1
THE FIVE BASIC MILITARY STRATEGIES
Liddle Hart – “The art of distributing and applying military means to fulfill the ends of policy”
The five basic military strategies and concepts of employment are fundamental to a theory of military
strategy as they, along with the two objects of strategy (physically disarming the adversary or
psychological diminishing his resolve to resist) provide the foundation for a strategy framework.
1. Extermination (Complete Annihilation)
A plan that describes how military means or concept of employment are used to achieve the
extirpation (completely destroy) of hated people or in a desired territory.
(a)Extreme Version (Absolute Extermination)
(b) Less Extreme Version (Selective Extermination)
2. Exhaustion (Tiredness)
Hans Delbruck - “A strategy emphasizing the gradual and often indirect erosion of the enemy's
military power and will to resist.”
Dislocation- destroy will to fight by breaking cohesion, demoralize, panic, fear – Indirect
Eg of Dislocation – Nazi against Belgium, Holland during WWII – 1940 – Liddell Hart
3. Annihilation (destroy capability and will to fight)
Sets out to attack the armed forces and destroy them and to impose the will of the conqueror on the
conquered.
(a) Annihilation through attrition (capability fight and physical direct)
(b) Annihilation through dislocation (will to fight and psychological indirect)
4. Intimidation (compellence or deterrence from some action by use of threat or force)
(a) Compellence (coerce/force en to do sth/ give up pol obj by threat or use of force)
(b) Deterrence (dissuade to gain pol obj by threat or use of force)
5. Subversion (undermining or detachment of the loyalty of pol and social group)
Foundation of three types of warfare
(a) Revolutionary warfare
(b) Coup d’etat
(c) Guerilla warfare
2
THE STRATEGY OF EXTERMINATION (total eradication/elimination)
1. “A plan that describes how military means and concepts of employment are used to
achieve the extirpation (destroy completely) of a group of people.
2. It is considered amoral in modern times, and is contrary to international law.
3. The strategy of extermination has a long, ugly history in warfare although it is still used
in contemporary times.
4. It takes little in the way of innovation or skill to create and implement other than the
decision and justification to kill everyone and take what’s left.
5. In ancient times, the strategy of extermination was used either
a. To take territory and its associated resources,
b. To eradicate a hated enemy,
c. Or in a two part – Strategy of Conquest(Extermination – Intimidation - Genkhis)
6. In the first two cases, two versions of the strategy were employed.
a. Extreme version (“absolute extermination”), Entire population occupying a
desired territory or comprising a hated group was killed, to include all men, women
and children.
b. Less extreme version (“selective extermination”), Men were killed, but the
women and children were either sold into slavery or assimilated, according to the
tradition of the period.
(Both of these versions of extermination can be found in the Bible, with God, perhaps shocking to
some, attributed as the source of the strategy of extermination.)
Ex.
Strategy applied by Romans against Carthage in Punic War (146 – 264 BC)
Hitler against Jews in II World War era
7. In third case, Extermination was coupled with intimidation in sequential manner, two phased
approach – "Extermination-Intimidation" to support an overarching strategy of intimidation illustrating
how basic mili strategy can be also used as sub strategy.
8. Ex. Genkhis khan used this strategy to conquer Central Asia and china.
3
THE STRATEGY OF EXHAUSTION
“A strategy emphasizing the gradual and often indirect erosion of the enemy's military
power and will to resist without direct confrontation.”
According to Delbruck, a German historian at modern times: Strategy of EXHAUSTION consists
of two pole- BATTLE AND MANEUVER (Physical Pole).
The strategy of exhaustion is sometimes referred to as the Fabian strategy, The Fabian
strategy is a military strategy where pitched battles and frontal assaults are avoided in favor
of wearing down an opponent through a war of attrition and indirection.
This strategy derives its name from Quintus Fabius Maximus Verrucosus, the dictator of the Roman
Republic given the task of defeating the great Carthaginian general Hannibal in
southern Italy during the Second Punic War (218–202 BC).
Utility of Strategy of Exhaustion
1. It is used when a nation is unable or unwilling to apply the force necessary to achieve
its objectives through annihilation of the enemy but risks high casualties and materiel
losses and a protracted war,
2. The strategy of exhaustion is a favorite of the weaker sides in conflict, as it does not
require a preponderance (great number) of force.
3. Net assessment of force. The decision to use a strategy of exhaustion should be driven
by an accurate net assessment of the forces available to both sides within the context of the geo-
strategic situation and the desired political ends.
4. Country with lack of resources. The decision It is a strategy well suited to a country
outmatched in the means of war against an invading or occupying enemy.
5. Second resort to Annihilation. Oldest in warfare and second resort to
Annihilation
6. Survival interest are at stake. It is typically more effective when a country’s survival
interests are at stake, as the entire population can be mobilized in either combat or supporting
roles, contributing to the resistance.
4
Application of strategy at all three levels.
1. Wu-Tzu tactics at tactical level - The strategy of exhaustion is one of the oldest in
warfare. Wu-Tzu, one of the great ancient Chinese masters of strategy, described its use at
the tactical level of war through the conduct of a series of hit-and run raids:
2. Clausewitz theory at operational level
At the operational level, Clausewitz saw exhaustion as a way to turn the tide of a
war, reducing a stronger side to one of relative weakness.
He viewed the strategy of exhaustion as initially useful while on the defensive, as a
way to diminish the enemy’s means and will to resist, while also buying time until an
offensive could be mounted. He advocated
3. Clausewitz at Strategic level. He also considered it in certain situations at the
strategic level, such as DPW -3
a) When the defeat of an enemy’s army was not possible,
b) Political aims did not justify the expenditure of force, or
c) To Support a diplomatic strategy (such as breaking up an enemy alliance or building
one’s own).
The key was to make the war more costly to the enemy. Clausewitz postulated that this
could be done in three ways: There are three other methods directly aimed at increasing the
enemy's expenditure of effort. - IPW-3
a) The first - Invasion simply to cause general damage.
b) The second - Give priority to operations that increase the enemy's suffering.
c) The third, and most important - Wear down the enemy.
EX. Roman against Carthage during holy war
Nepal in II Nepal Tibet War (Battle of Betrawati) 1991
THE STRATEGY OF ANNIHILATION
Acc to Hans Delbrück Strategy of annihilation as a strategy “Which sets out to attack the armed
forces and destroy them and to impose the will of the conqueror on the conquered.
According to Delbruck: Strategy of strategy of ANNIHILATION consists of single pole – BATTLE
(PSYCHOLOGICAL POLE)
5
Delbrück’s definition, largely influenced by Clausewitz, pointed out the dual nature of the strategy
of annihilation, consisting of both physical and psychological objects. Attacking the en
Capability and will to fight.
It does not necessarily require absolute superiority at the strategic level of war but requires at
least local superiority at the operational and tactical levels of war when accomplished through
attrition.
Diagram
There are two approaches to the strategy of annihilation
ATTRITION DISLOCATION
1. Aimed at either the PHYSICAL object B.H. Liddell Hart and John Boyd were
2. Focused at en physical CAPABILITY to advocates of this approach.
fight
1. Aimed at the PSYCHOLOGICAL object
3. Physically killing troops and destroying
(moral, mental and physical cohesion)
eqpt
2. Focused at en WILL to fight by breaking
4. Direct approach to en without wasting
cohesion of effort
time and resources.
3. Instilling fear and panic to break the
cohesion of the enemy fighting force.
Ex, Americal civil War 1861 to 1865
4. Indirect approach, attacking along a line of
Gen Grant set this strategy to defeat two
least expectation, surprising and confusing
principle army of Confederacy in Northern
the enemy
Virginia (Lee) and Tennessee (Johnson)
Ex. German Tank posture in II WW
“the heart of Georgia”.
Outfitted tank with siren "horns of jerico "
and diver bomber install fear on Allied
THE STRATEGY OF INTIMIDATION
1. The strategy of intimidation is defined as the COMPELLENCE OF OR DETERRENCE from
some action by the threat or violence.”
2. The strategy of intimidation is most effective when it is used to take an objective intact
without fighting.
3. Sometimes the strategy of intimidation requires a demonstration of physical power to achieve
credibility in the mind of the enemy. This demonstration can range from a military parade,
tactical battlefield success, to the test.
4. In this way, a strategy of extermination, exhaustion, or annihilation can be linked to the
strategy of intimidation through the establishment of a credible threat of more damage to
6
come.
TWO VERSION OF THE STRATEGY OF INTIMIDATION
SN COMPELLENCE DETERRENCE
1 Coined by Thomas Schelling Seeks to intimidate an enemy into
Seeks to intimidate an en giving up a inaction from seeking a political
political object, preferably without objective, through the threat or use
a fight, based upon threat of action i.e of force
physical force
2 Seeks to coerce/force an en to do Seeks to dissuade en from doing
something something
3 May involve partial use of force to be Use of force is considered as failure of
effective. strategy.
Ex German in WWII 1950 against Denmark North Korea nuclear test to show
Landed troops surrounding Denmark deterrence against US and periphery
Propaganda by leaflets and aircraft – 6 Nuclear test including hydrogen
flying display of poer bomb test with aerial distance of
Negation held in Denmark compelled 50KM
King to surrender
Similarly, India and Pakistan ICBM test
2 Act of terrorism, Defn of terrorism – US and S. Korea Joint exercise
deliberate and systematic murder to
achieve pol ends
9/11 attack
THE STRATEGY OF SUBVERSION
According to Blackstone: It is defined as “undermining or detachment of loyalties of
significant political or social group within the victimized stage and their transference on
ideal condition, to the symbols and institution of aggressor.
Advantage of this strategy
1. It is high reward – low cost strategy
2. Low cost in manpower and finance.
3. Can be utilized with limited source
7
Limitation
1. Protracted and long term strategy
2. It is implemented in covert if it is disclosed then it will be publicized by the target and
aggressor steep in international diplomatic reprobation. (severe reapprove)
3. Less effective when target is aware of it and implements a counter strategy to defend
against it.
4. Thus its difficult strategy to implement.
Application of this strategy. It provides foundation to three types of conflict.
Revolution
“Overthrow established Govt” – Oxford Govt
Primary instrument in this case of Subversion is Propaganda.
Ex. Insurgency in Nepal. Revolutionary war in SE Asia.
Coup d’etat
1. Lutwak. Infiltration of a small but critical segment of the state’s apparatus and then
displace the Govt control and its remainder.
2. Subversion of key official like bribery, blackmail.
3. Ex. . The United States was involved in coups in Iran (1953) and Iraq 1990. The coup d’état
against Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadeq was a carefully planned CIA operation,
codename TPAJAX, conducted jointly with the British Intelligence’s MI6.
Guerilla Warfare
Mil or paramilitary operation conducted by irregular, predominantly indeginious force to gain
political objective.
Subversion in first phase for political indoctrination to converse people into armed bands of
guerillas.
