SHOCK AND AWE(IN LITIGATION LAW)

Shock and awe (technically known as rapid dominance) is a tactic based on the use of overwhelming power and spectacular displays of force to paralyze the enemy's perception of the battlefield and destroy their will to fight. Though the concept has a variety of historical precedent, the doctrine was explained by Harlan K. Ullman and James P. Wade in 1996 and was developed specifically for application by the US military by the National Defense University of the United States.

It is an attempt  to affect the will, perception, and understanding of the adversary to fight or respond to our strategic policy ends through imposing a regime of Shock and Awe.

Ullman and Wade identify four vital characteristics of rapid dominance:

1.    near total or absolute knowledge and understanding of self, adversary, and environment;

2.   rapidity and timeliness in application;

3.   operational brilliance in execution; and

4.   (near) total control and signature management of the entire operational environment.

The term "shock and awe" is most consistently used by Ullman and Wade as the effect that rapid dominance seeks to impose upon an adversary. It is the desired state of helplessness and lack of will. It can be induced, they write, by

direct force applied to command and control centers,

selective denial of information,

dissemination of disinformation,

overwhelming combat force, and

rapidity of action.

Ullman and Wade enumerate nine examples:

·        Overwhelming force: The "application of massive or overwhelming force" to "disarm, incapacitate, or render the enemy militarily impotent with as few casualties to ourselves and to noncombatants as possible."

·        Hiroshima and Nagasaki: The establishment of shock and awe through "instant, nearly incomprehensible levels of massive destruction directed at influencing society writ large, meaning its leadership and public, rather than targeting directly against military or strategic objectives even with relatively few numbers or systems."

·        Massive bombardment: Described as "precise destructive power largely against military targets and related sectors over time."

·        Blitzkrieg: The "intent was to apply precise, surgical amounts of tightly focused force to achieve maximum leverage but with total economies of scale."

·        Sun Tzu: The "selective, instant beheading of military or societal targets to achieve shock and awe."

·        Haitian example: "Imposing shock and awe through a show of force and indeed through deception, misinformation, and disinformation."

·        The Roman legions: "Achieving shock and awe rests in the ability to deter and overpower an adversary through the adversary's perception and fear of his vulnerability and our own invincibility."

·        Decay and default: "The imposition of societal breakdown over a lengthy period, but without the application of massive destruction."

This is not merely a military strategy.It is and can be a part of litigation law specially when arguing before a Tribunal or higher forum with suitable modifications.Let us adapt the characteristics:

near total or absolute knowledge and understanding of facts of the appeal,case authorities;awareness of opposing counsel and his capabilities and environment(ie the judges,the context etc.);

rapidity and timeliness in presentation of facts and law;

operational brilliance in creating the case scenario; and

(near) total control and signature management of the entire hearing environment.

Defeat the opposing counsel in the mind;by your sheer mastery,break his will,make him anxious and reduce him to utter helplessness.Ruthless execution of rehearsed plan.When he is down,don’t relent.Pin him there,till judges say k.o.