properly exploited, and to restrict it if neglected.

To a considerable extent, a commander has within his own control the degree of influence which his force will exert in the creation or the maintenance of a favorable military situation. The power applied by a military force is determined not only by the fighting strength of its component commands, but also by the degree of coordination of their several efforts in the attainment of the objective (see also page 12). Whatever the inability of the commander to influence the other aspects of a situation, the ability of his command to act unitedly is a matter largely in his hands.

When time permits, subordinate commanders, apprised of contemplated tasks in general terms, may be called upon to submit recommendations as to the detailed instructions to be issued them, as well (page 66) as to the means to be allotted for the purpose. By this procedure, individual initiative (page 15) is fostered and the higher command enabled to utilize the first-hand knowledge and experience gained on lower echelons without, however, divesting the higher command of any of its responsibility.

The command system may provide for unified action through unity of command or through cooperation resulting from mutual understanding. On the assumption that commanders are competent and that communications are adequate, unity of command is the more reliable method. However, it cannot be obtained everywhere and at all times, because of the necessary decentralization of the command system in areas distant from the commander. In such areas, unity of effort may sometimes be assured by provision for local unity of command. At other times, unity of effort may depend entirely on cooperation between adjacent commands within the same area. (See page 12.)

Organization (see page 13), the mechanism of command, is most effective when, through the establishment of authority commensurate with responsibility (page 12) and through the assignment of tasks to commanders with appropriate capabilities (see also page 66), the highest possible degree of unity of command is attained. The command organization and mutual understanding are of primary importance as methods of ensuring maximum power with available fighting strength, and of affording consequent maximum contribution to freedom of action.

Deficiencies in technical training are capable of imposing grave restrictions upon freedom of action. Material equipment, even though it may represent the acme of perfection in design and construction, will not surely function unless skillfully operated and maintained. Even though mobility and endurance be otherwise assured, the capacity which they represent is not susceptible of effective employment unless the methods of movement, i.e., of effecting change in relative position (page 59), are intelligently planned and are developed to a point which assures facility of operation when in the hands of skilled personnel.

Tactical training, not omitting that required for joint operations (page 67), is one of the vital factors of fighting strength, with respect, more especially, to its contributions to freedom of action.

A state of high and stable morale (page 9), founded upon sound discipline, is an invaluable characteristic of fighting strength. An understanding of the human being is therefore an important feature of the science of war.

Discipline, in its basic meaning, is the treatment suitable to a disciple. The objective of discipline is therefore the creation and maintenance of the spirit of willingness to follow where the commander leads. The exercise of leadership is not restricted, however, to those occasions when the commander can be physically present. The exigencies of war and the requirements of control prevent the commander from being always, personally, in the forefront of action. These restrictions as to considerations of space however, impose no limitations on leadership in terms of time.

The influence of the competent commander is a factor always acting to shape the situation according to his will (page 47), though the necessities of the moment may compel his presence elsewhere. The ability to create and maintain a faithful following who will execute the commander's will wherever he may be (page 15) is, accordingly, a primary attribute of command.

With this objective in mind, the true disciplinarian runs no risk of confusing harshness with the exercise of justice. He understands the difference between an overbearing arrogance, arising from unconscious ignorance, and the pride which springs from a justified self-respect. He appreciates the distinction between mere stubbornness, which would alienate his followers, and the necessary firmness which binds the bonds between the leader and the led. He realizes that comradeship, without presumptuous familiarity, is the firmest foundation for mutual loyalty (page 14). He knows that kindness and consideration, without suggestion of pampering, will not be mistaken for weakness by any subordinate worthy of the name.

Military subordination, which implies a proud obedience without trace of servility, is the essential basis for the development of the qualities of command. It is an old adage that, to know how to command, one must know how to obey. In the profession of arms, every man is at once a leader and a follower; the uncertainties of war may suddenly confront any individual, even on the lowest echelon, with the call to exercise command.

The requirements of sound discipline are thus the correct basis for all training. By proper training of his command, by instilling in it a spirit of resolute determination and by otherwise fostering its morale, and by weakening the morale of the enemy, a commander may increase his own fighting strength and reduce that of the opposition. When a command is inured to the ill effects of fear, despondency, lack of confidence, and other weakening influences, it may more effectually employ measures calculated to upset the morale of the enemy.

In connection with these measures, surprise, when judiciously conceived and successfully employed, may be a most potent factor. Surprise (see page 26) is the injection of the unexpected for the purpose of creating an unfavorable military situation for the enemy. Its effect is particularly telling when it results in disruption of enemy plans, and thus promotes the execution of one's own.

The raid, an offensive measure swiftly executed, often by surprise, and followed by a withdrawal, may be a valuable operation when employed to attain objectives within its capacity. The collection of information, the destruction of important enemy equipment or supplies, the neutralization of enemy positions, the severing of physical means of communication and transport, and the like, are suitable objectives. The attritional effect of repeated raids may be very great. Skillfully executed raids frequently produce panic among the populace and thus, by political pressure, cause a change in the existing apportionment of fighting strength to the extent of upsetting military plans in other theaters. This is particularly likely to occur when there is fear, justified or otherwise, of repetition (see page 69).

However, because a raid necessarily includes a withdrawal and cannot, therefore, accomplish the occupation of territory (see page 46), it can have only indirect bearing, however important, upon the final outcome of the hostilities against a strong and competent enemy. Like other forms of surprise, the raid, injudiciously employed, may serve only to disclose one's presence, and thus to betray more important future plans. If the raid fails to attain its objective, it may even strengthen enemy morale.

The form which surprise may take is not confined to the stratagem, the ruse, or the sudden appearance. Any unexpected display of novel methods or of fighting strength, moral, mental, or physical, the last-named sometimes assuming the character of new and especially effective weapons or equipment, is included in the category of surprise. The potential value of such methods or weapons is, however, reduced or even completely vitiated by the leakage of advance information concerning them, not only as to their details, but as to the fact of their existence.

Other conditions remaining unchanged, an offensive surprise measure is therefore more likely to be effective when the opponent has not been given time to prepare a defense against it. On the other hand, where there is knowledge that an opponent or possible opponent is taking steps of a new or unusual nature and no adequate defense is prepared, the equivalent of surprise has been granted him.

Security measures are necessary in order to minimize or prevent surprise, or to defeat other efforts aimed at disruption of plans. Protection brings security; its basic objective is the conservation of fighting strength for future employment. Primarily requiring the maintenance of secrecy and the exercise of vigilance and foresight, security may be furthered by efficient scouting, by appropriate dispositions and formations within the command, and by the use of protective detachments and of various types of works in the sphere of engineering. Previous discussion (pages 64 and 69), with respect to relative position and to the apportionment of fighting strength, has indicated how, through fortification and related measures, the commander may increase relative fighting strength and thereby promote his own freedom of action while restricting that of the enemy.

A commander will be hampered in maintaining his fighting strength at its maximum unless he has arranged for, and has at his disposal, adequate logistics support. Because of its intimate relationship to mobility and endurance, such support is an essential to freedom of action. Logistics support requires provision for procurement and replenishment of supplies, for evacuation, proper disposition, and replacement of ineffective personnel, and for material maintenance. Freedom of action is restricted beyond those limits to which logistics support can be extended. (See page 63.)

The initiative is of paramount importance in ensuring freedom of action. If the initiative is seized and maintained with adequate strength, the enemy can only conform; he cannot lead. If initiative is lost, freedom of action is restricted in like measure.

The offensive, properly employed, is a method of seizing the initiative, and of regaining it if lost. Even though there be an actual numerical superiority in fighting strength, an offensive will, however, seldom assume practical form unless founded on an offensive mental attitude, which ever seeks the favorable and suitable opportunity to strike. Completely to abandon the offensive state of mind is to forswear victory.

Whether physically on the defensive or the offensive, the competent commander is always engaged in a mental and moral attack upon the will of the enemy commander (see page 8). By effective attack upon the hostile will, the commander disintegrates the enemy's plan, i.e., the enemy's reasoned decision, as well as the detailed procedure on which the enemy relies to carry this decision into effect.

It does not follow that offensive action is possible or even desirable under all circumstances. Even with superior strength the most skillful commander will scarcely be able, always, to apportion forces in such manner as everywhere to permit the assumption of the offensive. Without adequately superior strength, it may be necessary to adopt the defensive for considerable periods. If the offensive mental attitude is retained, together with fixed determination to take offensive measures as soon as appropriate to do so, the calculated and deliberate adoption of the defensive, for the proper length of time, may best promote the ultimate attainment of the objective. It is of the utmost importance, however, that a static defensive be not adopted as a settled procedure (see page 65) beyond the time necessary to prepare for an effective offensive.

Both the offensive and the defensive have their places in an operation whose broad character is primarily either defensive or offensive. In operations which involve movement over a considerable distance, a combination of the offensive and the defensive is usually found necessary (see also references to distant operations on pages 63 and 74). Though the movement itself be offensive, the ensurance of freedom of action may require both defensive measures and tactically offensive action. The enemy, primarily on the defensive, may be expected to seize every opportunity to employ the offensive.

Thus, a judicious combination of the offensive and the defensive has been found to be sound procedure (see also page 61), provided that the general defensive is always viewed as a basis for the inauguration, at the proper moment, of the offensive. The methods employed during the period of the defensive are best calculated to promote freedom of action if they are designed to facilitate a ready assumption of the offensive as soon as conditions favorable to the offensive have been created.

Familiarity with the physical characteristics of the actual and possible theaters of operations, and accurate intelligence of the strength, distribution, and activities of enemy forces likely to be encountered, are of primary importance in the promotion of freedom of action. Additions to this store of knowledge may be made by a continuous interpretation and dissemination of new information collected, analyzed, and evaluated by persistent effort. Of equal importance is the denial of information to the enemy.

In connection with counter-information measures (see page 127), the scrutiny of information of a military nature intended for popular consumption demands the exercise of sound professional judgment prior to publication. A resourceful enemy is ever alert to evaluate and turn to his own advantage all available information, including that ostensibly innocuous.

As to all of the foregoing considerations, a fund of professional knowledge, previously acquired through study, or experience, or both, and coupled with a sound concept of war, is the best basis for devising suitable, feasible, and acceptable measures for freedom of action.

With a given fighting strength, the ensurance of freedom of action, within the field of responsibility of a commander, requires consideration of such matters as:

A more detailed analysis of such factors is provided hereafter (Chapter VI, as to Section I-B of the Estimate Form). With proper provision made in these respects, the commander will be better able to deal with those restrictions on freedom of action imposed by the enemy and by adverse geographical conditions. With respect to restrictions that in a particular situation may be due to the latter cause, it will at once be appreciated how greatly freedom of action may depend on the selection of correct physical objectives, on utilization of advantageous relative positions, and on an effective apportionment of fighting strength.

Each measure, or each operation, for freedom of action, if it is to meet the requirements of suitability, feasibility, and acceptability, will be planned on the basis of the foregoing considerations and will take account, also, of the inherent requirements of that measure, or operation, for freedom of action for itself.

On occasion, higher authority may request the recommendations of the commander (see page 42, as to opinions) with reference to provision for freedom of action. Such recommendations will properly be based on the elements considered in the preceding discussion.

IV. SUMMARY

All these considerations involve the proper evaluation of the factors applicable (page 25) to the particular problem. Each objective, prior to its selection, and each operation, prior to its adoption, will require examination of its suitability with regard to the appropriate effect desired; of its feasibility with respect to the action contemplated as to physical objectives, relative positions, the concurrent apportionment of fighting strength, and freedom of action; and, finally, of its acceptability with reference to consequences as to costs.

CHAPTER VToC

FOUR STEPS IN THE SOLUTION OF A MILITARY PROBLEM

In Chapter II it has been brought to notice that every problem, regardless of its type and scope, has its source in a perplexity created by an apparent difficulty inherent in a situation. Where there is a sufficient incentive to change or maintain the situation, the problem is one which requires solution. (See page 20.)

A situation may be actual or assumed. In broad outline, an actual military situation is always likely to present a picture of opposing organizations of human beings, each possessed of fighting strength and disposed in a locality or localities which constitute relative positions with reference to each other.

This picture may be expected to assume various aspects as action progresses (see page 38). The concern of the commander is to control the unfolding of the original situation, to the end that he may attain the effect he desires (page 72). (See also Chapter IX.)

The incentive to solve a problem is provided by a realization, on the part of the individual concerned, of a need to make provision for the attainment of an objective. In the ease of a military problem, such incentive may result (1) from a directive issued by higher authority, usually in the form of an assigned task, or (2) from the fact that a decision already reached by the commander has introduced further problems, or (3) from a recognition of the demands of the situation. (See page 44.)

An objective is best attained by the successful application of properly directed effort. There is thus an essential and continuing relationship between the incentive to solve a problem, and the task which assigns the objective (or objectives) and thus motivates the procedure necessary for the attainment of the objective(s) so assigned (page 50).

Such a task may, therefore, be referred to as the motivating task.

The natural mental processes which normal human beings employ in solving their problems of business, public affairs, or even personal matters, have been previously described as the natural processes for employment in the solution of military problems (see Chapter II). In adapting these natural processes to military requirements (page 43), the only difference imposed is that of studied insistence that the factors peculiar to the conduct of war, as recognized in the Fundamental Military Principle (page 41), receive thorough analytical treatment from the professional viewpoint.

The same observations apply when the field of military operations is restricted to that which primarily concerns the naval branch of the military profession. No fundamental difference in the solution of problems is introduced thereby. The only variations in the application of the Fundamental Military Principle are those due to the fact that the sea provides the theater of naval operations with distinctive characteristics (see page 62).

The Approach to the Solution

Studies of the subject indicate that the successful attainment of an assigned military objective involves the application of mental effort in four distinct steps (see page 3), in fixed sequence, as follows:

In the chapters which follow, the fundamental procedure distinctive of each of these steps will be treated separately and in the sequence shown. The sequence of the steps is fixed because of the consequential nature of the relationship among the procedures distinctive of the several steps. The complete solution of a problem involves, necessarily, all four steps. Each step deals with a distinctive type of problem, or problems, pertaining to an aspect of the comprehensive problem whose solution requires all four steps. No step after the first can properly be undertaken unless the included problems involved in the preceding steps have been solved.

It does not follow that the completion of one step necessarily requires that the next step be undertaken immediately. It will be seen, for instance, that the first two steps are concerned with planning, the latter two more especially with execution. It is not always necessary that a plan be executed; it may be drawn up as a precautionary measure.

It is possible, therefore, that the first step only may be taken; i.e., that the procedure for the attainment of a particular assigned objective may be determined for the sole purpose of making provision against a contingency, at that particular time merely an obscure probability. Or, as may frequently be the case during peace, the procedure may terminate, for the time being, with the completion of the second step. In such cases, certain of the necessary military operations are worked out in the desired detail as a provision against future possibilities, are listed, and filed for reference as needed.

Parts II and III, which follow, deal primarily with the solution of those problems of the naval commander which require familiarity with the entire process, i.e., all of the four steps given above.

For simplicity of presentation, the procedure is described throughout from the mental standpoint of the same commander. The arrangement of subject matter conforms to this basis. The several types of problems, classified according to the source of the incentive (page 79), are discussed in connection with the appropriate step. When a problem typical of a previous step arises during the process, the sequence of steps is interrupted thereby, but is resumed by a mental return, on the part of the commander, to the proper earlier step.

The First Step

The mental procedure distinctive of the first step (more fully discussed in Chapter VI) deals with the usual case where a commander becomes acquainted with the nature of his assigned objective through receipt of a directive from his immediate superior, ordinarily in the form of an assigned task or assigned tasks. In the discussion of the first step, this most likely type of problem is chosen for description, i.e., the one where the motivating task (see page 80) comes directly from the immediate superior.

For purposes of reference, this problem may conveniently be termed a basic problem. In such a case the original situation which gives character to the problem may be similarly referred to as the basic situation. The full solution of a basic problem always involves a basic estimate of the situation, a basic Decision, a basic plan of operations, and one or more basic directives. It may, as will be shown, also require certain additional directives.

The military Estimate of the Situation, based on the natural mental processes (pages 19-20 and 43), is introduced in the first step. The reason for making such an Estimate is to provide a basis for a plan to accomplish the assigned task. The Estimate constitutes a systematic procedure for selection of a correct objective (or objectives), suitable to the appropriate effect desired, feasible of attainment, and acceptable as to the consequences involved in its achievement. The selection of such an objective or objectives involves, incidentally (see page 44), the determination, in the proper detail, of the action required.

This estimate procedure is founded on the Fundamental Military Principle (page 41). The procedure is the same as previously indicated for the correct selection of objectives (Section II of Chapter IV).

On the basis of a summary of the situation, a recognition of the incentive, and an appreciation of the assigned objective(s) (page 79), the estimate of a basic problem enables the commander to obtain, first, an understanding of (page 43) the appropriate effect desired. As a result of this procedure, he can then correctly formulate his mission (discussed hereinafter).

For the further understanding of all details pertaining to the situation (page 43), the estimate next determines relative fighting strength through a survey of the means available and opposed, as influenced by the characteristics of the theater.

With the basis for solution of the problem thus established, the actual solution (page 44), conforming to the system indicated in the Fundamental Military Principle, starts with consideration of pertinent methods of procedure, as tentative solutions of the problem. These take the form of military operations, each denominated a course of action (discussed in detail hereinafter). Each such course embodies, specifically or inferentially, an objective to be achieved for the attainment of the appropriate effect desired. Each course also indicates, in proper detail, the action to be taken. Every pertinent course of action is tested to determine whether it meets the requirements of suitability as to the appropriate effect desired, of feasibility on the basis of relative fighting strength, and of acceptability with respect to the consequences as to costs.

Enemy courses of action are subjected to the same treatment.

Each course of action which passes the tests is compared with each retained enemy course, after which those courses of action not rejected on this basis are compared with each other. The best is then selected and embodied in the Decision.

The Decision, accordingly, expresses a general plan of action (or provides a basis therefor), including the commander's general objective (page 49) for the attainment of the assigned objective. The Decision also indicates, in proper detail, the action to be taken.

The estimate procedure is applicable not only to the problem of the first step, viewed as a whole, but also to the numerous included problems. These present themselves during the procedure of solution, and call for "estimates within the estimate".

For example, the proper nature of the objective embodied in the assigned task (discussed hereinafter), if not clear in the directive received, may be determined by the use of the natural mental processes. This is done through the application of the Fundamental Military Principle, as previously described (page 52).

Similarly, the solution of the included problems as to the salient features of the operations involved (correct physical objectives, etc.) can be arrived at through the same processes. The procedure is that indicated previously (in Section III of Chapter IV).

The estimate procedure may, however, be somewhat varied, as to details, in accordance with the nature of the problem. Such adaptation is applicable, for example, as to the special features which distinguish certain types of strategical and tactical problems.

Every military situation has both strategical and tactical aspects (see discussion of strategy and tactics, pages 9 and 10). The character of the effort to be exerted at a particular time, and the nature of the objectives to be attained, may be governed chiefly by strategical, or chiefly by tactical, considerations. This fact may affect details in the estimate of the situation, e.g., as to the weight to be given various factors.

The essential difference between strategy and tactics has been shown to lie in the end in view. It follows, then, that estimates of broad strategical situations and of localized tactical situations tend to differ from each other. The former lead to decisions as to such matters, among others, as whether a battle shall be fought. The latter lead to decisions, among others, as to the comprehensive tactical methods to be followed in furtherance of strategical aims. Certain distinctions of method as to such estimates are noted hereinafter with respect to the analysis of fighting strength and with reference to courses of action.

Tasks. The assignment of tasks to subordinates is an essential function of the chain of command, applicable to all of the echelons of command, from the highest to the lowest (page 12). On the lowest echelons, such as that of a gun's crew or a fireroom watch, operations thus prescribed involve numerous small specialized tasks, each requiring the performance of a simplified routine by a few trained men. Although earlier training in the performance of such tasks is calculated to remove the necessity of solving the problems of the lowest echelons in the four studied steps stated above, it is only when the same methods of logical thought have previously been applied to the solution of these problems that this state of affairs can be brought about.

Properly conceived, each assigned task indicates, either specifically or inferentially, an objective (or objectives). The relationships existing among the echelons of command, with reference to objectives, have previously been noted. (See page 48.) These relationships, because a correctly conceived task specifies or infers an objective, are equally applicable as to such tasks.

The manner of expressing tasks calls for special comment (see also page 53, as to expressing objectives).

The commander may find in the expression of his task a statement, only, of the action required. For example, the order "Proceed toward the enemy battle line" involves movement, indicating merely a change in relative position. No provision appears as to a future condition or state of affairs.

Again, the task may be expressed as an order to "Attack the enemy battle line." In this case, the enemy battle line is the physical objective, but no specific future condition to result from the attack is indicated. Here the action and the physical objective are given, but the objective is left to be inferred.

If the commander can ascertain, from the directives he receives, his task expressed in terms of accomplishment, he may be able to visualize the action, the physical objective, and the condition to be created. The order "Destroy the enemy battleship" (indicating, as the objective, "the destruction of the enemy battleship"), results, when successfully completed, in a new condition which is the objective of the action against the physical objective.

Accordingly, a task expressed in such terms of accomplishment conveys precise information as to the objective; yet such an expression of the task does not prevent freedom of action, with opportunity for exercise of initiative. The commander who is assigned such a task can clearly visualize the results demanded of him, and may feel at liberty to employ any one or all of the methods at his disposal.

However, it is not always possible or even desirable to express tasks in terms of accomplishment.

For example, where the future situation cannot be adequately visualized, either because of the doubtful values of certain factors or because of possible changes in circumstances, it may be impracticable to assign a definite task in terms of accomplishment.

Under such conditions, and sometimes for other proper reasons, it may be desirable to afford a trusted and competent subordinate a corresponding measure of freedom of action. In such a case, the indication of the commander's general objective for his entire force, together with a directive for action along a certain general line, without prescription of a definite objective, may be especially appropriate to the situation. Such is the frequent usage in the issue, for example, of directives of the type known as letters of instruction (Chapter VIII).

Again, where immediate response is desired, and where the objective may be understood by implication, the task may be better expressed in terms of action, rather than of accomplishment. This is frequently the case where the task is assigned by word of mouth, by memorandum, or by signal. In the last-named instance, the signal, when it constitutes a command fully understood by previous usage or experience, may convey a practically instantaneous comprehension of the objective. In many such instances, however, an inferred objective will require more analysis.

The expression of the task in terms of action is frequently desirable, more especially during an engagement, when tactical considerations are uppermost. Under such circumstances, two or more objectives may be suitable to the appropriate effect desired, but their degree of suitability, and the influence of the factors pertaining to feasibility and acceptability, may vary rapidly with the course of events. In such conditions, an order such as "Attack" without indicating a specific physical objective, may be best calculated to attain desired results, for the reason, more especially, that it affords the subordinate a proper freedom of action.

In many cases, the instructions received by a commander will set forth more than one task, often of varying importance. The proper bearing of such a double or multiple task upon his future action is set forth, together with other relevant matters, in the discussion of the mission, which follows.

On occasion, a higher commander, in assigning a task, may elect to specify, also, the course of action to be pursued by a subordinate for the attainment of the assigned objective: for example—