By its very definition, doctrine speaks to “policy” or “a set of guidelines”. In the context of warfare, it refers to a general philosophy or set of beliefs pertaining to how a prolonged campaign or military operation is to be executed. Inherent to this concept is a human element that is separate from the tools or equipment used to carry out that plan as shaped by the doctrine. Simply stated, the plan, based on a general thought process or “doctrine”, is determined by human hands. If one understands the relationship that exists between doctrine and this human element or leadership, one can easily draw the conclusion that the bond that exists between doctrine and those executing the doctrine are virtually one and the same in many respects.United States Air Force Major Steve Michael introduced this concept in his 2001 article in Aerospace Power Journal where he states that “Military members understand the critical value of doctrine to the military. They also critically value leadership. Without doctrine or leadership, the service is a headless vector…subjected to institutional failure and battlefield defeat.” He would go on to add that “Doctrine is inextricably interwoven with the concept of leadership and in many respects provides the basis for it.” Further, Michael sums up the concept by stating that without sound judgment provided by leadership, doctrine is not enough and that in this vein, doctrine and leadership are bonded together.