Description
Book SynopsisJack Snyder''s analysis of the attitudes of military planners in the years prior to the Great War offers new insight into the tragic miscalculations of that era and into their possible parallels in present-day war planning. By 1914, the European military powers had adopted offensive military strategies even though there was considerable evidence to support the notion that much greater advantage lay with defensive strategies. The author argues that organizational biases inherent in military strategists'' attitudes make war more likely by encouraging offensive postures even when the motive is self-defense.
Drawing on new historical evidence of the specific circumstances surrounding French, German, and Russian strategic policy, Snyder demonstrates that it is not only rational analysis that determines strategic doctrine, but also the attitudes of military planners. Snyder argues that the use of rational calculation often falls victim to the pursuit of organizational interests such
Trade Review
One of the best comparative surveys of the war plans and strategic thinking of the General Staffs from the Franco-Prussian War to 1914.... An ambitious and interesting book both in its historical scope and in its theoretical implications for military decision making.
* Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science *
Snyder has made a significant contribution to strategic thought.
* Military Review *
This is a penetrating account, filled with valuable theoretical insights, of the military planning in France, Germany, and Russia on the eve of the First World War. Using the analytical approach of controlled comparison, Jack Snyder examines the role of doctrinal and organizational biases in military decision making and operational planning.... Snyder is superb in detailing Russian war planning in this era, providing the best account in English on this topic.
* Orbis *
