Katana VentraIP

Maneuver warfare

Maneuver warfare, or manoeuvre warfare, is a military strategy which emphasizes movement, initiative and surprise to achieve a position of advantage. Maneuver seeks to inflict losses indirectly by envelopment, encirclement and disruption, while minimizing the need to engage in frontal combat. In contrast to attrition warfare where strength tends to be applied against strength, maneuver warfare attempts to apply strength against weakness in order to accomplish the mission.[1]

Maneuver warfare, the use of initiative, originality and the unexpected, combined with a ruthless determination to succeed,[1] seeks to avoid opponents' strengths while exploiting their weaknesses and attacking their critical vulnerabilities and is the conceptual opposite of attrition warfare. Rather than seeking victory by applying superior force and mass to achieve physical destruction, maneuver uses preemption, deception, dislocation, and disruption to destroy the enemy's will and ability to fight.[2]


Historically, maneuver warfare was stressed by small militaries, more cohesive, better trained, or more technologically advanced than attrition warfare counterparts. The term "tactical maneuver" is used by maneuver warfare theorists to refer to movement by forces to gain "advantageous position relative to the enemy," as opposed to its use in the phrase "maneuver warfare."[3]


The idea of using rapid movement to keep an enemy off balance is as old as war itself.[4] However, advanced technology, such as the development of cavalry and mechanized vehicles, has led to an increased interest in the concepts of maneuver warfare and in its role on modern battlefields.

Tempo: as illustrated by OODA loop.

John Boyd's

('focal point'): the center of effort, or striking the enemy at the right place at the right time. According to van Creveld, ideally, a spot that is both vital and weakly defended.

Schwerpunkt

Surprise: Leaving the enemy unable to counter an action is central to any maneuver, and may be achieved by their remaining unaware for as long as possible

: the use of multiple means by which to attack the enemy creates an opportunity cost to any reaction. Should the enemy counter against one form of attack, they may leave themselves vulnerable to another. Additionally, different forms of attack may support each other through concurrent action (ex: Infantry supporting armor in such a way that the infantry has more available firepower, and the armor has protection from ambush)

Combined arms

Flexibility: a military must be well rounded, self-contained and redundant. By maintaining different avenues of attack, either in method, movement, or any other factor, alternatives are always available, and opportunities can always be seized

Decentralized command: rapidly changing situations may outpace the orders of a centralized command, leaving personnel with instructions that no longer apply. Lower levels of command must understand overall intent so as to adapt to a changing environment.

Although most battles between established armies have historically been fought based on attrition warfare strategies, many military doctrines and cultures are based on replete historical examples of maneuver warfare.


The view on attrition warfare involves moving masses of men and materiel against enemy strongpoints, with the emphasis on the destruction of the enemy's physical assets, success as measured by enemy combatants killed, equipment and infrastructure destroyed, and territory taken or occupied. Attrition warfare tends to use rigidly-centralized command structures that require little or no creativity or initiative from lower-level leadership (also called top-down or "command push" tactics).


Conventional warfare doctrine identifies a spectrum with attrition warfare and maneuver warfare on opposite ends. In attrition warfare, the enemy is seen as a collection of targets to be found and destroyed. It exploits maneuver to bring to bear firepower to destroy enemy forces. Maneuver warfare, on the other hand, exploits firepower and attrition on key elements of opposing forces.


Maneuver warfare suggest that strategic movement can bring the defeat of an opposing force more efficiently than simply contacting and destroying enemy forces until they can no longer fight. Instead, in maneuver warfare, the destruction of certain enemy targets, such as command and control centers, logistical bases, or fire support assets, is combined with isolation of enemy forces and the exploitation by movement of enemy weaknesses.


Bypassing and cutting off enemy strongpoints often results in the collapse of that strongpoint even where the physical damage is minimal, such as the Maginot Line. Firepower, primarily used to destroy as many enemy forces as possible in attrition warfare, is used to suppress or destroy enemy positions at breakthrough points during maneuver warfare. Infiltration tactics, conventionally or with special forces, may be used extensively to cause chaos and confusion behind enemy lines.


The retired officer and military theory author Robert Leonhard summarizes maneuver warfare theory as "preempt, dislocate, and disrupt" the enemy as alternatives to the destruction of enemy mass through attrition warfare.


Since tempo and initiative are so critical to the success of maneuver warfare, command structures tend to be more decentralized with more tactical freedom given to lower-level unit leaders. Decentralized command structures allows "on the ground" unit leaders but still works within the guidelines of the commander's overall vision, to exploit enemy weaknesses as they become evident, which is also called "recon-pull" tactics or directive control.[5]


The war theorist Martin van Creveld identifies six main elements of maneuver warfare:[6]

Charge

Decision cycle

Defeat in detail

Flanking maneuver

Historical examples of flanking maneuvers

OODA loop

Pincer movement

Russian military deception

Operational manoeuvre group

. Patterns of Conflict. 1986.

Boyd, John

. Race to the Swift: Thoughts on Twenty-First Century Warfare. Brassey's, 2000.

Simpkin, Richard E

in association with John Erickson Deep Battle: The Brainchild of Marshal Tukhachevskii, London, Brassey's Defence, 1987. ISBN 0-08-031193-8

Richard Simpkin

Maneuver Warfare Handbook. 1985. Westview Special Studies in Military Affairs. Westview Press Inc. Boulder, CO.

Lind, William S.

.The Art of Maneuver: Maneuver-Warfare Theory and Air-Land Battle. 1991. Presidio Press. Novato, CA.

Leonhard, Robert

MajGen Ray Smith, USMC (ret.) and (1 August 2003). "Implications from Iraqi Freedom for the Marine Corps". Westwrite. Archived from the original on 27 September 2007. Retrieved 19 May 2007. The first war fought under the new doctrine of Maneuver Warfare, with several observations and suggestions for future change.

Bing West