Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Dimensions of ‘Defensive Defence’

  • Chapter
Non-Offensive Defence

  • 20 Accesses

Abstract

In seeking to argue the case for military efficacy of a purely defensive posture, the advocates of ‘Just Defence’ ritually employ two principal arguments: that operationally, strategically and tactically speaking, defence is superior to attack; and that the former has gained a lasting ascendancy over the latter because of the advantages afforded by modern, advanced-technology equipment and weapons. The second of these contentions will be examined in some detail later. For the time being, we can content ourselves with the observation that whereas technological change has, it is claimed, only marginally enhanced the attacker’s capabilities, recent improvements in reconnaissance, target-acquisition and weapon accuracy, particularly over longer distances, are perceived as having brought far greater benefits to the defender. Let us first examine the professed supremacy of the defensive on the operational, strategic and tactical levels of warfare.

‘Petty geniuses attempt to hold everything; wise men hold fast to the key points. They parry great blows and scorn little accidents. There is an ancient apothegm: he who would preserve everything, preserves nothing. Therefore, always sacrifice the bagatelle and pursue the essential.’

(Frederick the Great in his Instructions For His Generals [1747])

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes and References

  1. Clausewitz, On War, p. 84.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Napoleon I of France, The Military Maxims of Napoleon (London: Greenhill, 1987 edition) p. 62.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Clausewitz, On War, p. 380.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Y. Molostov and A. Novikov, ‘High-Precision Weapons Against Tanks’, Soviet Military Review, no. 1 (1988) p. 13.

    Google Scholar 

  5. See, for example, P. Bracken, ‘Urban Sprawl and NATO Defence’, Survival (November-December 1976) pp. 254–60; FM 90–10: Military Operations in Urbanised Terrain (Washington: Army Department, 1979) pp. 1–3.

    Google Scholar 

  6. D. Gates, ‘Area Defence Concepts: The West German Debate’, Survival (July–August 1987) pp. 302–3.

    Google Scholar 

  7. See D. Gates, The British Light Infantry Arm (London: Batsford, 1987) passim.

    Google Scholar 

  8. See J. Erickson, L. Hensen and W. Schneider, Soviet Ground Forces: An Operational Assessment (London: Croom Helm, 1986) p. 43.

    Google Scholar 

  9. See, for examples, Voyenno-istoricheskiy zhurnal: no. 9 (September 1980) pp. 12–21; no. 1 (January 1987) pp. 30–6; no. 2 (February 1982) pp. 33–40; no. 11 (November 1984) pp. 59–67; and no. 4 (April 1986) pp. 52–7. Also see Soviet Military Power (Washington DC: USGPO, 1988) pp. 74–5.

    Google Scholar 

  10. See G. Sharp, The Politics of Nonviolent Action (Boston: Porter Sargent, 1973); and A. Roberts, Nations in Arms, pp. 261–7.

    Google Scholar 

  11. R. Aron, Paix et Guerre entre les Nations (Paris: Calmann-Lévy, 1966) p. 617.

    Google Scholar 

  12. See V. Mastny, The Czechs Under Nazi Rule: The Failure of National Resistance, 1939–42 (Columbia UP, 1971).

    Google Scholar 

  13. See B. Tuchman, August 1914 (London: Macmillan, 1987 edition) pp. 247–9, 307–14.

    Google Scholar 

  14. See Roberts, Nations in Arms, pp. 78–9.

    Google Scholar 

  15. D. Gates, ‘The Spanish Ulcer’: A History of the Peninsular War (London and New York, 1986); and D.W. Alexander, Rod Of Iron: French Counterinsurgency Policy in Aragon During the Peninsular War (Delaware: Scholarly Resources, 1985).

    Google Scholar 

  16. A. Boserup, ‘Two Papers On Maritime Defence’, Working Paper, no. 1 (Centre of Peace and Conflict Research, Copenhagen University, 1987).

    Google Scholar 

  17. J. Grin and L. Unterseher, ‘The Spiderweb Defence’, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, vol. 44, no. 7 (September 1988) p. 30.

    Google Scholar 

  18. H.A. Kissinger, The Troubled Partnership (New York: McGraw Hill, 1965) p. 162.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Afheldt, ‘Friedenspolitik mit militärischen Mitteln in den neunzigern Jahren’, in Sicherheitspolitik, K.D. Schwarz (ed.) (Bad Honner-Erpel, 1978) p. 647.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Afheldt, ‘New Policies’, p. 27.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Afheldt, ‘Friedenspolitik mit militärischen Mitteln’, p. 265 et seq.

    Google Scholar 

  22. See also H. Afheldt, ‘Kriegsverhütung setzt voraus, dass man in einer Krise warten kann: die Optionen einer defensiven Verteidigung’, in Krieg oder was sonst? NATO: Strategie der Unsicherheit, D. Schröder (ed.) (Manburg, 1984).

    Google Scholar 

  23. See Afheldt, ‘New Policies’, pp. 26–7; and Defensive Verteidigung (Reinbek: Rowohlt Verlag, 1983) p. 107.

    Google Scholar 

  24. See, for instance, J. de Ruiter, Reinforcement of the Conventional Defence and ‘Emerging Technologies’ (Government of the Netherlands Memorandum, June 1985) paragraph 26.

    Google Scholar 

  25. G. Bernhardt, ‘The Military Helicopter’, RUSI Journal Special Supplement (Winter 1989) p. 15.

    Google Scholar 

  26. J. Galvin, ‘A Strategy For The Future’, RUSI Journal, vol. 134, no. 3 (Autumn 1989) p. 18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. See D. Gates, British Light Infantry, p. 140.

    Google Scholar 

  28. W. W. Kaufmann, ‘Nonnuclear Deterrence’ in Alliance Security and the No-First-Use Question, J.D. Steinbruner and L.V. Sigal (eds) (Washington: Brookings, 1983) p. 73.

    Google Scholar 

  29. ‘Ogarkov Interview With Krasnaya Zvezda’, 9 May 1984, reproduced in Survival, vol. 26, no. 4 (July–August 1984) p. 186.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Also see Clausewitz, On War, pp. 184–6.

    Google Scholar 

  31. E.A. Shils and M. Janowitz, ‘Cohesion and Disintegration in the Wehrmacht in World War II’, Public Opinion Quarterly (Summer 1948) pp. 280–315.

    Google Scholar 

  32. See D. Irvine, ‘The French Discovery of Clausewitz and Napoleon’, Journal of the American Military Institute, no. 4 (1940) p. 143; and R.H. Sinnreich, ‘Strategic Implications of Doctrinal Change: A Case Analysis’, in Military Strategy in Transition, pp. 42–57.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Shils and Janowitz, ‘Cohesion and Disintegration’, p. 284.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Home, To Lose a Battle, pp. 63–4.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Shils and Janowitz, ‘Cohesion and Disintegration’, p. 289.

    Google Scholar 

  36. See Gates, British Light Infantry, p. 91.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Shils and Janowitz, ‘Cohesion and Disintegration’, p. 290.

    Google Scholar 

  38. D. Gates, ‘Area Defence Concepts’, Survival, vol. 29, no. 4 (July–August 1987) pp. 312–13.

    Google Scholar 

  39. C. Conetta and C. Knight, ‘How Low Can NATO Go?’, Defense and Disarmament Alternatives, vol. 3, no. 2 (February 1990) p. 3.

    Google Scholar 

  40. See Roberts, Nations in Arms, p. 237.

    Google Scholar 

  41. See, for example, The British Maritime League, World Trade, Military Logistics and Merchant Shipping Demand and Supply (London, June 1989); and The General Council of British Shipping, Supply and Demand For Merchant Shipping in Crisis and War (London, 1989).

    Google Scholar 

  42. Conetta and Knight, ‘How Low Can NATO Go?’, p. 3.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Quoted in J. Mendelsohn, ‘Gorbachev’s Preemptive Concession’, Arms Control Today, vol. 19, no. 2 (March 1989) p. 12. Also see A. Akhro-meyev, ‘Doktrina predotvrashcheniya voyny zashchity mira i sotsia-lizma’, Problemy mira i sotsializma, no. 12 (1987).

    Google Scholar 

  44. See Footnote 14 above and Evolyutsiya voennogo iskusstva: etaphy, tendentsii, prinstipy, F. Gayvoronskogo (ed.) (Moscow: Voenizdat, 1987).

    Google Scholar 

  45. S. Covington, The Role of the Defence in Soviet Military Thinking (Soviet Studies Research Centre, RMA Sandhurst, 1987).

    Google Scholar 

  46. E. Warner, ‘New Thinking and Old Realities in Soviet Defence Policy’, Survival, vol. 31, no. 1 (1989).

    Google Scholar 

  47. P. Kunitskiy, ‘Esli oborona prorvana’, Voenno-istoricheskiy zhurnal, no. 12 (1988).

    Google Scholar 

  48. A. Maryshev, ‘Nekotorye voprosy strategicheskoy oborony v Velikoy Otechestvennoy voyne’, Voenno-istorichekoy zhurnal, no. 6 (1986).

    Google Scholar 

  49. Akhromeyev, ‘Doktrina predotvrashcheniya …’, pp. 26–7. Also see G. Ionin, ‘Osnovy sovremennogo oboronitel’nogo boya’, Voenny Vest-nik, no. 3 (1988) pp. 19–20; and V. Kulikov, Doktrina zashchity mira i sotsializma (Moscow: Voenizdat, 1988) pp. 77–9.

    Google Scholar 

  50. A. Kokoshin and V. Larionov, ‘Kurskaya bitva v svete sovremennoy oboronitel’noy doktriny’, MEMO, no. 8 (1987); Protivostoyanie sil obshchego naznacheniya v kontekste obespecheniya strategicheskoy stabil’nosti’, MEMO, no. 6 (1988).

    Google Scholar 

  51. Akhromeyev, ‘Doktrina predotvrashcheniya …’; M. Gareev, ‘Soviet Military Doctrine: Current and Future Developments’, RUSI Journal, vol. 133, no. 4 (1988).

    Google Scholar 

  52. Napoleon, Maxims, p. 64.

    Google Scholar 

  53. H. Afheldt, Verteidigung und Frieden: Politik mit militärischen Mitteln (Munich: DTV, 1976) p. 238.

    Google Scholar 

  54. First Duke of Wellington, Dispatches of Field Marshall The Duke of Wellington, Col. Gurwood (ed.) (London, 1834–9) vol. VI, pp. 493–4.

    Google Scholar 

  55. See Home, To Lose a Battle, pp. 622–7.

    Google Scholar 

  56. See, for example, G. Herolf, ‘New Technology Favours Defense’, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, vol. 44, no. 7 (September 1988) pp. 42–4.

    Google Scholar 

  57. See, for instance, Gates, British Light Infantry.

    Google Scholar 

  58. See, for example I. Vorobyev, ‘Novoye oruzhiye i printsipy taktiki’, Sovetskoy Voennoye obozreniye, no. 2 (February 1987), 18.

    Google Scholar 

  59. The Guardian, 16 February 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  60. The Croker Papers, L.J. Jennings (ed.) (London, 1884) vol. III, p. 276.

    Google Scholar 

  61. See, for instance, Vorobyev, ‘Novoye oruzhiye i printsipy taktiki’, p. 18.

    Google Scholar 

  62. See F. Barnaby, The Automated Battlefield (London: Sidgwick and Jackson, 1986) especially pp. 41–4, 155, 163.

    Google Scholar 

  63. See S.J. Flanagan, NATO’s Conventional Defences (London: Mac-millan/IISS, 1988) pp. 72–3.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  64. ESECS, Strengthening Conventional Deterrence, pp. 230–3.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Y. Kardashevskiy, Voyenniy Vestnik, no. 7 (July 1988) p. 64.

    Google Scholar 

  66. A. Cockbum, The Threat: Inside The Soviet Military Machine (New York: Random House, 1983) p. 109.

    Google Scholar 

  67. L. Martin, ‘Theatre Nuclear Weapons and Europe’, Survival, vol. 14, no. 4 (November–December 1974) p. 272.

    Google Scholar 

  68. See Bamaby, The Automated Battlefield, pp. 7, 41.

    Google Scholar 

  69. See, for example, L. Spector, The Undeclared Bomb (London: Ballinger/Carnegie Endowment For International Peace, 1988); and F. Bamaby, The Nuclear Arms Race In The Middle East (London: Tauris, 1989).

    Google Scholar 

  70. See, for example, Home, To Lose a Battle, pp. 113–16.

    Google Scholar 

  71. See J. Connell, The New Maginot Line (London: Seeker and Warburg, 1986).

    Google Scholar 

  72. Barnaby, Automated Battlefield, p. 166.

    Google Scholar 

  73. See The Conventional Defense Of Europe: New Technologies and New Strategies, A.J. Pierre (ed.) (New York: Council On Foreign Relations, 1986) p. 162.

    Google Scholar 

  74. See Home, To Lose a Battle, pp. 60–2.

    Google Scholar 

  75. See B. Tuchman, August 1914, pp. 163–7, 189–91; Home, To Lose a Battle, pp. 255–9.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Clausewitz, On War, pp. 119–21.

    Google Scholar 

  77. See, for instance, T. Nash, ‘Guns And Missiles For Air Defence’, Armed Forces, vol. 6, no. 12 (1987) p. 556.

    Google Scholar 

  78. See G.W. Goodman, ‘New Army IR-Guided Missile’, Armed Forces Journal International (May 1989) p. 74.

    Google Scholar 

  79. S.L. Canby, ‘The Operational Limits Of Emerging Technology’, Inter-national Defense Review, vol. 8, no. 6 (1985) pp. 875–80; CJ. Dick, ‘Soviet Responses To Emerging Technology Weapons And New Defensive Concepts’, in Emerging Technologies And Military Doctrine, F. Barnaby and M. ter Borg (eds) (London: Macmillan, 1986); and J. Connell, The New Maginot Line.

    Google Scholar 

  80. F. Barnaby, Automated Battlefield, p. 74.

    Google Scholar 

  81. V.G. Reznichenko, Taktika (Moscow: Voyenizdat, 1987) p. 206.

    Google Scholar 

  82. D.T. Yazov, ‘Soviet Military Doctrine’, in RUSIAnd Brassey’s Defence Yearbook (London: Brassey’s, 1990) pp. 28–32.

    Google Scholar 

  83. P.G. Lushev, ‘Soviet And Warsaw Pact Goals And Developments’, RUSI Journal, vol. 134, no. 3 (Autumn 1989) p. 5.

    Google Scholar 

  84. See D. Gates, ‘Non-Offensive Defence: A Strategic Contradiction?’, Occasional Paper No 29 (London: Institute for European Defence and Strategic Studies, 1987) pp. 46–7.

    Google Scholar 

  85. See D. Gates, ‘The US Army’s Light Divisions: Power Projection and Strategic Mobility’, Occasional Paper, vol. 3, no. 1 (Georgia: Institute for the Study of Geopolitics, Valdosta State University, 1990).

    Google Scholar 

  86. See K. Hunt, ‘The Alliance And Europe: Part II: Defence With Fewer Men’, Adelphi Paper No. 98 (London: IISS, 1973) p. 37.

    Google Scholar 

  87. See, for example, The Guardian, 1 August 1989, p. 32.

    Google Scholar 

  88. See, for instance, C. Chapman and J. Speight, ‘Problems Of Monitored Storage’, Bulletin Of The Council For Arms Control, no. 47 (December 1989) pp. 5–6.

    Google Scholar 

  89. For a range of views see: W. Sombart, Krieg und Kapitalismus (Munich, 1913); J. Nef, War And Human Progress (London, 1950); H. de

    Google Scholar 

  90. Haan, ‘Military Expenditure And Economic Growth’, in The Economics Of Military Expenditure: Military Expenditures, Economic Growth And Fluctuations, C. Schmidt (ed.) (London: Macmillan, 1987); G. Adams and D.A. Gold, ‘The Economics Of Military Spending: Is The Military Dollar Really Different?’, in Peace, Defense and Economic Analysis,. Schmidt and F. Blackaby (eds) (London: Macmillan, 1987); C. Trebilcock, ‘British Armaments And European Industrialisation, 1890–1914’, Economic History Review, vol. 26 (1973); K. Hartley et al., ‘The Economics Of UK Defence Policy In The 1990s’, RUSI Journal, vol. 135, no. 2 (Summer 1990) pp. 49–54; and M. Chalmers, Paying For Defence: Military Spending And British Decline (London: Pluto, 1985).

    Google Scholar 

  91. See, for example, A. Aganbegyan, ‘The Economics Of Perestroika’, International Affairs, vol. 64, no. 2 (Spring 1988) p. 117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. R. Bova, ‘The Soviet Military And Economic Reform’, Journal Of Soviet Studies, vol. 40, no. 3 (July 1988) pp. 388–9.

    Google Scholar 

  93. Tass Press Release, New York, 15 January 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  94. See D. Herspring, ‘On Perestroika: Gorbachev, Yazov And The Military’, Problems Of Communism (July–August 1987).

    Google Scholar 

  95. Also see J. Eyal and I. Anthony, Warsaw Pact Military Expenditure (London: RUSI/Jane’s, 1988).

    Google Scholar 

  96. See ‘The Soviet Economy’, The Economist, 9 April 1988, p. 13.

    Google Scholar 

  97. See ‘Delikate Fragen’, Der Spiegel, vol. 32 (1990) pp. 34–6.

    Google Scholar 

  98. See, for example, A. Roberts, Nation In Arms, p. 109; and J. Bjork-lund, ‘The JAS 39 Project And Swedish Defence’, in RUSI And Brassey’s Defence Yearbook 1990, pp. 199–216.

    Google Scholar 

  99. See, for example, ACOST, Defence R amp; D: A National Resource (London: Cabinet Office, 1989), which highlights the British experience in this regard.

    Google Scholar 

  100. See J. Fagerberg, ‘International Competitiveness’, Economic Journal, vol. 98 (June 1988) pp. 355–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Aberdeen, UK

    David Gates (Ministry of Defence Lecturer in Defence Studies)

Authors
  1. David Gates
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 1991 David Gates

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Gates, D. (1991). Dimensions of ‘Defensive Defence’. In: Non-Offensive Defence. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-10585-4_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation