Center of gravity: what Clausewitz really meant

Joint Force Quarterly, Summer, 2003 by Joseph L. Strange, Richard Iron

How does one identify moral centers of gravity? The process begins and ends with people, for only they can create and sustain moral resistance. People fall into the following categories.

Leaders have the will to develop, execute, and sustain a policy of opposition to an enemy as well as the ability to exert that will through the military and people (examples include Saddam Hussein in 1990-91, Winston Churchill in 1940-41, and Joseph Stalin in World War II).

Ruling elites are closed groups in which real power resides in their members, who are loosely described as kingmakers, and who direct policy and wield control over the military and people (examples are the Soviet Politburo in the 1970s and clerics in the 1979 Iranian revolution).

Strong-willed populations are large groups with common beliefs that compel them to engage in conflict (examples include the Palestinians and Israelis in their dispute over the Occupied Territories and Americans in the wake of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor).

Two central elements common to these moral centers of gravity are the will to fight and the ability to command the necessary resources.

According to Clausewitz, "The first, the supreme, the most far-reaching act of judgment that the statesman and commander have to make is to establish ... the kind of war on which they are embarking.... This is the first of all strategic questions and the most comprehensive." They must therefore first appraise the moral and physical character of an enemy to include its moral and physical centers of gravity. There is no alternative, short cut, or analytical model to make up for inaccurate assessment of the enemy when deciding on centers of gravity.

Defeating a leader differs from undermining popular will. In Afghanistan, for instance, planners could have considered several moral centers of gravity: Mullah Omar, the Taliban elite, or large segments of the Pashtun population. The right choice assumed in-depth knowledge of the Taliban and the local situation, and a wrong one would likely have led to a misdirected campaign.

By appealing to the original concept of centers of gravity, one can determine that they are dynamic, positive, active agents (people in formations and groups or individuals), obvious (more for physical than moral centers, depending on the quality of intelligence gathered on an enemy), and powerful and strike effective blows. Physical centers of gravity can be visualized more easily as armies or units, those things that resist an enemy. By contrast, moral centers of gravity are less obvious. Yet it is essential to understand them since they are likely to be more important on the strategic level.

Clausewitzian centers of gravity are not characteristics, capabilities, or locations. They are dynamic and powerful physical and moral agents of action or influence with certain qualities and capabilities that derive their benefit from a given location or terrain. Further analysis is required to clearly define the relationship between centers of gravity and critical vulnerabilities, thus enabling planners to better focus sources of power on developing successful strategies and campaigns. This process will indicate where characteristics, capabilities, and locations properly belong in the overall scheme of things when thinking about warfighting.