J.F.C. Fuller: His View On Politicians & National Force

John F.C. Fuller was one of the leading theorists on armored warfare during the 1920s and 1930s. During World War-I he served in the newly formed Tank Corps, and responsible for implementing the tank on the European battlefield. Even though the tank faced serious problems and often broke down. 
Fuller was able to see the potential of this new weapon and its impact on warfare (Fuller 1993). Fuller was a strong supporter of understanding how technological advances could affect the conduct of war and then apply it on the battlefield.

Fuller‟s writings span nearly 6 decades, covering topics such as mysticism and cabbala, news reports, military theory, and history. In The Reformation of War (1923) and Foundations of the Science of War (1926), Fuller presented his views on war as a scientific activity. 
The misconduct of World War I led Fuller to believe that the use of force needed a better foundation – a scientific foundation. Fuller believed that the two world wars of the 20th century showed lack of understanding of how military force should be directed in order to obtain the true objective of war: a better peace (Fuller 1993).

Fuller argued for a strong political control of the military forces and believed that a great cause of war is the lack of civil control of the military, or as Fuller wrote: “due to the existence of a hiatus between the mentalities of the nation and its army” (Fuller 1923: 11). Fuller explains: “It frequently arises, however, especially in prosperous nations, that the national will to hunt for wealth is so great that it monopolizes all their efforts, and, consequently, that little thought is given to the maintenance and protection of their wealth through military action. In these circumstances, an army, which should be of the nation, becomes separated from it”. 

Fuller underlines the importance of a strong civil presence in the study of war: “To restrict the development of war by divorcing it from civil science is to maintain warfare in its present barbarous and alchemical form. To look upon war as a world force and attempt to utilize it more profitably is surely better” (Fuller 1993: 32). Fuller argued that politicians should take an active role in the development of their armed forces because these forces should serve the interests of the nations formulated by the politicians. And in order for politicians to take a constructive role in this development, they need to be educated. 

Fuller writes in the preface to The Reformation of War “I have not written this book for military monks, but for civilians, who pay for their alchemy and mysteries” (Fuller 1923: xii), and sums up his efforts in the epilogue: “In order to protect our homes and our institutions we must not only protect our army and look upon it as our shield against adversity, but we must determine whether the shield we have is worthy to protect us. 

In the book, he examined the possibilities of future warfare in order to lead up to this conclusion.

"I feel that I have written enough to enable any intelligent citizen, after he has studied what I have said, to turn to the army he is paying for in order to maintain the peace which he enjoys and to say: "Thou art, or thou art not, found wanting” (Fuller 1923: 282-283).Fuller wanted to create a manual for politicians so that they could better understand how the use of force should be applied in order to serve the nation‟s interests."

Theories of Air power:The Command of the Air - G. Douhet

General Giulio Douhet (30 May 1869 – 15 February 1930) was an Italian general and air power theorist. He was a key proponent of strategic bombing in aerial warfare. He was a contemporary of the 1920s air warfare advocates Walther Wever, Billy Mitchell and Sir Hugh Trenchard.

In 1921. The same year he completed a hugely influential treatise on strategic bombing titled The Command of the Air and retired from military service soon after Douhet’s theories on airpower have had a lasting effect on airpower employment.

The major premise of Douhet’s theory was his belief that during the war, a quick victory could be won by early air attack on the enemy’s vital centers, while surface forces worked to contain the enemy on the ground. Douhet differed from other prominent early theorists by proposing that civilian populations be directly targeted as part of the air campaign.

Key Aspects of Douhet’s Theories:

• Major Assumptions
• Thoughts on Targeting
• Thoughts on Air Exploitation

Major Assumptions:

• Airpower is inherently offensive; the bomber will always get through
• All future wars will be total wars
• Civilian morale can be diminished by direct attack
• The dominance of the defensive form of ground warfare is permanent

Thoughts on Targeting:

The first step is command of the air; the next priority is destroying vital centers and civilian moral targets.

Thoughts on Air Exploitation:

Once command of the air is won, it must be used to punish the civilians, so that they will coerce their own government to come to terms in order to end the suffering. This will happen so rapidly that total suffering will be less than that experienced in the trenches.

Implications of Douhet’s Theories:

• Organization for War
• Role of Other Armed Forces
• Force Structure
• Technology Requirements

Organization for War

In order to bring about victory over the enemy before your own civil morale collapses, you must organize airpower under a separate air force.

Roles of Other Armed Forces

Other armed forces will only stand on the defensive until the air force offensive has been decisive.

Force Structure

The army and navy will be structured to achieve economy of force. All the mass possible will be built into the air force.

Technology Requirements

Only one type of airplane is required—the battle plane. It will be of moderate speed, long range, and heavily armored for self-protection. If escort protection is required, battle planes will be made part of the strike package, armed only with self-defensive weapons. Everything not put into the battle plan is a diversion that weakens the main effort and reduces the probability of success. Battles plane would have a combination of high-explosive, incendiary, and gas bombs to have a synergistic effect.

Influence in Italy

His influence on Italy was quite significant, in that he helped bring about the development of an air ministry and separate air force under Mussolini.Colonel Billy Mitchell shared many of Douhet’s beliefs and also corresponded with Count Caproni (who was closely associated with Douhet in the articulation of his theory) on airpower employment. The communication between many of the early theorists promoted a vital dialogue in formulating ideas on airpower.

Influence on the United States

• His influence on the United States was somewhat indirect. Douhet’s contemporary, Count Caproni, was trying hard to sell his bomber to the U.S. Caproni was also closely associated with Douhet in the articulation of his theory. Colonel Edgar Gorrell, an early advocate of strategic bombing, met with Caproni and later had an influence on the initial development of the Air Service Strategic Bombing Theory.
• Several U.S. airpower theorists shared Douhet’s view on strategic bombardment. It can be assumed that Douhet had an influence in the formulation of airpower thought during the period. Portions of his book Command Of The Air were translated and incorporated into the Air Corps Tactical School (ACTS) curriculum. The ACTS would produce the airpower architects of the strategic bombing campaign of World War II.

Heartland theory : Halford Mackinder

The Geographical Pivot of History, sometimes simply as The Pivot of History is a geostrategic theory, also known as Heartland Theory. "The Geographical Pivot of History" was an article submitted by Halford John Mackinder in 1904 to the Royal Geographical Society that advanced his Heartland Theory. In this article, Mackinder extended the scope of geopolitical analysis to encompass the entire globe.

Supported by five diagrams, it was published by the Society in April 1904 together with comments by several students of geography. Probably few who read the lecture in 1904 guessed that Figure 5, bearing the caption "The Natural Seats of Power," would become one of the most famous maps of our time. It embodied one of the most thought-provoking views of the world in the twentieth century and has exercised a profound influence on foreign affairs and on history.

Pictures 1-5 from "The Geographical Pivot of History(1904)"

The Heartland consists of Russia and Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan)

In the Heartland theory, Mackinder actually engages geography in international politics both literally and figuratively. Literally, the Heartland theory pointed out that, Eurasia is strategically the most advantageous geographical location (See: Figure). 

On the other hand, figuratively this theory put emphasis on the centrality of the Eurasian region. Mackinder stated that in the context of the global geopolitical processes, the Eurasian continent is found in the center of the world politics. Under this statement, he suggested that the state that dominated the Heartland would possess the necessary geopolitical and economic potential to ultimately control the world politics. Although the Heartland Theory faced much criticism in the decades since its publication, rather the study aims to just how far the philosophy is rational as well as influential in the contemporary environment of international politics.

He asserted that the European civilization was the product of outside pressure. His account of Europe and European history, regarding it as the result of many centuries of struggle against invasions from Asia, proceeded from the same idea. He believed that Europe’s advance and expansion were stimulated by the need to respond to the pressure coming from the center of Asia. Accordingly, it was the Heartland (where the continental masses of Eurasia were concentrated) that served as the pivot of all the geopolitical transformations of historial dimensions within the World Island.

He pointed out that the Heartland was in the most advantageous geopolitical location. Aware of the relative nature of the conception “central location,” Mackinder pointed out that in the context of the global geopolitical processes, the Eurasian continent is found in the center of the world, with the Heartland occupying the center of the Eurasian continent. His doctrine suggested that the geopolitical subject (actor) that dominated the Heartland would possess the necessary geopolitical and economic potential to ultimately control the World Island and the planet.