Subscribe
Title: A Brief Primer of Mission Command Failure at the Battle of River Raisin
By Adam Betz, MING Command Historian
Introduction
“Mission command enables disciplined initiative within the commander's intent to empower agile and adaptive leaders in the conduct of unified land operations. However, failure to understand or apply the philosophy of mission command may result in misaligned efforts and operational failure." – ADRP 6-0
“’Tis done. The dreadful fight is o’er.
Thick clouds of smoke are seen no more,
The snowy plain is red with gore
Where fell the friends of liberty.”
– “Battle of the River Raisin,” John McClelland Bulkley, 1879
The Battle of River Raisin fought in January 1813 during the War of 1812, marked a devastating defeat for American forces attempting to recapture Detroit from the British and their Native American allies. This battle provides a significant study in mission command failures, as the United States Army suffered from inadequate leadership, a lack of clear intent, poor risk assessment, and insufficient communication. We often learn more from failures than victories. The outcome of the battle led to the infamous "River Raisin Massacre" and had a lasting impact on public sentiment during the war . Analyzing this battle highlights the importance of effective mission command principles for today’s military leaders.
1. Lack of Clear Commander’s Intent
The principle of "Commander’s Intent" focuses on establishing a clear purpose, key tasks, and desired outcomes. During the River Raisin campaign, General James Winchester's command suffered from a vague and poorly staffed operational plan. His intent was not clearly understood by subordinate officers and staff, especially the objective of advancing to Frenchtown (present-day Monroe, Michigan). Winchester's failure to articulate his intent and failure to follow through with conditions checks along the planning process left his forces ill-prepared for the dynamic nature of combat, disconnected from the overarching goals of the campaign to regain Detroit.
Winchester’s forces lacked a cohesive understanding of what the overall mission was to achieve. His inability to convey a clear intent to his subordinate commanders and staff led to a fractured approach, with units reacting independently rather than operating in unison. This contributed significantly to confusion and disorganization when the British counterattacked.
2. Ineffective Communication and Coordination
Effective communication is critical in mission command, enabling leaders to synchronize actions across all elements . At River Raisin, Winchester's failure to maintain proper communication with his fellow general, William Henry Harrison, and his subordinates resulted in missed opportunities to reinforce and respond to Brit fire and maneuver . Winchester’s forces advanced to Frenchtown without notifying Harrison, leading to a lack of coordination . Think Lee at Gettysburg: an overextension of existing capabilities in the current time and space. There was no shared understanding of what “general engagement” meant.
3. Poor Risk Management and Lack of Security
General Winchester failed to properly evaluate the risks his exposed position at Frenchtown posed. Despite warnings, Winchester underestimated the enemy's capabilities, leaving his forces vulnerable. His camp was not adequately fortified, contributing to a disastrous surprise attack by British and Native forces on January 22, 1813 .
4. Failure in Exercising Disciplined Initiative
Disciplined initiative requires empowering officers to act decisively. However, Winchester did not provide adequate guidance, leading to hesitation among subordinate officers during critical moments.
5. Absence of Mutual Trust
A lack of trust between Winchester and his officers weakened the unit's cohesion. His reluctance to share operational control left subordinates unsure of their roles, resulting in missed opportunities to mount an effective resistance. Furthermore, the enhanced mistrust between the U.S. Regulars and the Kentuckians resulted in a major blow to the Joint Mission Command. The literal right wing of the American defense refused to communicate to the left.
5.1. Breakdown of Communication and Trust Between U.S. Regular Soldiers and the Kentucky Militia
5.2. Lack of Integrated Command Structure
One key factor contributing to the breakdown in mission command at the Battle of River Raisin was the lack of an integrated command structure between the U.S. Regular Army units and the Kentucky Militia. General Winchester led a mixed force, including Regular troops and a contingent of Kentucky militia. However, the relationship between these two groups was fraught with coordination issues and trust deficits.
The U.S. Regulars were accustomed to disciplined maneuvering and strict command protocols, while the militia operated more flexibly. Winchester failed to unify both groups under a clear command structure, leading to communication gaps and conflicting orders. Without this cohesion, the two forces struggled to respond effectively to British attacks.
5.3. Distrust and Differing Expectations
Distrust between the Regular troops and the militia undermined mission success. The Regulars often viewed the militia as unreliable, while the militia saw the Regulars as rigid and dismissive. This divide hindered trust—a key component of mission command—and impeded effective coordination.
General Winchester, himself a Kentuckian, favored the militia but alienated the Regulars, further straining relations. His failure to leverage the militia’s strengths, such as knowledge of local terrain and a shared culture with local inhabitants, diminished the efficiencies of the force.
5.4. Communication Gaps During the Battle
During the counterattack on January 22, 1813, communication between the Regulars and militia faltered. Positioned more vulnerably, the militia lacked timely support from the Regulars. Communication attempts between the two groups were delayed or misunderstood, creating exploitable gaps in the American lines. The militia, feeling unsupported, began to falter, and the Regulars, unaware of the militia's position, struggled to adapt to shifting battlefield conditions.
5.5. Impact on Morale and Cohesion
The lack of trust and poor communication also had profound effects on morale. Many militia members, feeling abandoned, retreated or surrendered rather than fight on. The collapse in morale, exacerbated by conflicting surrender orders after Winchester’s capture, led to a disorderly defeat.
6. Lack of Firm Lines of Communication and Supply
The poor choice of Lines of Communication (LOC) compounded logistical issues, with the treacherous "Black Swamp" creating significant supply challenges. “The Black Swamp was a foggy, gummy mass of mud and water bigger than the State of Rhode Island”. Additionally, Lake Erie remained under British control, cutting off naval supply routes and forcing dangerous overland routes.
General Hull's error in placing vital operational plans aboard the Cuyahoga Packet schooner, which was captured by the British, exemplifies how compromised communication and supply lines further weakened the American position .
Conclusion
The breakdown in communication and trust between the U.S. Regular Soldiers and the Kentucky Militia significantly contributed to the American defeat at the Battle of River Raisin. The absence of a cohesive command structure, cultural divides, and ineffective communication resulted in fragmented defense efforts. Most importantly, the Commander's Intent was utterly in the air.
Forty years since 1813, a young 14-year old kid named George Armstrong Custer sifts through the battlefield today known as the River Raisin National Battlefield Park (RRNBP). As he ponders what happened here, the bones of American Soldiers still visible, artifacts still easily found…he wonders what kind of enemy to America could do this. Perhaps this encounter at a young age had an impact on Lieutenant Colonel G.A. Custer sixty-three years later at the Battle of Little Big Horn. Had he been of age and in position to appreciate and study this field, would his story have been different?
| Date Taken: | 03.27.2025 |
| Date Posted: | 04.01.2025 10:26 |
| Story ID: | 493875 |
| Location: | MONROE, MICHIGAN, US |
| Web Views: | 10 |
| Downloads: | 0 |
This work, A Brief Primer of Mission Command Failure at the Battle of River Raisin, by Adam Betz, identified by DVIDS, must comply with the restrictions shown on https://www.dvidshub.net/about/copyright.
