Battle Analysis Porcess

:
Modified document from:
BASIC BATTLE ANALYSIS: KASSERINE PASS
[Link]/CAC2/CSI/docs/[Link]
[Link]/CAC2/CSI/docs/[Link]

What is Battle Analysis?

GEN Frederick M. Franks, Jr., who Commanded VII Corps during Desert Storm, wrote
afterwards: “Training and leader development must include a historical perspective
—especially of the conduct of battle.” Battle Analysis provides a method of
understanding conflict and the complexity of military operations. Leaders must be
able to integrate a variety of sources of information, determine the relevance of the
information, and assess the situation based on the context. Battle Analysis
Methodology provides a tool to accomplish the assessment.

Battle Analysis is a method used by the U.S. Army to provide a systematic approach
to the study of battles, campaigns, and other operations. It is designed as a general
guide to ensure that significant actions or factors affecting the outcome of a battle or
operation are not overlooked. The end result of the Battle Analysis is to derive
lessons from a study of past battles, campaigns, or operations, which will give
today’s Army leaders insight into problems they may encounter in contemporary
operations. At its very core, a Battle Analysis is a tool to help military professionals
understand some of the constants which govern military actions as well as the
multitude of variables.

Battle Analysis Steps

The battle Analysis process contains four steps. Each step builds on the previous one
to provide a logical order to the study.
1. Define the subject. This step decides which battle, campaign, or other operation
will be studied.
2. Set the stage. This step examines the situation at the beginning of the operation
chosen.
3. Describe the action. This step reviews the conduct of the operation and looks for
key events or decisions that affected the outcome.
4. Draw lessons and insights. The last step involves analyzing the information
gathered in the previous steps to formulate lessons and derive insights about
contemporary operations.

STEP 1: DEFINE THE SUBJECT

In the first step of Battle Analysis, choose the subject (or have it chosen) for study.
This will provide the parameters of the Battle Analysis and will enable you to
determine if sufficient research sources are available to support the study.

A. Identify Event (where, who, when)

Determine where, who and when. Selecting a battle, campaign, or other operation
limits the subject in time and space. Then ask the journalist’s questions, keeping in
mind the time available for the study and the reasons for making it. Time will most
likely limit the possibility of studying the entire European Campaign during World War
II. Likewise, study of an entire war, or even an entire campaign or battle, to derive
lessons useful for battalion or company level operations may be misguided
Pick a subject appropriate to the level of interest. A study of how MacArthur’s
headquarters planned the invasion of the Philippines will not be helpful if the subject
of interest is battalion operations.
B. Determine & Evaluate Research Material
1. Quantity and type of sources (books, articles, and other).
2. Quality of sources (content, bias, and intent).

Step 2: Review the Setting (Set the Stage)

Setting the stage establishes the foundation for the study by reviewing the context of
the operation being considered. Reviewing the setting in this manner prepares for
both the description and the analytical phases of the process in steps 3 and 4. The
level of detail gathered in this step will depend upon the purpose of the study as well
as the audience for which it is intended. For example, an abundance of detail on the
causes of World War II is probably not necessary for an analysis of the battle of
Okinawa. But a thorough knowledge of the campaign in the Pacific will be required.
Step 2 is divided into four parts:
A. Strategic/Operational Overview
B. Area of Operations
C. Compare Forces
D. State the Mission & Describe Initial Disposition of Opposing Forces

PART A: STRATEGIC/OPERATIONAL OVERVIEW

Produce a brief background leading up to the battle to be analyzed.
1. Identify the war in which this battle was fought to include the time frame and
areas covered.
2. Objectives of the principle antagonists. What were the intentions of the
principles?
3. Briefly overview the campaign. What were the events leading up to this battle?

PART B: AREA OF OPERATIONS

Study the area of operations. Look at weather and terrain. What was the impact of
weather? Which side gained an advantage from the terrain?
Use the OAKOC factors when studying terrain
 Observation and fields of fire
 Avenues of approach
 Key terrain & weather
 Obstacles
 Cover

PART C: COMPARE FORCES

Determine the strengths and weakness of opposing forces. There are eight factors to
consider (This can be done in any order. The order given was the best way to
present for Kasserine Pass. Also other factors can be added if needed, or deleted if
they do not apply). Factors include:
1. Size and composition: How many units? Troops? Major weapons systems?
How were they organized?
2. Technology:
What was the level of battlefield technology (deployed, not theoretical)? Did
one side have an advantage over the other?
 3. Doctrine and training:
Was tactical doctrine is understood and used? What was the level of training
and experience?
4. Logistics
Did either side have an advantage in supplies and transportation?
5. Intelligence:
What types of intelligence assets were available to the antagonists (human—
spot reports from front-line troops, information from deserters and spies),
imagery (photo reconnaissance), signals (ranging from flags to GPS)? How did
intelligence figure into planning?
6. Condition and morale:
How high (or low) was morale at the beginning of the operation? Did it
change over time? If so, what caused the change? Did leadership affect
morale for better or worse?
7. Command, control, and communications (C3)
How effective was each side’s command and control system? How did
communications (or lack of it) affect of operation?
8. Leadership
How experienced and effective were leaders? What were their leadership
styles?

PART D: STATE THE MISSION & DESCRIBE INITIAL DISPOSITION

1. State the missions of the opposing forces. Briefly state the objectives for each
force, such as seizing and holding key terrain, partial or total destruction of the
opposing force, etc. What plans were undertaken to achieve the objective? Did
other options exist to achieve the mission other than those undertaken?
2. Describe the initial disposition of forces. What were the locations and strengths
of the opposing units? How were forces deployed? Which units were selected to
lead the attack or defense?

Step 3--Describe the Action

The third step of a Battle Analysis, describe the action, encompasses what might be
thought of as the traditional approach to operational military history, that is, taking a
normally chaotic event or series of events and attempting to impose order to be able
to understand what happened.
A. Describe the opening moves of the battle, campaign, or operation. Briefly
examine the initial actions by each side. Did one side accrue an advantage in the
opening phase? Was the opening phase important to the overall outcome?
B. Detail the major phases. The intent here is to provide a degree of order to the
Battle Analysis by breaking the operation being studied into major phases. This
effort to understand the operation may actually presume a structure on events
that was not apparent to the participants, and may not have existed in real time.
It is necessary, however, to impose such an order if a study is to be undertaken at
all. Major phases of an operation may be stated as movement to contact, initial
assault, breakthrough, counterattack, exploitation, and pursuit. The key objective
in this portion of the Battle Analysis is to look for events or decisions that shifted
the course of battle toward one side, or otherwise affected the outcome. Causes
will be found in Steps 2 and 3, and effects of those causes should be evident in
Step 3. Step 4 will put those two groups together which in turn should result in
relevant insights.
C. State the outcome. Review the course of the operation as laid out in the earlier
parts of this step, and decide if there was a clear victor, if one side came out with
some advantage, or if the operation produced no clear advantage to either side.
Questions to ask include: Did either side achieve its objectives? What were
losses to personnel and equipment? What was the immediate and long-term
impact of this operation on the larger campaign, war, or other event under study?

Step 4—Assess the Significance

The fourth and final step of Battle Analysis determines what lessons and insights can
be drawn from the study that may help military professionals understand the nature
of military operations. Having set the context, gathered the facts, and imposed some
order on the information accumulated, the student should ask two key questions:
1. Why did events turn out the way they did?
2. What is relevant about this study to current operations?
These are not necessarily separate questions. They can be answered together.

Cause and Effect:

Examine the battle or operation by establishing cause and effect.
1. Who won? Who lost? Is determination of victory or defeat possible, or even
meaningful?
2. What were the constants that affected the outcome?

Relevance/Military Lesson
Military history, whether in the form of sources or more structured as Battle Analysis,
cannot find specific solutions to specific problems. Nevertheless, there are lessons
and insights that can be drawn from intelligent study. In addition to the constants
referred to above, there are other tools to use in seeking insights. Each of the tools
is useful in its own right, although there is some overlap among the elements.
1. Principles of War. Commonly, nine principles form part of the foundation of U.S.
Army doctrine, providing general guidelines for the conduct of operations. The
nine principles are objective, offensive, mass, economy of force, maneuver, unity
of command, security, surprise, and simplicity.
2. Threads of Continuity. Although the art of war has changed over time, USMA has
identified constant themes and categories of analysis to facilitate the study of
these changes in warfare. We call the factors that provide a common reference
for the study of the changes in the art of war the threads of continuity. They fall
into two general groups: the internal threads, which are predominantly a part of
the military profession; and the external threads, which are part of the greater
society in which the military exists.

3. Warfighting Functions. The six warfighting functions are tasks and systems
united by a common purpose that commanders use to accomplish missions and
training objectives. Tied together with leadership, they create Combat Power.
The warfighting functions are:
 intelligence,
 movement and maneuver
 fire support
 protection
  sustainment
 command and control
The process of deriving lessons and insights should formulate ideas about the
operation that go beyond the operation itself. Even with the same body of
information, no two students may find the same lessons and insights. The value of
the process is to give a method for analytically considering the military profession
and its missions. Students may find that factors affecting an operation in the past
may or may not be relevant to the present; either outcome provides a better
understanding of their profession.

Note: The utilization of different tools of analysis: The example included a

warfighting function (Intelligence), two Threads of Continuity (Doctrine and
Leadership) and a Principle of War (Mass) as subject headings for Step 4. A Principle
of War (Security) was also used to better analyze a warfighting function. These were
presented to illustrate their flexibility. Only one set of tools may be used, or all three
of them could be mixed. There is no set pattern, and other tools may be used as
appropriate. The format of Cause and Effect/Insight is also a suggested one.