At the operational and strategic levels, military planners use the concepts of centers of gravity and decisive points to assist them in determining the best ways for accomplishing assigned tasks. By identifying the enemy's center of gravity, the planner determines the enemy assets that must be defeated to gain victory. On the other hand, by identifying the friendly center of gravity, the planner has determined the friendly assets that must be protected to retain freedom of action to attack the enemy's center of gravity. Since it may not be possible to directly attack enemy centers of gravity, friendly forces attack formations, positions, or support structures that lead directly to the center of gravity. These are referred to as decisive points. There is a hierarchical relationship among the assigned task, center of gravity for that task, and the decisive points on the path to the center of gravity. The given task is based upon the higher authority's desired outcome and is refined by the subordinate to become the unit's mission. The unit executing the mission determines the enemy and friendly centers of gravity based upon the mission/assigned task. The center of gravity chosen must be based upon the mission and can not be a generic center of gravity. If the chosen center of gravity is not based on the assigned task, accomplishing the mission probably will not compel the enemy to the desired action and may have far greater affects than desired. For example, the enemy's government may collapse leaving a vacuum rather than that government performing the desired action. This may happen anyway but if the action taken is limited by the desired endstate it is less likely to occur. This monograph discusses the military theory of centers of gravity and its relationship to assigned tasks and decisive points. United States' joint and individual service doctrines and historical examples frame the discussion of theory. This monograph seeks to clarify the relationship among assigned tasks, centers of gravity, and decisive points to assist commanders and planners in determining how to best accomplish assigned tasks.

ADA 356944 Approved for public release; Distribution is unlimited. The opinions and conclusions expressed herein are those of the student-authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College or any other governmental agency. (References to these studies should include the foregoing statement.)