The “Schlieffen Plan” of the First World War is arguably the most widely known battle plan in the history of warfare. It is thought that Count Schlieffen's plan was based on Hannibal's victory at Cannae and inspired by the last chapter from Carl Von Clausewitz's “On War” entitled “The Plan of a War designed to Lead to the Total Defeat of the Enemy.” Ultimately the plan failed. Or did it? It is well known that certain aspects of the plan were changed by Schlieffen's successor Moltke the Younger. Many of these changes were crucial to the original plan and Count Schlieffen criticized Moltke the Younger for altering his magnum opus before he died.
As Moltke the Younger had made several changes in the plan, once it failed to defeat the French he became the obvious scapegoat. But while it is true that his changes had significantly warped the original version of the “Schlieffen Plan,” one must also remember Moltke the Elder's (Moltke the Younger's uncle) sound maxim that “no battle plan survives contact with the enemy.” For even Count Schlieffen's original plan, with all its methodical calculations, failed to take into account a few variables that with or without Moltke's changes, may have doomed the “Schlieffen Plan” from the start.
First it is necessary to illustrate the context in which the original “Schlieffen Plan” was devised and how it was supposed to work. In the event of war, Germany assumed it would have to fight the French in the west and the Russians in the east. Faced with such a strategic nightmare the obvious solution was to quickly defeat one nation, freeing the greater part of the German army to then concentrate against the other. The only question was which country would be dealt with first. Although Russia was still a backward state with an inefficient army, its geography made it difficult for the German Army to strike a quick and decisive blow. France on the other hand had a relatively competent army and a frontier lined with powerful fortresses.
Read Full Article »