| Abstract |
Blitzkrieg has been variously described as strategy, tactics, and even operational art. This ambiguity, coupled with a misinterpretation of this form of offensive combat, can cause false conclusions when studying the history of World War II and trying to relate this history to modern practice. Blitzkrieg was the tactical means the Germans used so pursue their strategy in World War 2. Applied against an enemy that was temporarily inferior in doctrine and technology, it was a great success and led to the aura which surrounds the word. This paper examines Blitzkrieg from a tactical and operational perspective. The result is an appreciation of where Blitzkrieg falls in the conceptual and theoretical realm of warfare. The first section examines Blitzkrieg from a theoretical perspective. The German practice of this form of maneuver warfare concentrated on battles of encirclement which would annihilate enemy forces. This analysis compares the German practice with the theoretical basis of radical deep battle. The result is a redefinition of Blitzkrieg as a tactical form of maneuver. The second section is an introduction of the characteristics of operational art. Blitzkrieg, rather than an expression of operational art, was instead a characteristic. Finally, two events, the German invasion of France in 1940, and the plans for the Summer offensive of 1942 are examined to determine the validity of the claim that Blitzkrieg is a tactical rather than operational action. Deep Battle, Operational Art, Blitzkrieg Doctrine, Battle of France, German Army 1939-1942, Western Front, Eastern Front, Barbarossa, Case Yellow, Case Blue, Army Group South, Manstein, Von Bock, Halder, OKW, OKH, World War 2. |
