Having enough of the finest forces does not by itself ensure that missions will be accomplished successfully. Forces are only instruments. Success has much to do with the way they are used. In both eastern and western armies prescriptions, plans and procedures are currently classified from the general to the specific as strategy, operations and tactics. The classifications are fluid, the debate over defining methods and objectives ancient and continuing. Past British and U.S. preference was for two levels—general strategy and battlefield tactics. French practice has often extended to greater precision in more levels of action—grand and petit tactics, for example. Current fashion in all armies is to identify three levels solely by the sizes of the participating units, i.e., battalion, division, corps. The Soviet Army, for example, defines operations as actions of fronts and armies (rough equivalents of western army groups and corps) and tactics as actions of divisions and smaller units. Western usage is similar. 1