Author Description

The full power of America's combat capability has been restrained in a variety of forms since World War II. Restrictions on the use of military force as a political instrument have characterized each confrontation. The purpose of this paper is to examine one specific set of limitations imposed on the operational commander, rules of engagement. This paper initially explains the role ROEs play in the use of military force as a political instrument. Rules of engagement are then characterized into three categories using theory and a historical overview of recent armed conflicts. From this analysis, the relationship of rules of engagement and the design of operational plans are investigated. This study concludes that rules of engagement impact on the design of operations in three significant ways. First and foremost ROEs introduce a new equation of uncertainty into operations. Since rules of engagement are an indirect reflection of policy imposed on the battlefield, the operational commander must not only understand the political objective but be prepared for the rapid, fluctuating changes in policy. Second, the operational commander must address the unusual degree of risk associated with limiting the use of force in relation to the enemy. Finally, limitations on the use of force can radically change the capabilities of the friendly force. The operational commander must access his own force with respect to the limitations imposed by rules of engagement. This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work. This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, a