Conflict Termination in the Persian Gulf: How Did We Fall Short?

Abstract

Abstract : Much has been written recently regarding the subject of conflict termination and how it relates to the operational commander in planning and executing military objectives to be victorious at war. Prior to the Persian Gulf War conflict termination was focused primarily at the strategic level with political objectives in mind and little thought of how the national desired end state is transformed by the operational commander to satisfy the military objectives. The Joint Chief of Staff more recently have come to realize that conflict termination is a very important and integral part of campaign planning and have included it in their planning for joint operations. Conflict termination provides an essential link between national security strategy, national military strategy, and post-hostility aims. The issue of conflict (or war) termination centers on the national will and freedom of action. Further, it must be considered from the outset of planning and should be refined as the conflict moves toward advantageous termination. As the link between a war's end state and the post-hostility phase, conflict termination poses one set of difficult issues for the grand strategists and different but equally challenging questions for the operational commander. Herein lies the complicated task for the operational commander. That is, transforming the desired national end state into definable and achievable military conditions which meet the military objectives. Therefore, the operational commander must develop a mission statement based on the national objectives, coordinate that mission statement with the political authority, and develop an acceptable end state--satisfying economically, militarily, and politically.