Center of Gravity - Still Relevant After All These Years

Abstract

Abstract : Clausewitz's concept of center of gravity has generated much discussion in the last twenty-five years after being 're-introduced' to doctrine in the 1986 version of the FM100-5, Operations. Requiring agreement by all services, joint doctrine with regards to center of gravity analysis is vague and contradictory. Individual service parochialism further confuses the issue. This paper initially investigates possible reasons why Clausewitz chose to label the source of enemy strength or the hub of all power with center of gravity. The evolution of center of gravity analysis in joint doctrine is discussed. Strengths and weaknesses of the joint definition and subsequent discussion are highlighted. Each individual service perspective is investigated. Agreement and disagreement with joint doctrine is highlighted. The second major weakness concerning center of gravity is addressed. In addition to confusing doctrine on center of gravity analysis, no joint or service doctrine discusses center of gravity determination. No methodology exists in doctrine to systematically examine a campaign and all associated factors to determine a candidate list and narrow that list to the choice for center of gravity. A basic analytical framework for determining center of gravity that was developed by the Center for Strategic Leadership at the U.S. Army War College is discussed. This model is updated-in a cooperative research effort conducted by the Department of Defense, the Army, the Air Force, and George Mason University. Incorporating an alternate model for assessing center of gravity candidates into the previous model results in an artificial intelligent agent called Disciple-COG. This model shows potential for a robust ability to aid planners in developing a comprehensive list of center of gravity candidates. Assessment and test elements can pare the list to two to three candidates.