Grand strategy is typically decided by the political leadership of a country, with input from the most senior military officials. Because of its scope and the number of different people and groups involved, grand strategy is usually a matter of public record, although the details of implementation (such as the immediate purposes of a specific alliance) are often concealed. A grand strategy may extend across many years or even multiple generations.
- : For much of her history, Great Britain has pursued a ‘maritime’ or ‘blue water’ grand strategy. Central to this was the maintenance of a strong navy to dominate the seas and especially the English Channel and North Sea , thus keeping her safe from invasion; she would therefore only need a small army which could be used for amphibious and Colonial operations. Such a grand strategy allowed Britain to save on the huge costs which a large standing army required (navies tend to be cheaper) as well as boosting her trade through her control of the main sea lanes.
- : A classic example of modern grand strategy is the decision of the Allies in World War II to concentrate on the defeat of Germany first. The decision, a joint agreement made after the Attack On Pearl Harbor had drawn the US into the war, was a sensible one in that Germany was the most powerful member of the Axis, and directly threatened the continued existence of both the United Kingdom and the Soviet Union . Conversely, while Japan's conquests garnered considerable public attention, they were mostly in colonial areas deemed less essential by planners and policymakers. The specifics of Allied military strategy in the Pacific War was therefore shaped by the lesser resources made available to the theatre commanders.
- : A more recent example of grand strategy was the policy of Containment used by the US during the Cold War .
- : An example of grand strategy incorporating both military and economic elements was the decision by the Chinese leadership in the early 1980s to reduce the size of the People's Liberation Army so that more resources could be used by the civilian economy on the premise that a growing civilian economy would be able to support a more advanced military in the future.
- : The Athenians under Pericles were the naval force of the time, controlling what Spykman would call the periphery of Ancient Greece and most of the important harbours. The Spartans and the Pelloponesian League had strong land forces and enjoyed control of the Ancient Greek "heartland". The Spartans begun the war, fearing the unequal growth of the Athenian power. Pericles understood that time was running in favour of the Athenians so they chosed an indirect approach and a strategy of exhaustion. With naval raids the and denial of Spartan success through the long walls success was assured. The Spartans chosed a direct approach and a strategy of complete destruction. The Athenian league lost the war under Alkibiades who changed with the Sicily campaign the indirect approach to direct which was a crucial and basic strategic mistake.
Further Reading
Platias, International Relations and Grand Strategy in Thucidedes,estia editions ,Athens, 1999
Kolliopoulos,Grand strategy of ancient Sparta, Piotita publications
Reading in strategy
Von Clausewitz, on War
Lidell Haart, Strategy
Lutwwak,The Grand strategy of the Roman Empire
Harry Papasotiriou, Grand strategy of the Byzantine Empire
P. Komdilis, Theory of War
and Kondilis, Power and decision
|
