Military Review English Edition July-August 2014 | Page 80

history and is familiar to many of
today’s military officers. Many of its
best historical examples come from
the series of conflicts we collectively refer to as the Indian Wars.
Braddock’s defeat highlights as many
useful insights as contemporary
examples of asymmetric action, like
Russian battles with the Chechens.
Overcoming future challenges will
require that we both understand the
lessons from the past and develop
strategies and tactics appropriate to
tomorrow’s battlefield.
While asymmetric warfare is not
something new, it is very much in
vogue today in the aftermath of the
Persian Gulf War. Given America’s
resounding success in that conflict,
potential adversaries have learned
Iraq’s lesson that it is foolish to try
to match us conventionally. Instead,
they are seeking ways to turn our
strengths against us. This is the
heart of the concept of asymmetry,
broadly defined by Steven Metz and
Douglas Johnson of the U.S. Army
War College as: “In the realm of
military affairs and national security,
asymmetry is acting, organizing, and
thinking differently than opponents
in order to maximize one’s own
advantages, exploit an opponent’s
weaknesses, attain the initiative, or
gain greater freedom of action.