Download - Royal Australian Navy

Introduction
Over the course of their histories, most Commonwealth navies have acquired
reputations for their aversion to written doctrine. Yet these reputations have been only
partly earned, as these navies have, since their inaugurations, maintained a plethora
of written doctrine designed to guide their actions at the tactical level. Commonwealth
navies have traditionally referred to their tactical level doctrine as ‘procedural manuals’,
‘fighting instructions’ or ‘fleet orders’ rather than ‘doctrine’, and it is this practise that
has tended to create the erroneous perception (particularly amongst army officers)
that navies have not historically had any doctrine at all. 1
Above the tactical level, however, it is true that Commonwealth navies have traditionally
been doctrine-adverse. Michael Codner, for example, noted that during the early 1990s
Royal Navy (RN) commanders worried that higher level doctrine would be ‘inherently
prescriptive’ and that its publication would limit commanders’ freedom of action. 2 In
several Commonwealth navies, this perception of doctrine designed to provide guidance
above the tactical level has recently, if gradually, shifted. The result of this attitudinal
shift has been the production by several Commonwealth navies of doctrine manuals
designed to provide guidance at the operational and, even more significantly, at the
military-strategic level. 3
This paper examines the history and significance of the foremost military-strategic
level doctrine manuals – often referred to as keystone doctrine manuals – produced by
five Commonwealth navies. These navies are the Canadian navy, the Indian Navy, the
Royal Australian Navy, the Royal New Zealand Navy and the South African Navy. The
RN does not form part of this study, although its doctrine has significantly influenced
each of the five Commonwealth navies discussed. 4 Prior to undertaking a detailed
analysis of keystone doctrine development within each of these five navies, the first
of two background chapters discusses precisely what is meant by the term ‘keystone
doctrine’. The second background chapter then summarises several key maritime
strategic theories, which are worthy of overview because each features prominently
in the keystone doctrine manuals produced by the navies studied.
Subsequently to these background chapters, the bulk of this paper is dedicated to
the conduct of an analysis of keystone doctrine development within each of the
navies studied. Although structured chronologically, discussion of keystone doctrine
development within each navy focuses on three areas:
• Factors that were influential during the production of each keystone
doctrine manual.
• The intended and actual effects each manual had following its release.