Art Of War Case Study

General Casey and General Petraeus both put the “Art” back into the “Art of War” using Commander-centric leadership. Casey attempted to refine the operational approach by progressively reducing the U.S. footprint in a three-phased plan to stabilize, restore Iraqi government authority, and inject Iraqi self-reliance. Although unknown, it is possible that this approach would have worked had the Iraqi Sunni population learned of the withdrawal and been faced with a 20% Sunnis 80% Shiite civil war. Without U.S. stabilization, the Sunni populations would potentially have made amends quickly or face a very lopsided fight. In spite of this, insurgents would also have free rein to intimidate the population, possibly negating the proposed strategy anyway. Petraeus’ “surge” strategy change attempt favored the approach that increased U.S.
Recommendations to provide quality operational art and operational design in the future include the ability to adapt and respond, creatively changing plans in order to pivot as the national mission, and strategy changes. In order to accomplish this, a regular assessment of whether the strategic leadership priorities and requirements match the current national threat must be achieved through situational awareness. The operational art and operational design process also needs a mechanism to counter civilian leaderships influence by periodically having an objective evaluation of the plans functionality and desired end state. It is also important to realize that sticking with an incomplete or subpar campaign plan can be as bad as having no plan at all. Above all, civilian leadership of the military must end with the policy-making process and the U.S. military leadership must never relinquish their predisposed ability to plan for and implement those policies in any manner they deem