A Study on the Strategic Implication of the Employment for the Amphibious Operational Forces of the U.S.S.R and USA During the WWII

Abstract

Amphibious operation has developed with war history and it’s been conducting decisive role at the war. Amphibious troops did a key role when they swept the enemies and changed the war status from defensive to offensive direction. The U.S. and U.S.S.R fully understood the usefulness and flexibilities of amphibious troops. Although the U.S.S.R was known as a continental state, it built up amphibious power. On the contrary, the U.S. was a maritime nation it utilized the Marines when it expanded power to the West Pacific area. This article examined how the U.S. Marines and U.S.S.R Naval Infantry were employed during the World War II and found out its strategic implication. There were several similarities and differences between them. Both the U.S. and U.S.S.R. employed the amphibious troops when they tried to secure the lands and islands which were strongly defended by the enemies. The Marines and Naval Infantry showed off their sufficient capacities as an assault troops to recover the lost territories. In the beginning of the World War II the Marines and Naval Infantry of both countries hadnt full-fledged power to project, but they have expanded their size and grown their capacities during the wartime. However, there were lots of differences between them in conducting national strategy, building up the military powers, the strategy and tactics. The U.S. Marines usually did amphibious assault which was a large scale and from the long distance. In contrast, the U.S.S.R. Naval Infantry operated within the short distance and small groups but it developed the unique tactics called “Desant” that aimed at the enemy’s side and rear area attack to support the Army. It was totally different from the U.S.’s tactics. The former not only made progress amphibious doctrine, and built up enough ships but also supported by coordinated ship and air fire when they performed the mission. It usually conducted the amphibious operation by the systematic procedures from its first step to end. The latter made use of temporary amphibious ships, since improvisational assault and Navy’s fire support was limited. Although the U.S. Marines and U.S.S.R.’s Naval infantry were small sizes when compared with Army and Navy, they not only verified the efficiency but also showed the flexibilities of the amphibious troops. In this study we found that the U.S Marines and U.S.S.R Naval Infantry contributed the development of various amphibious operational skills and reminded the value of their existence. The amphibious troops can be easily affected by nation’s strategy and their performances when they try to survive as an independent military service.