Showing posts with label logistics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label logistics. Show all posts

Thursday, January 19, 2023

Orcine Infighting

22-4-19 What makes the Orcine Military so Ineffective? - VisPol > .
24-2-14 Coup-Proofing USSR/Ruscist Orcine Military (subs) - Katz > .
23-12-22 P00ti's War: Killer Instinct - NBC > .
23-11-4 Ruscia's Combat Compliance Problem - Icarus > .
23-9-2 When the Elites Will Topple P00ti (subs) - Katz > .
23-8-30 Fear is the new normal in Russian politics - Anders > .
23-8-29 Dictatorships: From Spin to Fear | Ruscist Regression (subs) - Katz > .
23-8-22 Change of Heart in Pro-War [Authoritarian] Community (subs) - Katz > .
23-8-14 Post-P00: Elites Flee; Opposition Rises (subs) - Katz > .
23-7-31 P00ti's Missing Generals - Fired, Interrogated, Killed | Times > .
23-7-21 P00 vs Wagner: The Full Story One Month Later - Animarchy > .
23-7-21 Real Meaning of Girkin's Arrest - Vlad V C > .
23-7-19 Mutiny, Insurgency, Arrests, Economic Implosion - Konstantin Samoilov > .
23-7-15 Orcine FAILS | Prigozhin's Mutiny to Popov (subs) - Katz > .
23-7-13 What's Next For Ruscia After Wagner's Mercenary Revolt - CNBC > .
23-7-4 P00paganda Bashing Wagner | [0pini0ns reversed] (subs) - Katz > .
23-7-2 Is Vladimir P00tin’s power coming to an end? | 60 Min Aus > .
23-6-15 Wagner Backstabs Chechens - Dude > .
23-6-10 Wagner Took Senior Army Officer Hostage | P00 Silent (subs) - Katz > .
23-6-9 Inside Wagner, Ruscia’s Secret War Company | WSJ Doc > .
23-6-4 Orcine Failures & Prigozhin's Ambitious Game - K&G > .
23-6-2 [Corrupt Kadyrov & His Useless Tik Tok Warriors] (subs) - Katz > .
23-5-13 [Ztupidity: P00, Babitchkas, Prickozhin, Fodder, nukes, Xi] - CBC > .
23-5-12 Prigozhin Invites Shoigu to Bakhmut | Factions (subs) - Katz > .
23-5-12 [Wagner Fleeing Bakhmut? Prigozhin Spews Threats] - U24 > .
23-5-8 P00ti Fragmented Military: Internal Rivalries, Mismanagement - Spaniel > .
23-5-5 Prigozhin's Ultimatum | Battle for Bakhmut (subs) - Katz > .
23-4-11 E-Draft - cannon-meat mobiki - Ukraine's Offensive (subs) - Katz > .
23-3-29 Peskov & Cryptic Messages of Russian Elites (subs) - Katz > .
23-3-27 Wagner in Ukraine: Power Struggle on Ruscian Front - VisPol > .
23-3-17 What makes the Wagner PMC effective - Def & Geo > .
23-3-15 Post-P00tin Elites | Options for New System (subs) - Katz > .
23-3-12 Vuhledar, Why Ruscia Repeats Mistakes - T&P > .
23-3-5 Wagner Group, Russian PMCs & Ukraine - Hx, R-U - Perun > .
23-3-4 R's Potential Collapse | P00's Balkanization Warnings (subs) - Katz > .
23-3-1 [Seven Losses of P00tin: How to Fail Ztupidly as Dicktator - Matters > .
23-2-20 Peter Zeihan - Prigozhin's Wagner Group: Ruscia's Flunkies > .
23-2-20 Biden in Kyiv | Pooti & Orcine Infighting a Year In? (subs) - Katz > .
23-2-19 Prigozhin's Fall | Wagner Symphony Over (subs) - Katz > .
23-2-19 Ruscia's Grand Strategy & Ukraine - P00's geostrategic disaster - P > .
23-2-18 Thwarted Orcine Coup Attempt - Military > .
23-2-15 Ruscia’s private military force [Prigozhin's Wagner Thugs] - Vox > .
23-2-15 Big Trouble for Prigozhyn | Wagner losing in Bakhmut | Denys > .
23-2-13 Navalny's Defiant Impact Can Only be Judged in Retrospect - Katz > . 
23-2-11 Current offensive and losses | [Pooti's desperate tactics] - Katz > .
23-2-8 Ruscia’s Warpaint | Once “decent” people провоенный (subs) - Katz > .
23-2-6 Orcine army casualties mounting | Pooti won't stop (subs) - Katz > .
23-2-5 22-12-16 Fronts, Supplies, Orcine Infighting 23-1-15 - K&G > .
23-1-30 Offensive Pooti's Doomed Orcine Escalation (subs) - Katz > . 
23-1-29 Orcine Strengths & Capabilities in Ukraine - still a threat - Perun > .
23-1-24 Pooti's Ztupid R-U Miscalculation: Self-Inflicted Disaster - Spaniel > .
23-1-22 Politics Can Destroy Armies: Factionalism & R-U War - Perun > .
23-1-20 Wagner mercenary group = ‘transnational criminal organization’ > .
23-1-19 Kremlin's Bizarre Ideological Mission for 2023 - Vlad > .
23-1-19 Krumblin power struggle: Infighting vs Pooti's aggression | DW > .
23-1-18 What will end the war in Ukraine? - Binkov > .
23-1-16 Violent Mercenary Groups; Ruling Elite Fragments - Anders on Silicon > .
23-1-15 Children! Children! Orcs "Lost Upper Hand" | Reporting > .
23-1-12 Pootin replaces war commander in 'desperation' - Stavridis > .
Wagner 

23-3-26 ‘He’s Satan’: Russian Elites Call Putin Every Name In The Book On Leaked Call .

23-3-28 A revealing leaked conversation between billionaire oligarch Farkhad Akhmedov and music producer Losif Prigozhin, as they bash Putin and his regime for waging a fratricidal war against Ukraine and depriving Russia and all Russians of a future. They talk about Russia being finished and say that their children's futures are "F-ED." They also mention how Putin's inner circle are eating each other up.

Joke:
One evening, Vladimir Pootin decided to find out what Russians really thought about him. Being an experienced intelligence officer, he disguised himself thoroughly and donned a fake beard and heavy glasses. 

Pootin walked along a street and saw a bar. He popped in and noticed a man sitting alone at a table. Pootin came up and sat beside him.

After having a few shots, Pootin asked him, “So tell me, what do you think about our president Vladimir Pootin?”

The man looked around and said, “Not here, it’s too crowded. Let’s walk outside.”

So they exited the bar. Pootin asked again: “So what do you think about Pootin?”

The man looked around again and said, “Not here, too many people here, too!”

So they went to a train station and boarded a suburban train.

As they got off in the middle of nowhere in the dead of night, they walked deep into the woods. Pootin could no longer contain his curiosity and asked, “Okay now, come on! There isn’t a single living soul around here for miles! Tell me what you think about Vladimir Pootin”

The guy glanced around and whispered into his ear, “I like him.”
at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, December 26, 2022

Attrition 2022

23-1-13 Ruscia LIED About Destroying [Absent] M2 Bradley Vehicles - Jake > .
23-1-13 No more doubts for the West | Ukraine weaponized (subs) - Katz > .22-11-21 'Demoralised and demobilised Russian army' lost the upper hand - T > .22-10-1 What Ukraine Needs to Win - Animarchy > .
22-9-4 6 Months of Ukraine War - Economics, Endurance, Energy War - Perun > .
22-6-19 Two Economies: Ukraine, Russia - 100 days of sanctions & shelling > .
22-5-17 War of attrition: Not a frozen conflict — 17MAY2022 - Anders > .

BOAK ..
Budgets (Military) ..
at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , ,

Monday, July 26, 2021

CAI, RCEP - Asia, Europe, USA

24-7-20 Malaysia [could become] next global chip giant - Caspian Report > .
2021 QUAD? Can Biden create an Asian NATO against China? - VisPol > .
22-2-24 Australia considers replacing bullying CCP with Indian Market - Insight > .
22-1-6 Australia & Japan sign security cooperation treaty - Focus > .
21-12-28 Australia to streamline weapon-buying process - Focus > .

CAI, RCEP - Asia, Europe, USA ..

The Comprehensive Agreement on Investment (CAI) is a proposed investment deal between the People's Republic of China and the European Union. Proposed in 2013, the deal had NOT been signed as of 27 October 2022. In December 2020, the European Commission announced that the agreement was concluded in principle by the leaders of the EU Council, pending ratification by the European Parliament.

In March 2021, it was reported that there would be serious doubts about the approval of the deal in the European Parliament given China's "unacceptable" behavior toward members of the parliament, the European Council's Political and Security Committee, and European think tanks.

The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) is a free trade agreement between the Asia-Pacific nations of Australia, Brunei, Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Japan, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, New Zealand, the Philippines, Singapore, South Korea, Thailand, and Vietnam. The 15 member countries account for about 30% of the world's population (2.2 billion people) and 30% of global GDP ($26.2 trillion) as of 2020, making it the biggest trade bloc in history. Unifying the preexisting bilateral agreements between the 10-member ASEAN and five of its major trade partners, the RCEP was signed on 15 November 2020 at a virtual ASEAN Summit hosted by Vietnam, and will take effect 60 days after it has been ratified by at least six ASEAN and three non-ASEAN signatories.

The trade pact, which includes a mix of high-income, middle-income, and low-income countries, was conceived at the 2011 ASEAN Summit in Bali, Indonesia, while its negotiations were formally launched during the 2012 ASEAN Summit in Cambodia. It is expected to eliminate about 90% of the tariffs on imports between its signatories within 20 years of coming into force, and establish common rules for e-commerce, trade, and intellectual property. The unified rules of origin will help facilitate international supply chains and reduce export costs throughout the bloc.

The RCEP is the first free trade agreement between China, Japan, and South Korea, three of the four largest economies in Asia. Several analysts predicted that it would offer significant economic gains for signatory nations, as well as "pull the economic centre of gravity back towards Asia, with China poised to take the lead in writing trade rules for the region", leaving the U.S. behind in economic and political affairs. Reactions from others were neutral or negative, with some analysts saying that the economic gains from the trade deal would be modest. The RCEP has been criticized for ignoring labor, human rights, and environmental sustainability issues.

The new free trade bloc will be bigger than both the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement and the European Union. The combined GDP of potential RCEP members surpassed the combined GDP of Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) members in 2007. It was suggested that continued economic growth, particularly in China and Indonesia, could see total GDP in the original RCEP membership grow to over US$100 trillion by 2050, roughly double the project size of TPP economies. On 23 January 2017, UNpresident Idiot-in-Cheat signed a memorandum withdrawing the United States from the TPP, a move which was seen to improve the chances of success for RCEP.
at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Saturday, July 17, 2021

Lunar Economics

2020 Economy of the Moon: Lunar Economics? - AltS > .

at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

Saturday, May 22, 2021

Glocalization, Neomedievalism

.
Neo-Medievalism and the New World Order - Geopoliticus > .
23-9-1 Rise of economic nationalism | Business Beyond - DW > .
Sociopolitical Conflict

Globalization ⇔ Decoupling ..

The theory of Neomedievalism proposes that the international system is rapidly transforming into a world order similar to that which existed in Medieval Europe, with overlapping structures of authority and multiple loyalties of international actors, which is gradually eroding the power and agency of nation states.

There are two imagined futures in a Neomedieval worldview: one, of a coming anarchy, an era of systemic breakdown and perpetual wars; the second of a New Universalism in which new transnational regimes, which are secular version of the Catholic Church and the Holy Roman Empire, will be constructed to bring order to the world.
 
Neo-medievalism (or neomedievalism, new medievalism) is a term with a long history that has acquired specific technical senses in two branches of scholarship. In political theory about modern international relations, where the term is originally associated with Hedley Bull, it sees the political order of a globalized world as analogous to high-medieval Europe, where neither states nor the Church, nor other territorial powers, exercised full sovereignty, but instead participated in complex, overlapping and incomplete sovereignties. 

The idea of neomedievalism in political theory was first discussed in 1977 by theorist Hedley Bull in The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics to describe the erosion of state sovereignty in the contemporary globalized world:
It is also conceivable that sovereign states might disappear and be replaced not by a world government but by a modern and secular equivalent of the kind of universal political organisation that existed in Western Christendom in the Middle Ages. In that system no ruler or state was sovereign in the sense of being supreme over a given territory and a given segment of the Christian population; each had to share authority with vassals beneath, and with the Pope and (in Germany and Italy) the Holy Roman Emperor above. The universal political order of Western Christendom represents an alternative to the system of states which does not yet embody universal government.
Thus Bull suggested society might move towards "a new mediaevalism" or a "neo-mediaeval form of universal political order", in which individual notions of rights and a growing sense of a "world common good" were undermining national sovereignty. He proposed that such a system might help "avoid the classic dangers of the system of sovereign states by a structure of overlapping structures and cross-cutting loyalties that hold all peoples together in a universal society while at the same time avoiding the concentration inherent in a world government", though "if it were anything like the precedent of Western Christendom, it would contain more ubiquitous and continuous violence and insecurity than does the modern states system".

In this reading, globalization has resulted in an international system which resembles the medieval one, where political authority was exercised by a range of non-territorial and overlapping agents, such as religious bodies, principalities, empires and city-states, instead of by a single political authority in the form of a state which has complete sovereignty over its territory. Comparable processes characterising Bull's "new medievalism" include the increasing powers held by regional organisations such as the European Union, as well as the spread of sub-national and devolved governments, such as those of Scotland and Catalonia. These challenge the exclusive authority of the state. Private military companies, multinational corporations and the resurgence of worldwide religious movements (e.g. political Islam) similarly indicate a reduction in the role of the state and a decentralisation of power and authority.

Westphalian sovereignty, or state sovereignty, is a principle in international law that each state has exclusive sovereignty over its territory. The principle underlies the modern international system of sovereign states and is enshrined in the United Nations Charter, which states that "nothing ... shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state." According to the idea, every state, no matter how large or small, has an equal right to sovereignty. Political scientists have traced the concept to the Peace of Westphalia (1648), which ended the Thirty Years' War. The principle of non-interference was further developed in the 18th century. The Westphalian system reached its peak in the 19th and 20th centuries, but it has faced recent challenges from advocates of humanitarian intervention.

Stephen J. Kobrin in 1998 added the forces of the digital world economy to the picture of neomedievalism. In an article entitled "Back to the Future: Neomedievalism and the Postmodern Digital World Economy" in the Journal of International Affairs, he argued that the sovereign state as we know it – defined within certain territorial borders – is about to change profoundly, if not to wither away, due in part to the digital world economy created by the Internet, suggesting that cyberspace is a trans-territorial domain operating outside of the jurisdiction of national law.

Anthony Clark Arend also argued in his 1999 book Legal Rules and International Society that the international system is moving toward a "neo-medieval" system. He claimed that the trends that Bull noted in 1977 had become even more pronounced by the end of the twentieth century. Arend argues that the emergence of a "neo-medieval" system would have profound implications for the creation and operation of international law.

Although Bull originally envisioned neomedievalism as a positive trend, it has its critics. Bruce Holsinger in Neomedievalism, Neoconservatism, and the War on Terror argues that neoconservatives "have exploited neomedievalism's conceptual slipperiness for their own tactical ends." Similarly, Philip G. Cerny's "Neomedievalism, Civil War and the New Security Dilemma" (1998) also sees neomedievalism as a negative development and claims that the forces of globalization increasingly undermine nation-states and interstate forms of governance "by cross-cutting linkages among different economic sectors and social bonds," calling globalization a "durable disorder" which eventually leads to the emergence of the new security dilemmas that had analogies in the Middle Ages. Cerny identifies six characteristics of a neomedieval world that contribute to this disorder: multiple competing institutions; lack of exogenous territorializing pressures both on sub-national and international levels; uneven consolidation of new spaces, cleavages, conflicts and inequalities; fragmented loyalties and identities; extensive entrenchment of property rights; and spread of the "grey zones" outside the law as well as black economy.

Glocalization (a portmanteau of globalization and localization) is the "simultaneous occurrence of both universalizing and particularizing tendencies in contemporary social, political, and economic systems." The notion of glocalization "represents a challenge to simplistic conceptions of globalization processes as linear expansions of territorial scales. Glocalization indicates that the growing importance of continental and global levels is occurring together with the increasing salience of local and regional levels."

Glocal, an adjective, by definition, is "reflecting or characterized by both local and global considerations." The term “glocal management” in a sense of “think globally, act locally” is used in the business strategies of companies, in particular, by Japanese companies that are expanding overseas.

The concept comes from the Japanese word dochakuka, which means global localization. It had referred to the adaptation of farming techniques to local conditions. It became a buzzword when Japanese business adopted it in the 1980s. The word stems from Manfred Lange, head of the German National Global Change Secretariat, who used "glocal" in reference to Heiner Benking's exhibit Blackbox Nature: Rubik's Cube of Ecology at an international science and policy conference.

"Glocalization" first appeared in a late 1980s publication of the Harvard Business Review. At a 1997 conference on "Globalization and Indigenous Culture", sociologist Roland Robertson stated that glocalization "means the simultaneity – the co-presence – of both universalizing and particularizing tendencies."

"Glocalization" entered use in the English-speaking world via Robertson in the 1990s, Canadian sociologists Keith Hampton and Barry Wellman in the late 1990s and Zygmunt Bauman. Erik Swyngedouw was another early adopter.

In literary theory regarding the use and abuse of texts and tropes from the Middle Ages in postmodernity, the term "neomedieval" was popularized by the Italian medievalist Umberto Eco in his 1986 essay "Dreaming of the Middle Ages".

Since the 1990s, "glocalization" has been productively theorized by several sociologists and other social scientists, and may be understood as a process that combines the concerns of localism with the forces of globalization, or a local adaptation and interpretation of global forces. As a theoretical framework, it is compatible with many of the concerns of postcolonial theory, and its impact is particularly recognizable in the digitization of music and other forms of cultural heritage. The concept has since been used in the fields of geography, sociology, and anthropology. It is also a prominent concept in business studies, particularly in the area of marketing goods and services to a heterogenous set of consumers.

Although the Westphalian system developed in early modern Europe, its staunchest defenders [users] can now be found in the non-Western world. The presidents of China and Russia issued a joint statement in 2001 vowing to "counter attempts to undermine the fundamental norms of the international law with the help of concepts such as 'humanitarian intervention' and 'limited sovereignty'". China and Russia have used their United Nations Security Council veto power to block what they see as [claim is] American violations of state sovereignty in Syria. Russia was left out of the original Westphalian system in 1648, but post-Soviet Russia has seen Westphalian sovereignty as a means to balance [oppose] American power by encouraging a multipolar world order [A pseudo-principle diametrically opposed to the military Sovietization of nations occupied and forcefully subsumed into the USSR.].

Some in the West also speak favorably of the Westphalian state. American political scientist Stephen Walt urged U.S. UNpresident Wanna-Be-Autocrat to return to Westphalian principles, calling it a "sensible course" for American foreign policy. American political commentator Pat Buchanan has also spoken in favor of the traditional nation-state.

Addendum to the video presentation -- emergence of Cyberspace as a realm where we might already be seeing Neomedieval structures of power developing and influencing the trajectory of global politics.

New World Order - End of Liberal International System? - https://youtu.be/90rjypFSLVg .

Spheres of Influence in the Cold War - https://youtu.be/tGKnwFNWmQ8 .

Podcast: Theatres of the New Cold War - https://youtu.be/cve8XyTxjiI .

Podcast: Outer Space and Fourth Dimension of Geopolitics - https://youtu.be/Ri3ag1wRIZA .

Americanization .
Cultural homogenization .

at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, March 22, 2021

Geostrategy ~ Geopolitics, Geoeconomics, Military Projection

2021 What would happen if Russia collapsed? - CaRe > .
24-2-16 Why Russia is Invading the Arctic (why it matters) - Icarus > .
23-11-5 [XIR] Corrupt, Sanctioned Iran's Military & Power Projection - Perun > .
at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, January 26, 2021

Catalina - ASW

Catalina Flying Boat

Coastal Command - ASW
https://youtu.be/uTE-jHVIKJU?t=19m3s
Inside The Cockpit - Short Sunderland - MAH > .
Sub Chasers of the Civil Air Patrol > .
Why Aircraft Patrols Were a Source of Fear for Nazi U-Boats > .
Why Depth Charges Don't Have to Touch a Submarine to Sink It > .

Catalina - ASW

Other work by the Coastal Command's Operational Research Section (CC-ORS) indicated that on average if the trigger depth of aerial-delivered depth charges (DCs) were changed from 100 feet to 25 feet, the kill ratios would go up. The reason was that if a U-boat saw an aircraft only shortly before it arrived over the target then at 100 feet the charges would do no damage (because the U-boat wouldn't have had time to descend as far as 100 feet), and if it saw the aircraft a long way from the target it had time to alter course under water so the chances of it being within the 20-foot kill zone of the charges was small. It was more efficient to attack those submarines close to the surface when the targets' locations were better known than to attempt their destruction at greater depths when their positions could only be guessed. Before the change of settings from 100 feet to 25 feet, 1% of submerged U-boats were sunk and 14% damaged. After the change, 7% were sunk and 11% damaged. (If submarines were caught on the surface, even if attacked shortly after submerging, the numbers rose to 11% sunk and 15% damaged). Blackett observed "there can be few cases where such a great operational gain had been obtained by such a small and simple change of tactics".
------
"The "exchange rate" ratio of output to input was a characteristic feature of operational research. By comparing the number of flying hours put in by Allied aircraft to the number of U-boat sightings in a given area, it was possible to redistribute aircraft to more productive patrol areas. Comparison of exchange rates established "effectiveness ratios" useful in planning. The ratio of 60 mines laid per ship sunk was common to several campaigns: German mines in British ports, British mines on German routes, and United States mines in Japanese routes."

http://www.feightstudios.com/navalasw.htm .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operations_research .
at No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

Wednesday, December 30, 2020

Sitzkreig Hesitation

Ignoring early signs of impending invasion > .
Shadows Of The Third Reich - Sitzkrieg, The Phony War > . 
WW2: The Beginning, "The Phony War" - AP > .
Phoney War, the Admiral Graf Spee and the Altmark Incident - HiGu > . 

at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, October 21, 2020

Hello Girls - WW1


When the first members of the American Expeditionary Force arrived in France in 1917 they found that the telephone lines already in operation were overloaded. To solve the problem, John J Pershing called for experienced, bilingual switchboard operators, which meant women. Hundreds would don the uniform and answer the call as “Hello Girls”, serving in the Signal Corps.

The St. Francis Dam was a curved concrete gravity dam, built to create a large regulating and storage reservoir for the city of Los Angeles, California. The reservoir was an integral part of the city's Los Angeles Aqueduct water supply infrastructure. It was located in San Francisquito Canyon of the Sierra Pelona Mountains, about 40 miles (64 km) northwest of downtown Los Angeles, and approximately 10 miles (16 km) north of the present day city of Santa Clarita.

The dam was designed and built between 1924 and 1926 by the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, then named the Bureau of Water Works and Supply. The department was under the direction of its general manager and chief engineer, William Mulholland.

At 11:57 p.m. on March 12, 1928, the dam catastrophically failed, and the resulting flood killed at least 431 people. The collapse of the St. Francis Dam is considered to be one of the worst American civil engineering disasters of the 20th century and remains the second-greatest loss of life in California's history, after the 1906 San Francisco earthquake and fire. The disaster marked the end of Mulholland's career.

at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , ,

Sunday, July 26, 2020

CCS - Combined Chiefs of Staff

Friendship Between Britain & USA | Warlords: Churchill vs Roosevelt - Time > .

Following the German declaration of war on America on the 11th of December 1941, Britain gained an invaluable ally. Securing a joint military command between the new partnership was central to its success.

42-1-1 Arcadia Conference & Declaration of the United Nations ..

The Combined Chiefs of Staff (CCS) was the supreme military staff for the United States and Britain during World War II. It set all the major policy decisions for the two nations, subject to the approvals of British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

The CCS emerged from the meetings of the Arcadia Conference in Washington, from December 22, 1941 to January 14, 1942. Shortly after Pearl Harbor, Prime Minister Churchill and his senior military staff used Arcadia as an opportunity to lay out the general strategy for the war. The American Army Chief of Staff George Marshall came up with the idea of a combined board, and sold it to Roosevelt and together the two sold the idea to Churchill. Churchill's military aides were much less favorable, and General Alan Brooke, the chief of the British Army, was strongly opposed. However, Brooke was left behind in London to handle the daily details of running the British war effort, and was not consulted. As part of Marshall's plan, Roosevelt also set up a Joint Chiefs of Staff on the American side. The combined board was permanently stationed in Washington, where Field Marshal John Dill represented the British half.

The responsibilities of the Combined Chiefs of Staff were set out as follows: Under the direction of the heads of the United Nations, the Combined Chiefs of Staff will collaborate in the formulation and execution of policies and plans concerning:
(a) the strategic conduct of the war;
(b) the broad programme of war requirements based on approved strategic policy;
(c) the direction of munition resources based on strategic needs and the availability of means of transportation; and
(d) the requirements for overseas transportation for the fighting services of the United Nations, based on approved strategic priority.

In the report of the Arcadia Conference, it is noted, to avoid confusion, that the word 'Combined' applied to the Combined Staffs of, or combined action by two or more of the united nations, whilst the word 'Joint' signified inter- service planning by one of the 'united nations.'

The CCS was constituted from the British Chiefs of Staff Committee and the American Joint Chiefs of Staff, The American unit was created in part to present a common front to the British Chiefs of Staff. It held its first formal meeting on 9 February 1942 to coordinate U.S. military operations between War and Navy Departments.

The CCS charter was approved by President Roosevelt 21 April 1942. The American members of the CCS were General George C. Marshall, the United States Army chief of staff, the Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Harold R. Stark (replaced early in 1942 by Admiral Ernest J. King); and the Chief (later Commanding General) of the Army Air Forces, Lt. Gen. Henry H. Arnold. In July 1942 a fourth member was added, the President's personal Chief of Staff, Admiral William D. Leahy.

On the British side the Chiefs of Staff only normally attended during the heads of states' conferences. Instead the British Joint Staff Mission was permanently situated in Washington, D.C. to represent British interests. The British members were a representative of the Prime Minister, in his capacity as Minister of Defence, and the Chiefs of Staff Committee, which consisted of the First Sea Lord, the Chief of the Imperial General Staff, and the Chief of the Air Staff, or the Washington representative of each. The representative of the Prime Minister was Field Marshal Sir John Dill and after his death Field Marshal Sir Henry Maitland Wilson. The Washington representatives of the Chiefs of Staff Committee, who normally met with the United States members in place of their principals, were the senior officers from their respective services on the British Joint Staff Mission in Washington. In the course of the war, the First Sea Lord was represented by Admiral Sir Charles Little, Admiral Sir Andrew Cunningham, Admiral Sir Percy Noble, and Admiral Sir James Somerville; the Chief of the Imperial General Staff was represented by Lt. Gen. Sir Colville Wemyss and Lt. Gen. G. N. Macready; and the Chief of the Air Staff was represented by Air Marshal D. C. S. Evill, Air Marshal Sir William L. Welsh, and Air Marshal Douglas Colyer. Dill, a close friend of Marshall, often took the American position and prevented a polarizations that would undermine effectiveness.

The Combined Chiefs of Staff organization included the Combined Secretariat and a supporting organisation of combined committees and sub-committees to deal with specific subjects. Of these, the Combined Planning Staff were the body of officers appointed by the Combined Chiefs of Staff to make studies, draft plans, and perform such other work as placed on the Combined Chiefs of Staff agenda and delegated to them by the Combined Planning Staff. Officers attached to the British Joint Staff Mission provided the British element in the secretariat for these combined committees. Their authority did not extend to operations controlled directly by the Admiralty and the US Navy Department.


In the Northern hemisphere spring of 1942, Britain and the United States agreed on a worldwide division of strategic responsibility. On 24 March 1942, the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff were designated as primarily responsible for the war in the Pacific, and the British Chiefs for the Middle East-Indian Ocean region, while the European-Mediterranean-Atlantic area would be a combined responsibility of both staffs. China was designated a separate theater commanded by its chief of state, Chiang Kai-shek, though within the United States' sphere of responsibility. Six days later the Joint Chiefs of Staff divided the Pacific theater into three areas: the Pacific Ocean Areas (POA), the South West Pacific Area (SWPA), and the Southeast Pacific Area. The Pacific Ocean Area command formally became operational on 8 May.

The CCS usually held its meetings in Washington. The full CCS usually met only during the great wartime conferences on grand strategy, such as at Casablanca (see List of WW2 conferences). The British Chiefs of Staff took their place on the Combined Chiefs of Staff Committee at the international conferences (at which Roosevelt and Churchill settled the main lines of allied strategy). For the conferences at Tehran (December 1943), Yalta (February 1945) and Potsdam (July-August 1945), the British and Americans were joined by the Russian Chiefs of Staff. The meetings of heads of government at those conferences were designed to reach formal agreement on issues thoroughly staffed by the CCS. At the Casablanca Conference in January 1943, General Frank Maxwell Andrews was appointed commander of all United States forces in the European Theater of Operations.

Although it was responsible to both the British and American governments, the CCS controlled forces from many different countries in all theaters, including the Pacific, India and North Africa. The existence of the Combined Chiefs of Staff enabled forces to be effectively placed under a commander of a different nationality without breaking the chain of responsibility to their home government, as commanders were responsible to the Combined Chiefs who respectively continued to remain responsible to their own governments. This responsibility was both advisory (in terms of the settlement between governments of the overall strategy) and executive (in terms of formulating and issuing directives to implement that strategy). Representatives of allied nations were not members of the CCS but accepted procedure included consultation with "Military Representatives of Associated Powers" on strategic issues. Much cooperation continued between the British and American militaries after the war including the Combined Chiefs of Staff structure, and it was used again during the Berlin Blockade of 1948 even as negotiations began that resulted in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

sī vīs pācem, parā bellum

igitur quī dēsīderat pācem praeparet bellum    therefore, he who desires peace, let him prepare for war sī vīs pācem, parā bellum if you wan...

  • >>>
    >>> Economic >  >>> Geopolitics > >>> Military > >>> Resources > > >> Sociopoli...
  • >>□□ ⧫⧫ ●γ
    >> playlists >>  » >> pages □□ »□ ⧫⧫ section indexes ⧫⧫ ⧫⧫ & ⧫ alphabetic index  ⧫⧫ & ⧫ ● Geographic Entities   ...
  • > > Video Topics > >
    >   > Alliances >  > >  > Authoritarianism >  > > > Civil Wars > > >  > Ċold Ŵar 2 Geopolitics ...