Dislocation and the Enemy Commander
Abstract
According to Lidell Hart, the physical and psychological dislocation of the enemy is the primary aim of strategy, the processes of mystifying and misleading the enemy provide distraction, and it is such distraction that provides both a foundation and amplification of effect for the unexpected "surprise" that is the signature of the indirect approach. Liddell Hart is quite specific that the psychological dislocation--the confusion, the fears, the increased sense of Clausewitzian friction--of the enemy commander is of particular benefit to the practitioner of the indirect approach. Sun Tzu, in his ancient writings, explicitly recognizes the benefits of instilling doubts and confusion in the mind of the enemy, going so far as to maintain that the primary target of the superior commander is precisely the mind of the opposing commander. The disorientation of a surprised commander under attack and the unwarranted persistence of other commanders in continuing to press discredited strategies may have their bases in the same psychological phenomena. This essay will examine the impact of dislocation and fixation in terms of the theory of cognitive dissonance, and suggest that an awareness of this theory has real relevance to the commander of today.
Document Details
- Document Type
- Technical Report
- Publication Date
- Jan 01, 1997
- Accession Number
- ADA442219
Entities
People
- Richard H. Smyth
Organizations
- National War College