There is a strong relationship between military strategy to steer ground battles and geomorphology, the science that teaches land topography, including natural constituents such as outcrops, low lands, plains, valleys, deserts, wet salty lands… etc.
A military commander’s ability to achieve victory in land battles is commensurate with his knowledge and awareness of the terrain of the battle ground, avoiding risks and tacking advantage of the nature of the land to achieve victory. He would be able to utilize natural impediments to hinder enemy advance.
The successful military commander is aware that land battles require appropriate knowledge of the best passageways for use by the military machinery as well as for delivering supplies. He is also aware of the need for digging trenches and water wells to maintain water supplies during the battle. This is in addition to the best place for staging military camps, shelters and runways, using detailed topographic maps with various scales to achieve victory.
The military commander’s awareness of the land geomorphology should be based on two important facts to ultimately achieve victory:
First: utilizing battle ground positive geomorphology to defeat the enemy.
Second: utilizing battle ground’s negative geomorphology to impede enemy advance and abort enemy plans.
Upon receiving the geomorphology of the battle ground, the military commander should take into consideration the positive terrain such as highlands and hills for use as barriers and barricades to block enemy vision and avoid his attacks. Also the negative terrain such as valleys, lowlands and dry canals should be utilized as trenches and natural barricades to protect troops, equipment and camps against enemy attacks.
The following is a review of the most important geomorphologic forms that should be used by military commanders on both sides either to achieve victory or impede enemy advance.
First: mountains:
The difficulty of fighting in mountainous regions makes it imperative on the military commander to adequately prepare his men due to the difficulty of maneuvering in both offensive and defensive situations. This is in addition to shortage of food and military supplies. Also to be taken into account are the unpredictable weather conditions such as sudden rains, clouds, dust or even predatory animals.
Mountainous regions have different characteristics, including ranges such as the 3000-meter-high Al-Sarawat mountain range in western Saudi Arabia, overlooking Tihama plain. Interrupted ranges include Median mountains in northwestern Saudi Arabia. Mountains could also be forest-covered, further complicating the uncovering of their locations and the passageways in the region.
This gives the field commander the opportunity to utilize these mountainous characteristic to enhance fighting ability, widens maneuverability during the battle and protect his men against enemy attacks.
The utilization of the forest-covered mountainous slopes may compel the enemy to use the previous routes and find itself within the army’s fire range. This makes it easy to destroy the enemy and prevent enemy advance.
Arid slopes make the enemy vulnerable and within the army’s fire range. Moreover, optical deception and erroneous estimation of real objects on mountain slopes make them smaller and more distant, while the enemy on the slopes-when looking upwards- could not adjust and direct its horizontal-firing weapons.
Fighting from high mountainous regions gives the commander the opportunity to disguise and camouflage, appearing at the right time to launch surprise attacks against the enemy. This is in addition to organizing effective reconnaissance mission. Also the setting up of field command headquarters, tunnel networks, trenches, depots and engineering fortifications is more effective in mountain regions compared to flat plains. Moreover, fighting operations in mountain regions require huge stockpiles of equipment, munitions, ford stuffs and water to achieve steadfastness and continuous resistance in the event of a blockade, the weakest point faced by armies fighting in mountainous regions.
Despite the development of fighting techniques and weapons on the battle ground, particularly the air force’s ability to resolve mountainous battles, the geomorphologic elements are still vital for resolving land battles.
The experiences of Muslims and other commanders with respect to waging mountainous battles are worthy of careful study to glean the principles of fighting such battles. History has known decisive wars won or lost by Muslims. Commanding the polytheist army, Khaled Ibin Al-Waleed reversed victory elements at the end of the battle of Uhod: he utilized the geomorphologic elements (the sharpshooters mountain) and the adjacent valley, surprising the Islamic army from the other side. Also, during Nahawand battle (Fath Al-Futooh –21 H), the armies crossed Zagros mountain range to Persia. Add to this the other Islamic battles in North Africa and the conquest of Andalusia (Spain) in 92H, when the armies crossed the mountain ranges between Africa and Andalusia, entering southern Europe via Andalusia.
The Balkan battle during World War II, was a unique mountainous war, exhausting the German army morally and materially.
Meanwhile, the French forces’ defeat in Algeria in 1374H was attributed to the Algerian Mujahideen’s mountainous strongholds, inflicting material and moral losses on the French forces.
Most important recent mountainous battles include the 1401H Afghan-Russian war and the first and second Chechnya wars in 1412H and 1419H. Add to this Saudi war against the Huthi faction. During this war,the Saudi army displayed remarkable fighting skills, utilizing the mountains to resolve the battle. Also, the air force was used in the war.
Second: the desert:
In the Middle East, the word Sahara transcends the sand formations to add flat plains that include valleys, hills and salty lands, extremely hot in summer and severely cold in winter with scarce rain and frequent sandstorms.
The toughest terrain unsuitable for army operations is that characterized by sand veins and hills. Such terrain may turn into a graveyard for some military machinery, particularly the shifting sands regions. Therefore, the commander should not subject his men and machinery to such locations to avoid losing the war.
The commander should also steer clear from staging his army camps or refugee shelters in a region characterized by sand veins and hills as they negatively affect the army’s personnel, equipment and weapons, hindering their fighting assignments.
Meanwhile, the commander could utilize such terrain to block enemy advance, trapping its men and equipment.
The open desert is suitable for crossing rather than staying due to the lack of protective terrain, while the crossing of valleys requires special equipment if bridges and passageways are not available.
Third: Al-Harrat:
These are molten rocks spewed by a volcano after eruption. It is difficult for military equipment to cross this rocky terrain and the commander is advised to utilize them as a buffer zone between his forces and the enemy.
Fourth: salty lands:
These are loose, salty lands that are unsuitable for crossing by heavy vehicles. The commander should utilize such lands as buffer areas or a trap zone for enemy forces.
Marine landings on Saudi Arabia’s gulf or Red Sea coasts are in most cases unsuccessful because these areas include wet salty terrain, limiting the landing space and making it easier to monitor and defeat enemy forces. Also, the commander should stop enemy advance or compel it to try to cross these wet salty lands where its forces will be bogged down.
The above four examples are enough to give the military commander a good idea about geomorphology’s importance in military strategy and the successful steering of land battles.
As Saudi Arabia’s geomorphology abounds in such types of terrain, the Saudi army’s field commanders should be well aware of them to utilize them on both sides of the battle, mindful of the need for training and joint maneuvers in such types of terrain.
Dr. Abdul Rahman Bin Abdul Aziz Al-Nashwan