Читать книгу Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Operations - Department of the Army Headquarters - Страница 12

Table of Contents

a. The military strategy of small wars is more directly associated with the political strategy of the campaign than is the case in major operations. In the latter case, war is undertaken only as a last resort after all diplomatic means of adjusting differences have failed and the military commander’s objective ordinarily becomes the enemy’s armed forces.

J. Diplomatic agencies usually conduct negotiations with a view to arriving at a peaceful solution of the problem on a basis compatible with both national honor and treaty stipulations. Although the outcome of such negotiations often results in a friendly settlement, the military forces should be prepared for the possibility of an unfavorable termination of the proceedings. The mobilization of armed forces constitutes a highly effective weapon for forcing the opponent to accede to national demands without resort to war. When a time limit for peaceful settlement is prescribed by ultimatum the military-naval forces must be prepared to initiate operations upon expiration of the time limit.

c. In small wars, either diplomacy has not been exhausted or the party that opposes the settlement of the political question cannot be reached diplomatically. Small war situations are usually a phase of, or an operation taking place concurrently with, diplomatic effort. The political authorities do not relinquish active participation in the negotions and they ordinarily continue to exert considerable influence on the military campaign. The military leader in such operations thus finds himself limited to certain lines of action as to the strategy and even as to the tactics of the campaign. This feature has been so marked in past operations, that marines have been referred to as State Department Troops in small wars. In certain cases of this kind the State Department has even dictated the size of the force to be sent to the theater of operations. The State Department materially influences the strategy and tactics by orders and instructions which are promulgated through the Navy Department or through diplomatic representatives.

d. State Department officials represent the Government in foreign countries. The force generally nearest at hand to back up the authority of these agents is the Navy. In such operations the Navy is performing its normal function, and has, as a component part of its organization, the Fleet Marine Force, organized, equipped, and trained to perform duty of this nature. After the Force has landed, the commander afloat generally influences the operations only to the extent necessary to insure their control and direction in accordance with the policy of the instructions that he has received from higher authority. He supports and cooperates with the Force, to the limit of his ability. In the latter stages of the operation the local naval commander may relinquish practically all control in order to carry out routine duties elsewhere. In such case the general operations plan is directed by, or through, the office of the Naval Operations in Washington.

e. Wars of intervention have two classifications; intervention in the internal, or intervention in the external affairs of another state. Intervention in the internal affairs of a state may be undertaken to restore order, to sustain governmental authority, to obtain redress, or to enforce the fulfilment of obligations binding between the two states. Intervention in the external affairs of a state may be the result of a treaty which authorizes one state to aid another as a matter of political expediency, to a void, more serious consequences when the interests of other states are involved, or to gain certain advantages not obtainable otherwise. It may be simply an intervention to enforce certain opinions or to propagate certain doctrines, principles, or standards. For example, in these days when pernicious propaganda is employed to spread revolutionary doctrines, it is conceivable that the United States might intervene to prevent the development of political disaffection which threatens the overthrow of a friendly state and indirectly influences our own security.