Coalition Tactics On The Napoleonic Battlefield And Their Influence On Unity Of Effort

The mechanism for the operation of our military forces beyond the shores of the U.S. is the modern coalition from the grand alliance of NATO to simple bilateral relationships. Understanding the dynamics of coalition warfare is important for a U.S. Military that often finds itself operating as the dominant member of any coalition it joins. One of the major considerations listed in the portion of joint doctrine which addresses multinational coalitions is the concept of unity of effort Current U.S. Army doctrine has long recognized the importance of unity of command. However, the latest drafts of the new Army keystone doctrine publication, FM 100-5, have upgraded the principle of unity of command to unity of effort. The efficacy of this change recognizes the realities of operations in a world of coalitions, trans-governmental agencies, and private organizations all which find themselves often in league with our military as we strive to reach common (not always strictly military) objectives. This monograph will examine two historical case studies from the Napoleonic Wars (1792-1815) in order to explore the relationship between tactical and doctrinal differences between different members of the same coalition. The first case study examines the coalition army of Marshal Suvorov at the battles of the Trebbia and Novi in 1799. The second example will move forward in time to the Russo-Prussian army of the spring of 1813 and its performance at the battles of Lützen and Bautzen. Although history does not provide us with exact recipes for implementing complex solutions in a complex world, it does provide a means to understand the dynamics of human behavior on a vast scale. The Napoleonic period represents a veritable laboratory of coalition warfare and provides a means of applying the lessons of a historical period to understanding the dynamics of coalitions.

The mechanism for the operation of our military forces beyond the shores of the United States is the modern coalition from the grand alliance of NATO to simple bilateral relationships. Understanding the dynamics of coalition warfare is important for a United States Military that often finds itself operating as the dominant member of any coalition it joins. One of the major considerations listed in the portion of joint doctrine which addresses multinational coalitions is the concept of unity of effort. Current U.S. Army doctrine has long recognized the importance of unity of command. However, the latest drafts of the new Army keystone doctrine publication, FM 100-5, have upgraded the principle of unity of command to unity of effort. The efficacy of this change recognizes the realities of operations in a world of coalitions, transgovernmental agencies, and private organizations all which find themselves often in league with our military as we strive to reach common (not always strictly military) objective. This monograph will examine two historical case studies from the Napoleonic Wars (1792-1815) in order to explore the relationship between tactical and doctrinal differences between different members of the same coalition. Specifically the effect of these differences on the unity of effort, both military and political, will be addressed. The first case study examines the coalition army of Marshal Suvorov at the battles of the Trebbia and Novi in 1799. The second example will move forward in time to the Russo-Prussian army of the spring of 1813 and its performance at the battles of Lutzen and Bautzen. Although history does not provide us with exact recipes for implementing complex solutions in a complex world, it does provide a means to understand the dynamics of human behavior on a vast scale.

This carefully researched book provides an operational level analysis of European warfare from 1792 to 1815 that includes the tactics, operations, and strategy of major conflicts of the time. 2015 marks the 200th anniversary of the famous Waterloo campaign, sparking a renewed interest in Napoleon's prowess as a military leader and acumen as a strategist. This in-depth analysis scrutinizes the complex campaigns and strategies of the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars, looking at how military genius—referred to in the book as "operational art"—shaded the panorama of 18th-century warfare. Drawing upon familiar battles as well as lesser-known campaigns, this sweeping reference uses 20th-century military theory to explain 19th-century events. Author John T. Kuehn discusses joint warfare and strategy found in the military movements of Marshal Suvorov in Italy and Switzerland in 1799; the early and later campaigns of Napoleon and Nelson; and the Duke of Wellington's campaigns in Spain, Portugal, and Belgium. The work also includes an entire chapter on theory and history of operational art spanning a variety of perspectives—from theorist Carl von Clausewitz to American air force pilot John Boyd. This book is a must-have for any military history collection.

The purpose of this monograph is to search for, identify, and discuss the emergence of elements of operational art during the Napoleonic wars. James Schneider has tied the emergence of operational art to the technological advances of the industrial revolution; specifically the rifled musket, steam locomotive, and instantaneous communications theoretically possible with telegraph. Schneider lists eight "key attributes" that are used in this monograph as elements of operational art. These elements are: a distributed operation, distributed campaign, continuous logistics, instantaneous command and control, operationally durable formations, operational vision, a distributed enemy, and distributed deployment...This monograph uses Schneider’s elements as the criteria to establish the presence or absence of operational art in the 1813 campaign in Germany. The 1813 German campaign is examined from the viewpoint of Napoleon’s adversaries; principally the Prussians, Russians, and Austrians. This campaign was used because it represents Napoleonic warfare at a very high level of sophistication by both the Allies and their French opponents. Both sides were now organized along the French model with field armies, corps, and divisions as standard organizations. The armies that faced each other, while composed of some veteran troops, were mostly the result of massive conscription across all classes of society. All of the protagonists were essentially nations in arms. The complexity of this campaign, there were approximately seven field armies in Germany by the fall of 1813, lends itself well to a search for Schneider’s elements. The course of this campaign followed a pattern of attrition and exhaustion which, too, favors an operational analysis vice analysis along the lines of classical strategy.

Maritime powers dominate the planet, from the British empire of the 19th century, to the American post-World War II domination of global affairs. To a large degree their control of the globe is based on control of the seas. This book seeks to examine the strengths and weaknesses of maritime power, including specific chapters on mutiny, blockades, coalitions, piracy, expeditionary warfare, commerce raiding, and soft power operations, but with larger discussion of such sea power characteristics as sea control, sea denial, and the competition between land powers and sea powers. The conclusions will discuss how many other countries, including Russia during the Cold War and the PRC today, have or are seeking to use sea power to claim regional and then eventually global hegemony.

Recent history indicates that, in most, if not all, future military conflicts, the United States will participate as part of a coalition. Examination of successful coalitions from the past may reveal precepts which can be applied in order to successfully approach participation in future coalitions. The Battle of Leipzig in 1813 is a superb example of successful coalition operations from early 19th Century. Its detailed study and analysis has led the author to the conclusion that, different principles apply to successful prosecution of coalition operations at each level of war. Understanding and orchestrating the precepts that apply at each level will give the United States the best chance for successful prosecution of its future strategic objectives during war.