Courtesy of John M. Collins*
National security officials at the highest levels promulgate policies that reflect national preferences and thereby shape politico-military strategies.
Illustrative U.S. policies, for example, currently prescribe civilian control over armed forces; an All-Volunteer Force rather than conscription; high quality rather than high quantity personnel, weapons, and equipment; proactive rather than reactive concepts; and so on.
Military doctrines, unlike national security policies, are instructive rather than directive in nature. They standardize strategic, operational, tactical, and logistical procedures in peacetime as well as war under offensive, defensive, and benign conditions. Each military service establishes an overarching doctrinal framework within which many subordinate doctrines reside. Some address military operations in arctic, equatorial, wet, dry, urban, rural, level, and mountainous regions. Others address distinctive functions. Different Army doctrines, for example, guide armor, infantry, artillery, engineers, quartermasters, medics, and so on.
Surface ships, submarines, and carrier airpower demand different doctrines. So do bombers, fighter, and transport aircraft. Combined arms doctrines are designed to tie all others together, so the whole equals more than the sum of individual parts.
* John M. Collins is a retired U.S. Army colonel and a distinguished visiting research fellow at the National Defense University. Collins culminated his military career as the director of military strategy studies and then as chief of the Strategic Research Group at the National War College. He was subsequently the senior specialist in national defense at the Congressional Research Service for twenty-four years. Collins has written twelve books and numerous monographs, including Strategy: Principles, Practices, and Historical Perspectives. He lives in Alexandria, Virginia.
