1
Roles Of the Human Context Within the Operational Environment as It Existed During
World War Two
Student's Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course Number: Course Name
Instructor's Name
Date
2
Roles Of The Human Context Within the Operational Environment as It Existed During
World War Two
Compare and contrast the strategy and tactics of Pacific and European theatres in
World War II.
The historical development of the theatres of operations during World War II indicates
the significant roles of the human context within the operational environment. June 1950 saw the
formation of the office of a theatre commander, whose primary role was to effectively coordinate
land, sea, and air forces at his disposal.1 The theatre commander became the central figure of all
operations, guiding soldiers in executing all plants with energy and precision while putting in
place plans to deal with unforeseen contingencies. A theatre commander was also responsible for
executing tactical operations of all army forces in the theatre.2 After the Second World War, the
need for a theatre army as a distinct organization became inevitable. In its most basic form, a
theatre brought together armed forces from different fields, including components of the Army,
Navy, and Air Force, that were often organized in combination to form a theatre of operations.3
The Pacific Theatre would be started on a note of military reverses, which saw the President
order General MacArthur to withdraw his forces from the Philippines to Australia.
General MacArthur would then reconstitute his forces for the long march as ordered by
the President, a move that significantly became an important strategy in the Pacific Theatre.
Specifically, the forces' return resulted in the eventual surrender of the Japanese and a
1 Ney, Virgil. Evolution Of a Theater of Operations Headquarters, 1941-1967. Combat
Operations Research Group, 1967, 2.
2 Ney, 2.
3 Ney, 4.
3
subsequent occupation of their homeland.4 The United States did not give in to the defeat by the
Japanese, and it was the choice of tactics and strategies that would lead to the recapture of the
Philippines and other islands. Specifically, the Pacific Theatre enjoyed its most significant win
following the creation of six Marine divisions, each with associated air force and several AAF
units.5 The Pacific Theatre also demonstrated superior tactics in the sea using its navy. History
indicates that the naval battles fronted by the Pacific Theatre commanders exceeded the battles in
that had taken place in Bismarck Sea or the Solomons in scale and importance.6 Most
importantly, the Pacific Theatre relied on carrier borne aircraft, which completed the reduction of
the Japanese naval and air strength.
Undeniably, the strategies used by General MacArthur in the Pacific Theatre differed
significantly from those used by General Eisenhower in the large landmass of the European
Theatre. General MacArthur fought an amphibious war, which involved using ground forces,
naval army, and air armies who constantly worked together to actualize constant island-hopping
campaigns.7 The Pacific Theatre secured islands as their air bases, as well as the bases where
they would get their constant supplies. However, there were islands of varying sizes, which
constituted the bulk of the land masses that General MacArthur needed to guide his forces to
secure. The focus on securing different islands constituted the basic environmental differences
between the European Theatre and the Pacific Theatre.8 Still, the Pacific Theatre deviated from
4 Ney, Virgil. Evolution Of a Theater of Operations Headquarters, 1941-1967. Combat
Operations Research Group, 1967, 11.
5 Rein, Christopher M. Multi-Domain Battle in the Southwest Pacific Theater of World War II. Fort Leavenworth, KS:
Army University Press, 2017, 168.
6 Rein, 168.
7 Ney, 11.
8 Ney, 11.
4
the standard format associated with a theatre of operations compared to the European Theatre.
The reasons given for this deviation included the extent of the ground area involved, the terrain,
and the nature of the campaigns launched against the war enemies.9 The issue of supplies also
emerges as one of the reasons for the significant difference between European Theatre and
Pacific Theatre.
The Pacific Theatre noted that it was a challenge to get its supplies across the vast waters,
and it meant the establishment of a single headquarters for administrative and supply factors.10
The European Theatre also differentiated itself from its tactical operations. Unlike the Pacific
Theatre, the European Theatre operated under the principle of unity of command, which was
under the directorship of a Supreme Commander.11 For the European Theatre, the Allied
combined theatre effort became the most vital factor in planning and executing its tactical
operations. Still, the military skills and workforce provided by the British became the major
factor that guaranteed victory by working in harmony with American leadership.12 The command
aspect, coming from the directives of the Supreme Commander, was exerted, and victory was
assured by pulling allies together as a team.
There are significant similarities between the Pacific Theatre and the European Theatre.
There is evidence that every side of the Second World War intended to win the war by all means.
Based on a comparative analysis between the two theatres, it emerges that much of what made
9 Ney, 13.
10 Ney, Virgil. Evolution Of a Theater of Operations Headquarters, 1941-1967. Combat
Operations Research Group, 1967, 13.
11 Ney, 13.
12 Ney, 13.
5
them different was the role of the human element. Undeniably, both the Pacific and European
theatres used enviable technologies, but it was the presence of persons, such as the theatre
commander and the superior commander, that led to successful encounters with war enemies.
6
Bibliography
Dzwonchyk,>Wayne M..,>Skates,>John Ray.>A Brief History of the U.S. Army in World War
II.>United States:>Center of Military History, U.S. Army,>1992.
Rein, Christopher M. Multi-Domain Battle in the Southwest Pacific Theater of World War II.
Fort Leavenworth, KS: Army University Press, 2017.
Ney, Virgil. Evolution Of a Theater of Operations Headquarters, 1941-1967. Combat Operations
Research Group, 1967. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/AD0675414.pdf
