Command & Control in War: From Gettysburg to Gaza

Command and control is the structure used by armed forces to transform leadership intent into coordinated battlefield action. It links decision-makers with tactical units through planning, communication systems, and real-time coordination. From handwritten orders delivered by couriers during the American Civil War to artificial intelligence-assisted targeting in modern urban warfare, the tools have evolved. However, the purpose remains constant: direct operations, respond under pressure, and ensure unity of effort across domains.

Limitations of Command and Control at Gettysburg

During the Battle of Gettysburg in 1863, commanders operated with fragmented communication systems and limited situational awareness. Messages were carried by horseback, maps were often outdated, and decisions were shaped by delays and incomplete information.

• Orders traveled for hours before reaching their destination
• Reinforcements arrived without synchronized timing
• Field reports were outdated by the time they informed action
• Units operated with little feedback once committed
• Decisions relied on individual judgment shaped by uncertainty

These limitations hindered coordination, delayed responses, and reduced commanders’ ability to adapt during critical phases of battle.

Civil War Technologies and Underutilization

Several innovations were available during the Civil War but were not effectively integrated into command systems.

• Observation balloons offered aerial intelligence but saw limited use
• Telegraphs enabled rapid messaging but were tied to static rear positions
• Repeating rifles and Gatling guns increased firepower but did not enhance coordination

The limited adoption of these tools reinforces a key principle: without leadership adaptation, training, and doctrinal reform, new technologies may offer little operational advantage.

Mission Command in Modern Military Doctrine

To address the complexity of modern battlefields, contemporary militaries use mission command. This is a leadership philosophy that emphasizes trust, decentralized execution, and shared intent. It supports flexible decision-making when speed, initiative, and local adaptation are essential.

• Clear articulation of the commander’s intent and mission objectives
• Shared understanding across all levels of command
• Mutual trust between leaders and subordinates
• Disciplined initiative to seize opportunities
• Calculated risk acceptance to maintain operational momentum

Mission command allows forces to act independently while staying aligned with overarching goals, even when communication is degraded.

Multi-Domain Operations and Modern Complexity

Today’s conflicts unfold across six interconnected domains:

• Land
• Air
• Sea
• Space
• Cyber
• Electromagnetic spectrum

Military forces must operate simultaneously across these environments while managing threats such as jamming, cyber intrusions, deception, or misinformation. Command and control systems must be secure, agile, and capable of integrating massive data flows to maintain synchronized operations.

Transition to Joint All-Domain Coordination

To manage these simultaneous challenges, militaries have developed integrated frameworks that function across domains and organizational boundaries.

Joint All-Domain Command and Control (JADC2)

JADC2 is the U.S. Department of Defense’s strategy for connecting sensors, decision-makers, and operational forces across all services and domains. It enhances situational awareness and enables distributed action, even when communications are degraded.

• Sense: Collect data from satellites, drones, sensors, and field reports
• Make sense: Analyze, fuse, and prioritize data using artificial intelligence and decision-support tools
• Act: Deliver secure, real-time orders to units based on current operational conditions

This structure supports agile, decentralized execution while preserving strategic coherence.

Israeli Command and Control in Urban Operations

During recent operations in Gaza, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) applied a decentralized model of command and control adapted to urban terrain, tunnel systems, and civilian populations. The environment required precision, flexibility, and continuous adaptation.

• Small, integrated units combining infantry, tanks, engineers, bulldozers, and drones
• Persistent drone surveillance providing rooftop and street-level visibility
• Bulldozers clearing paths and exposing tunnel networks
• Engineers dismantling explosives and enabling unit mobility
• Junior commanders empowered to make tactical decisions in alignment with mission intent

This structure supported rapid, context-driven action without sacrificing operational cohesion. It demonstrated mission command in action.

AI-Supported Targeting and Decision Acceleration

To enhance battlefield decision speed, the IDF reportedly used artificial intelligence systems to process operational data, identify threats, and support target prioritization.

• Analyzing behavioral patterns, communications metadata, and movement signals
• Estimating civilian presence using digital indicators
• Scoring threats and generating targeting recommendations for human review
• Reducing decision timelines from hours to minutes (according to open-source reporting)

Although these capabilities improved responsiveness, they also raised concerns about transparency, ethical oversight, and the appropriate balance between automation and human judgment.

Comparing Gettysburg and Gaza: Evolution of Command

• Communication speed: Hours (1863) to seconds (2023)
• Information sources: Scouts and maps to real-time sensors and AI
• Command structure: Centralized and detailed to decentralized and intent-based
• Decision-making: Delayed judgment to data-informed analysis
• Feedback loop: Minimal or none to continuous and adaptive

These comparisons show that while tools and environments have transformed, the foundations of command remain grounded in leadership, trust, and clarity.

Strategic Lessons Across Time

• Technology improves outcomes only when integrated with doctrine and leadership
• Speed must be balanced with ethical safeguards and situational accuracy
• Decentralized execution requires trust, clarity of intent, and resilient systems
• Risk must be calculated and linked to disciplined initiative
• Tools that are available but unintegrated may become missed opportunities

Command and control remains a human-led system. It is enabled by machines, but guided by experience, training, and leadership.

Conclusion

From the delayed dispatches of Gettysburg to the integrated networks of modern joint operations, command and control has evolved in speed, precision, and scale. Yet its foundation remains unchanged. It is the enduring mechanism that links leadership intent to action under pressure. Across all domains and eras, success in war depends not only on advanced tools, but also on clarity, trust, adaptability, and the timeless discipline of command.