Attrition warfare is a military strategy in which a belligerent attempts to win a war
by wearing down the enemy to the point of collapse through continuous losses in personnel
and materiel.
The war will usually be won by the side with greater such resources.
The word attrition comes from the Latin root atterere to rub against, similar to the "grinding
down" of the opponent's forces in attrition warfare.
Strategic considerations Military theorists and strategists like Sun
Tzu have viewed attrition warfare as something to be avoided.
In the sense that attrition warfare represents an attempt to grind down an opponent through
superior numbers, it represents the opposite of the usual principles of war, where one
attempts to achieve decisive victories by using minimal necessary resources and in minimal
amount of time, through maneuver, concentration of force, surprise, and the like.
On the other hand, a side which perceives itself to be at a marked disadvantage in maneuver
warfare or unit tactics may deliberately seek out attrition warfare to neutralize its opponent's
advantages.
If the sides are nearly evenly matched, the outcome of a war of attrition is likely to
be a Pyrrhic victory.
The difference between war of attrition and other forms of war is somewhat artificial,
since war always contains an element of attrition.
However, one can be said to pursue a strategy of attrition when one makes it the main goal
to cause gradual attrition to the opponent eventually amounting to unacceptable or unsustainable
levels for the opponent while limiting one's own gradual losses to acceptable and sustainable
levels.
This should be seen as opposed to other main goals such as the conquest of some resource
or territory or an attempt to cause the enemy great losses in a single stroke.
Historically, attritional methods are tried when other methods have failed or are obviously
not feasible.
Typically, when attritional methods have worn down the enemy sufficiently to make other
methods feasible, attritional methods are abandoned in favor of other strategies.
In World War I, improvements in firepower but not communications and mobility forced
military commanders to rely on attrition, with terrible loss of life.
Attritional methods are in themselves usually sufficient to cause a nation to give up a
non-vital ambition, but other methods are generally necessary to achieve unconditional
surrender.
History
It is often argued that the best-known example of attrition warfare was during World War
I on the Western Front.
Both military forces found themselves in static defensive positions in trenches running from
Switzerland to the English Channel.
For years, without any opportunity for maneuvers, the only way the commanders thought they could
defeat the enemy was to repeatedly attack head on, to grind the other down.
One of the most enduring examples of attrition warfare on the Western Front is the Battle
of Verdun.
Erich von Falkenhayn later claimed that his tactics at Verdun were designed not to take
the city, but rather to destroy the French Army in its defense.
In practice the German Offensive was intended to go as far as possible and had no obvious
design to minimize German casualties and maximize French casualties.
Falkenhayn is described as wanting to "bleed France white" and thus the attrition tactics
were employed in the battle.
Attritional warfare in World War I has been shown by historians such as Hew Strachan to
have been used as a post hoc excuse for failed offensives.
The decision to launch a war of attrition at Verdun was also used to mask the failure
of Falkenhayn's original tactical plan.
Attrition to the enemy was easy to assert and difficult to refute, and thus may have
been a convenient face-saving exercise in the wake of many indecisive battles.
It is in many cases hard to see the logic of warfare by attrition because of the obvious
uncertainty of the level of damage to the enemy, and of the damage that the attacking
force may sustain to its own limited and expensive resources, while trying to achieve that damage.
That is not to say that a general will not be prepared to sustain high casualties while
trying to reach an objective.
An example in which one side used attrition warfare to neutralize the other side's advantage
in maneuverability and unit tactics occurred during the latter part of the American Civil
War, when Ulysses S. Grant pushed the Confederate Army continually, in spite of losses, confident
that the Union's supplies and manpower would overwhelm the Confederacy even if the casualty
ratio was unfavorable; this indeed proved to be the case.
Other examples The "delaying" tactics of Quintus Fabius Maximus
"Cunctator" against Hannibal Barca during the Second Punic War.
Battle of Actium of 31 BC during the Roman civil wars
The Hungarian resistance against the Mongols 1241–1242
The Đại Việt Empire, three repulsions of Kublai Khan in 1258, 1285 and 1288
The American strategy during the American Revolutionary War
The French invasion of Russia by Napoleon Bonaparte in 1812
Trench warfare in the American Civil War, notably the Siege of Petersburg
Trench warfare in World War I, including the Battle of the Somme, the Battle of Verdun
and many others The Spanish Civil War
Tonnage war in the Atlantic and Pacific during World War II
The Air battle for Great Britain in World War II after the bombing of London
Static battles in World War II, including Soviet urban defense during the Battle of
Stalingrad Battles of Rzhev
The final two years of the Korean War The Vietnam War
The "Long War" during the Provisional IRA's armed campaign against the British Army during
the Troubles.
The Israeli-Egyptian War of Attrition from 1967–1970.
The Soviet war in Afghanistan The later phases of the Iran–Iraq War
The War in Afghanistan Sri Lankan military's crushing of LTTE
The 2011 Libyan civil war is arguably an example of attrition warfare.
The Mexican Drug War, where the Mexican government seeks to fatally weaken the cartels.
Given the recent rise of irregular autodefensas militia units after a number of smaller attacks
against cartels by irregulars possibly from the United States, this phase of warfare may
be coming to an end.
The Syrian Civil War See also
Asymmetric warfare Guerrilla warfare
Human wave attack Mexican standoff
No-win situation Pyrrhic victory
Winner's curse Win-win game
Military theory: Fabian strategy
Flypaper theory Lanchester's laws
Loss Exchange Ratio Maneuver warfare
Ivan Bloch References