What Is the Difference Between the Battlefield and the Battlespace, and How Will This Difference Shape Conflict in the 21st Century?
Assignment 4
What is the difference between the battlefield and the battlespace, and how will this difference shape conflict in the 21st century?
Introduction Technology is changing conflict, not only by improving the tools used in conflict but the spaces conflicts are held. Conflicts are moving from the traditional “field” of battle, in which two opposing militaries faced each other and charged, to long range missiles, urban warfare and cyber warfare. This paper will explain the differences between “battlefield” and “battlespace” and explain how these differences will expand and change the way the world views and deals with conflict in the 21st century. In order to explain the differences this paper will be written in a linear fashion, explaining how battles were fought in the days of old, from medieval times to the Second World War (WWII), how they are being fought now, the Cold War to Afghanistan, and how they will be fought in the future.
Definitions
Battlefield “The common definition of “battlefield” is quite simple: a battlefield is the piece of ground on which a battle is fought. A battlefield basically possesses three dimensions — breadth, depth and height. The word itself refers to an era of warfare when battles were fought outside major urban centres, literally in a field. The term battlefield evokes images of armies in line formation, facing each other in open spaces.” Battlespace
“Defining battlespace is not an easy task. Its meaning often changes according to the author and the context in which it is used. In short, no clear consensus has yet emerged around the definition of what a battlespace is. In broad terms, battlespace is often defined as a three-dimensional area — width, depth and airspace — that must be reckoned, analysed and dominated by military forces in war. It is also referred to as a “box,” in which a commander positions and moves forces over time, adding a fourth dimension (time) to the ones already mentioned.
More
What is the difference between the battlefield and the battlespace, and how will this difference shape conflict in the 21st century?
Introduction Technology is changing conflict, not only by improving the tools used in conflict but the spaces conflicts are held. Conflicts are moving from the traditional “field” of battle, in which two opposing militaries faced each other and charged, to long range missiles, urban warfare and cyber warfare. This paper will explain the differences between “battlefield” and “battlespace” and explain how these differences will expand and change the way the world views and deals with conflict in the 21st century. In order to explain the differences this paper will be written in a linear fashion, explaining how battles were fought in the days of old, from medieval times to the Second World War (WWII), how they are being fought now, the Cold War to Afghanistan, and how they will be fought in the future.
Definitions
Battlefield “The common definition of “battlefield” is quite simple: a battlefield is the piece of ground on which a battle is fought. A battlefield basically possesses three dimensions — breadth, depth and height. The word itself refers to an era of warfare when battles were fought outside major urban centres, literally in a field. The term battlefield evokes images of armies in line formation, facing each other in open spaces.” Battlespace
“Defining battlespace is not an easy task. Its meaning often changes according to the author and the context in which it is used. In short, no clear consensus has yet emerged around the definition of what a battlespace is. In broad terms, battlespace is often defined as a three-dimensional area — width, depth and airspace — that must be reckoned, analysed and dominated by military forces in war. It is also referred to as a “box,” in which a commander positions and moves forces over time, adding a fourth dimension (time) to the ones already mentioned.
More
Bibliography: Hills, Alice. “Can We Fight in Cities?” RUSI Journal 146 (2001): 6-10. Horn, Bernd. “Complexity Squared: Operating in the Future Battlespace.” Canadian Military Journal 4.3 (Autumn 2003): 7-16. Jayne, A.R. “Manoeuvre Warfare Doctrine for Urban Operations.” Army Doctrine and Training Bulletin 5.1 (Spring 2002): 65-70. Nordick, Glenn. “Fighting in Built-up Areas. We Can Do This, so Let’s Get On With It.” Army Doctrine and Training Bulletin 4.3 (Fall 2001): 28-32. Schnelle, David. “Soldiers, not Post-Modern Professionals.” Canadian Military Journal 3.3 (Autumn 2002): 68-69. Smith, Ron and Scott Knight. “Applying Electronic Warfare Solutions to Network Security.” Canadian Military Journal 6.3 (Autumn 2005): 49-57. St. Denis, Thomas. “The Dangerous Appeal of the Warrior”. Canadian Military Journal 2.2 (Summer 2001): 31-38.