The Application of Diplomacy, Information, Military, Economic (DIME) in World War II Crowl (1978), in a lecture at the Air Force Academy, discussed the importance of studying history as a military strategist and highlighted six questions that must be considered by civilian and military leaders responsible for war related decision-making. One of these questions concerns an assessment of the alternatives to war and the development of contingency plans, if the chosen alternative to war fails (Crowl, 1978). This paper attempts to examine Crowl’s question about the alternatives to military power from the perspective of President Franklin D. Roosevelt using the Diplomacy, Information, Military, Economic (DIME) construct of the national instruments …show more content…
In the late 1930s, Roosevelt believed this strategy would be effective based on his assessment of Germany’s waning resources and power as a result of maintaining full military mobilization for the better part of a decade; this was supported by European military intelligence sources who reported Germany had almost exhausted its gasoline supply (Bell, 2008). Tooze (2006) describes how the shortages of raw materials negatively impacted Germany’s armaments and aircraft production; however, Bell (2008) indicates Hitler did not fully mobilize until 1942. Roosevelt’s DIME approach towards Germany was heavily reliant on economic and information means through the use of sanctions, blockades, and information operations. Information operations included statements made by Roosevelt that only served to antagonize Hitler as well as the fact that Roosevelt’s support of the Allied cause was increasingly obvious to the world (Bell, 2008; Tooze, 2006). Tooze (2006) proposes that Hitler accelerated his military advance into Poland and the subsequent world war as a result of Germany’s economic hardships and decreasing military advantage and the growing alliance between the United States and the Allies, an unintended consequence of Roosevelt’s …show more content…
Maechling (2000) states Japan was dependent on the United States for many imports, particularly petroleum; so, similar to his approach to Germany, Roosevelt utilized economic sanctions on raw materials and aviation fuel to incentivize Japan to engage in diplomatic discussions, a DIME strategy also relying heavily on diplomacy, economics, and information. Discussions reached a stalemate and Japan resumed the violent quest for resources into Indo-China, leading the United States to freeze all Japanese assets and cut off the supply of petroleum (Maechling, 2000). Roosevelt was well-informed about the state of affairs in the Pacific due to access to encrypted Japanese communications describing the devastating impact of the petroleum embargo and warnings from his ambassador to Japan, who predicted the nation might behave impulsively if cornered (Maechling, 2000). However, Roosevelt was not able to apply strategic insight to understand how Japan would respond to his use of non-military instruments, such as the petroleum embargo. Maechling (2000) postulates Roosevelt’s strategy may have contributed to another unintended consequence – the attack on Pearl
Strategy depends on numerous analytical factors and some of these present challenges to planners. This essay will identify some of these challenges that strategists encountered during WWII. Moreover, it will present strategy as a fluid process requiring refinement throughout.
To begin, the attack on Pearl Harbour was devastating to U.S. naval capabilities in the Pacific at the onset of their entry into the war. Japanese officials had grown tired of the U.S. oil embargo, which was meant to limit their territorial expansion and aggression in South-East Asia as well as China, and as negotiations weren’t reaching any conclusions they decided that the only course of action was a first strike on the aircraft carriers at Pearl Harbour to cripple U.S. naval capability in the Pacific (Rosenberg 1). The attack, which lasted about two hours, had resulted in the sinking of four battleships, among ...
Previous to the surprise Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour on December 7th 1941, tensions had been forming between the USA and Japan in the pacific. The US had cut of most supplies to Japan with the fear of Japanese expansion. The conflict that had been escalating between Japan and China since 1937 had the US treating Japan with great cautiousness. They had been monitoring Japanese Americans in anticipation of a surprise attack. However the attack on Pearl Harbour still shocked and outraged the American nation and affected the American psyche. After being assured that “a Japanese attack on Hawaii is regarded as the most unlikely thing in the world”(1), the sudden mass destruction of the U.S Navy’s Pacific fleet and deaths of roughly 2400 U.S soldiers and civilians as a result of such an attack undoubtedly lead to confusion and racial hatred amongst many US citizens. The assumption on the War Department’s behalf that Japan’s Navy were incapable of launching a full scale assault on the US Navy’s chief Pacific base was more than inaccurate. As a result, the US Naval base was unprepared and was quickly taken out. A hidden bias would soon become evident in both average civilians and higher positioned government officials. This bias against Japan aided in the formation of the Executive Order 9066, signed by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) on February 19th 1942.
FDR explained Japans deceitfulness to the US government as they wrote “false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace”(Roosevelt) in a letter delivered to the United States government shortly after the attack. The note didn't contain any information in regards to the recent attack, but the revelation of this information enforced Roosevelt’s creditability because this specific type of information isn't easily accessed. With the use of ethos in Roosevelt’s speech, he greatly influenced the citizens’ and governments will to enter the
The United States was at peace with Japan following peace negotiations that had been made. The President expresses his concern that the United States was still in conversation with Japanese government and its Emperor looking towards the continuation of peace in the pacific. Japanese had a series of secret plans to bomb America. The president says that the previous day’s attack on Hawaii Islands had caused severe destruction to American naval and military forces. In his speech, he expresses his regrets to inform the Congress that Americans had lost their lives. He continues to state that American ships had been submerged in elevated seas starting from San Francisco and Honolulu. Consequently, these harsh actions by Japanese government made Roosevelt, as commander in chief of the army and navy, dictate on the possible measures to fight back. He is very confident to state that even if it takes a long period for the United States to conquer the enemies’ actions, which he refers to as old-fashioned invention, the people of America will emerge the absolute victory. He believes that, through defending his nation against enemies, he will be acting upon the will of his people and of the Congress. He promises his people that such attacks w...
World War II, along with its numerous battles, brought great tension between two of the strongest countries during the 1940s: the United States and Japan. Conflict between these two countries started with Japan’s push past Chinese borders into Manchuria in search of the natural resources Japan lacks. At first, the United States avoided military action with Japan by waging economic warfare on them. This economic pressure included the passing of the Neutrality Act, which prohibited the sale of weapons to nations at war (Nash 513). Additionally, the United States placed oil embargoes on Japan hoping it would force Japan to shut down military operations in China. Japan, at a critical decision point, decided to bomb the American naval base at Pearl Harbor. On December 7th, 1941 at 6 a.m., Japan pilots bombed the naval base at Pearl Harbor, taking out the United States’ strongest battleships, killing thousands of people, and destroying hundreds of planes (Sherman). The day after Pearl Harbor, the United States declared war on Japan. Over the next few years, the United States and Japan fought fierce battles for dominance in the Pacific Ocean. One of the most important battles during the United States and Japanese war was the Battle of Midway. Japan was destroying the United States at sea, until the Battle of Midway gave the United States Pacific Fleet an edge on Japanese forces. The Battle of Midway was the most important naval engagement of World War II: it was a decisive battle that allowed the United States to be the dominant naval power in the Pacific and it marked a turning point in World War II for the United States.
Year’s prior to the bombing of Pearl Harbor the United States Government intercepted and decoded secret messages from the Japanese Islands and the Japanese Government. During that time the relationship with the Japanese Government and the rest of the world, especially the United States, was extremely tenuous. To avoid a war, which had begun to loom in the waters of the Pacific, off the coast of the Hawaiian Islands, a territory of the United States, Great Britain, the United States and other countries of the world called for all trade to the Japanese Islands be halted and assets to be frozen, which ultimately caused a near collapse of the Japanese economy. In the early Fall of 1941 the U.S. Government, knowing a possible war approached, secretly requested that those Japanese immigrants and the large population of Japanese- Americans (those born in the United States) be questioned as to their loyalty. “The President of the United States ordered a special intelligence finding investigation to be conducted” (Armor and Wright, 13-14).
Roosevelt paved the United States’ path from isolation to power. When World War II broke out in Europe, the country was largely isolationist. “Isolationist rhetoric reflected real public sentiment, as Roosevelt knew” (Renka, The Modern Presidency…). Roosevelt, however, seemed a step ahead of the nation. He stood firmly against Hitler and strove to align the United States with Western democracies and to strengthen the military (Greenstein 20). In 1938, Roosevelt’s foreign policy speeches began to reveal an obvious swing away from isolationism (Renka, Roosevelt’s Expansion of the Presidency). When Churchill reported in 1940 that the United Kingdom could no longer afford to pay for American weapons, Roosevelt used this opportunity to increase the United States’ influence in European affairs and lean his country slightly away from isolationism. Knowing Congress would oppose a loan to the United Kingdom, he created an entirely new program he called “lend-lease” (Greenstein 20).
Pearl Harbor was arranged by President Roosevelt in 1941, his first order inclosing duty to bring forth the new ships and diminish all carriers. Japan, desperate for resources, imported oil via the United States. The U.S disapproved of Japans divergence with China and as a result, halting supplies for Japan. Realizing the East Dutch Indies would be the next superlative destination to bear oil. Although, wanting to oppose connection with the United States, they detained from war in the East Dutch Indies. The goal of Pearl Harbor was to disarm the American fleet for a few months, therefore bringing hopelessness to the Dutch East Indies and seize resources to finance the war in China and the United States. Before this could occur, the United States admitting wrong and issued formal apologies. Giving $20,000 to each survivor of the Internment Camps in 1988. Granting this will never make up for the terrible conditions and racism that the Japanese-Americans had ...
Kaplan, Morton. "Why Roosevelt Wanted Japan to Attack Pearl Harbor. " World and I Oct. 2000: v.15 p.288. La Forte, Robert, and Ronald E. Marcello.
Although there is a level of complexity, an inherent and deterministic logic underpins traditional warfighting operations. Planners can apply certain principles to contingency planning for traditional warfighting. Once planners understand relationships between the parts of the problem, they recognize that every action has a consequence, and although some actions reinforce the adversary system’s power, others degrade that power. The typical wargaming method of action, reaction, and counteraction significantly contributes to this oversimplification of combat, which, after all, is a human endeavor and thus subject to fog and friction. Traditional wargaming is an extremely useful tool, but planners must understand that whereas the wargaming outcome is deterministic, combat is not. In complex, ill-structured problems, wargaming is still required, but the real benefits do not necessarily come from the results. The far greater benefits are derived from the discussions of possibilities and probabilities from the interaction of systems and actors within and between
Current military leadership should comprehend the nature of war in which they are engaged within a given political frame in order to develop plans that are coherent with the desired political end state. According to Clausewitz, war is an act of politics that forces an enemy to comply with certain conditions or to destroy him through the use of violence. A nation determines its vital interests, which drives national strategy to obtain or protect those interests. A country achieves those goals though the execution of one of the four elements of power, which are diplomatic, informational, military and economical means. The use of military force...
By the end of the Cold War the literature focusing on strategic studies has highlighted transformational changes within international system that affected and altered the very nature of war. As a result many security studies scholars have renounced traditional theories of strategic thought. Clausewitzian theory, in particular, has taken a lot of criticism, regarding its relevance to modern warfare. (Gray, How Has War Changed Since the End of the Cold War?, 2005)
In modern military theory, the highest level is the strategic level, in which activities at the strategic level focus directly on policy objectives, both during peace and warfare. In the study of modern military strategy, there is a distinction between military strategy and national strategy, in which the former is the use of military objective to secure political objectives and the latter coordinates and concentrates all the elements of national...
The memory is a complex subject with many scientists still studying it. Dr. Priya Rajasethupathy had a talk called, “Where Did The Memory Go?” at the Rockefeller University. It was held there from 4:30-7 pm on September 15, 2017. She discussed her scientific research on how memories were stored in the brain.