| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In his classic book Small Wars: Their Principles and Practice (1896), the military theorist Charles E. Callwell divided small wars into three broad classes: wars of conquest were fought to expand empires; pacification campaigns were internal, and often followed campaigns of conquest; campaigns to wipe out an insult, avenge a wrong, or overthrow a dangerous enemy, often developed into wars of conquest. While all three categories involved major political considerations, Callwell's text is often criticised for its lack of discussion of politics. However, Callwell recognised that, if the ultimate objective of a campaign was successfully to assimilate a people into the British Empire, then 'military intimidation' was ill adapted to that end. This article will argue that a strategy of 'butcher and bolt' was indeed considered by many commentators, including Callwell, to be the best way to win 'hearts and minds'. This stemmed from a belief in the all-importance of 'moral effect', a recurring theme in small wars literature. However, to view the British approach to colonial small wars as pure and simple brutality, in a 'dark age' before a more enlightened period of 'minimum force', is an oversimplification.
|