Pink!? Did you have your glasses on when you chose the colour you did, Ken? I mean, even Barney is purple.

Wilf wrote:

I did actually want to aim this at everyone from Sub-unit to Battle Group or formation level, so it would appear that tactical and operational dispersion, is a major factor.

Most comments here confirm a certain amount of gut feel, but I still think we may be missing something very obvious. How we do things now is not necessarily indicative of how things should be done.
Certainly the degree of operational dispersion may vary considerably between Irregular/LIC/COIN Warfare/SSO on the one hand, and Regular/Conventional Warfare/MCO on the other, and may make for a distinguishing characteristic between the two. In Afghanistan, Platoons may spend much of their time operating 50-100 km apart; in Desert Storm you could fit an entire Divisional frontage into 50km. The key here of course is dependent upon whether the opponents have the capability to marshal sufficient troops and firepower in a particular place at a particular time in order to seek a decision, or not.

When both sides have that capability, as in GW1, with half a million to 3/4s of a million troops on either side, heavily armed and concentrated over an area of a few hundred kilometres, and (theoretically) tightly-controlled, then you have the makings of MCO - and a decision may be reached on the battlefied within a few years or even a few days. The Operational level of war tends to begin at Corps-level, and concentrated into a few hundred km of frontage and rather more depth.

Alternatively, as in Afghanistan, when one opponent is unable to concentrate considerable force in a locality to force a decision, such an opponent may disperse over as large or larger an area than either Third Army and the Iraqi Army occupied in GW1, even though the forces on both sides may only amount to a few percent the size of what were massed for GW1. As dispersion lends itself to protraction and not to decision, the decision may take several years or a few decades to achieve, if at all. Moreover, the Tactical level of war may rise no higher at times than at the level of the individual soldier, and the Operational level begin right at Fire Team level, maybe even individual level in some cases. Strategic Corporal and all that.

In sum, a chief characteristic of Unconventional War is operational dispersion, whilst for Conventional War it is operational concentration. And from that tends to follow the lowering of the Operational level of war often to the Sub-Unit level in Unconventional Warfare, while the Tactical level of war may range right up to Divisional level in Conventional Warfare. Operational dispersion therefore may make for a distinguishing characteristic of what makes for Unconventional War on the one hand and Conventional War on the other. Plainly obvious I suppose, but this was part of what Wilf was getting at I'm guessing.

As to the future warfighting implications of operational dispersion, I'm not entirely convinced by what has been publicly revealed so far about DO, although some other experiments along more or less similar lines seem rather more realistic, given the tactical and operational possibilities afforded in part by personal radios and digitized communications possible right down to the lowest levels. Advancing/Movement to Contact in typical tactical formations from Squad right on up to Battalion is very exposed to enemy observation much of the time, and the combination of dispersion and improved communications technology may afford a way to dispense with typical open-order battlefield formations as we presently know them and adopt simpler, more subtle, and more dispersed approaches on the battlefield instead.

Some of this has already been tried with considerable success in the present Wars; we'll see what develops over the next few to several years. But if these approaches, or something like them are adopted, the distinction between Unconventional and Conventional Warfare may blurr even further. The distinctions may even be be found to be rather more abstract than real.

Having stated the unstated obvious, I will shut up now.