Join | Log in

Channel Button
Debate_icon

Politics, News & Issues   >

Terrorism

Get a Widget for this title

What military strategy can win the War on Terror: Air power alone or more ground forces?

Results so far:

Air
28% 14 votes Total: 50 votes
Ground
72% 36 votes
Air

There is no single strategy that can defeat the terrorists who plague Western Civilization. Terrorism, as it has evolved today, is a worldwide issue, fostered by religious zealotry and hatred, and carried out by many different groups in and from developed, developing, underdeveloped and failed-state countries.

While air power might be effective in combating terrorist groups in open country, it works less well in mountainous areas like Afghanistan and the border regions of Pakistan, where the natural environment provides shelter and protection from even the most massive of conventional air strikes.

This is why Usama bin Laden was not killed in 2001 when the United States and its allies used overwhelming air power in attacking the Tora Bora area where he and the Al Qaeda leadership were holed up. Because we did not have enough trained ground combat forces in the area to seal it off, bin Laden and his top lieutenants were able to escape to the border areas of Pakistan not under control of that country's central government.

Conversely, the use of ground forces often works well in open or forested terrain, or in urban settings. But, as we saw in places like Somalia, it is ineffective when you are fighting in an area with a hostile, armed populace, who resent any occupying foreign forces.

Without air support and the resolve to inflict damage on the civilian population - in other words a total war strategy - it is a losing proposition to throw either armies or air forces against entrenched guerillas.

And in dealing with terrorists who have entered developed countries, such as the London subway bombers and the sleeper cells periodically uprooted in the United States and Europe, military force is useless. This is strictly an intelligence and law enforcement function and requires a close working relationship among agencies, rather than any intercinine turf wars for credit in making arrests.

In real and practical terms, terrorists will always be with us. Whether motivated by religion or other reasons, it is as impossible to stamp it out as it is to eliminate crime or win the so-called War on Drugs. Conflict, religious extremism and ethnic hatred are simply part and parcel of the human condition.

You cannot change the nature of people by use of force. Thus you cannot control terrorism solely by the use of military power. What is required is a combination of efforts. Ground, naval and air forces where you are in appropriate hostile terrain, to degrade the power and capabilities of organized terrorist groups. Special operations commando forces to deal with smaller cells in host countries.

Intelligence operations, including the use of drone surveillance and attack aircraft in areas harboring terrorists and without any interference from the local governments. And in countries where there are functioning, friendly governments, there must be close cooperation of intelligence and law enforcement personnel to locate, infiltrate and disrupt groups intent on committing acts of terrorism against the population and infrastructure.

There must also must be a concerted effort by all countries to stop the flow of funds into terrorist coffers, be it from donations, businesses or illegal enterprises such as the opium trade. Without money, these groups cannot operate or procure weapons and explosives and they will wither and break apart.

Finally, it is important that Western Nations invest in the infrastructure and development of opportunity for the populace in underdeveloped and threatened nations, especially in Asia and the Middle East, where terrorism has its base of strength, so that the people have hope and a chance to improve their lives. Otherwise the continued radicalization of these folks will provide a nearly infinite supply of terrorists for generations to come.

There are no simplistic solutions to fighting terrorism. If you want to declare war upon it, then as we learned in Iraq, be prepared to shore up any peace that you achieve.

Learn more about this author, Martin W. Schwartz.
Contact this writer Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Ground

The War on Terror is presently being waged on two fronts: Iraq and Afghanistan. The predominant method of combat by the NATO forces should be with ground forces. There is a place for air power, but its use should be extremely limited.

One of the enemy's favourite tactics is to position its weapons, soldiers and commanders in the midst of a populated area. If the allies bomb the area, some civilians, including women and children are bound to be hurt or killed. True, the intended targets may be destroyed, but the enemy has also gained a powerful propaganda tool.

Pictures of injured and dead mothers, bloodied babies, weeping families, homes reduced to rubble, cannot fail to touch the hearts of the world community. If the enemy can obtain interviews with anguished victims and mourners, so much the better. The news footage will be played, with translation if necessary, over every television station that will carry it.

In the eyes of the world, America, Canada and other allied nations are presented as heartless monsters, baby killers, without consciences and lacking the slightest speck of ethical responsibility.

Would it not be better if well-armed ground forces, in sufficient numbers, invaded the enemy area on foot and chose their targets more accurately? They would not be challenged by ordinary civilians and the clamour generated by their approach and arrival would give native families time to take cover.

Utilizing ground forces would enable military personnel to mix, person-to-person, with the citizens. The NATO forces would no longer be faceless enemies, from faraway, first-world countries, but soldiers who cared enough to warn families when danger threatened.

It should always be remembered that the children and the young people on both sides of the conflict are watching and listening. Hatred that is embedded in their hearts and souls now will last for life.

When an aeroplane flies over a home, drops a bomb which kills family members and destroys their house, it's only natural to hate the pilot and the country that sent him. Bombing which kills non-combatants and destroys property only begets more hatred.

In comparison, if ground troops, entering the town, stopped to advise everyone to take cover because there was going to be a battle, the residents would be grateful for the warning. They might even realize that the fight was initiated by the governments in power, and that the soldiers were truly concerned for the safety of ordinary citizens.

It must be remembered that after the war, we will still all have to live on the same planet. If anger and hostility are instilled in the hearts of young people today, we are only ensuring that the War on Terror will be passed down to our children and grandchildren in the years to come.

The next chapter of the war may be fought in the United States and Canada instead of Iraq and Afghanistan. Then, militant Muslims may be the invaders and younger members of our families may be defending their native soil.

The devastating bombing raids carried out by Nato forces out in the Middle East today, may be replicated by Muslim forces in Boston and Toronto in the future.

Government policy makers, military advisors and commanders on both sides should stop and consider the consequences of today's decisions on future generations.

This is one legacy we should be most anxious to avoid bequeathing to our children and grandchildren.

Learn more about this author, Carolyn Tytler.
Contact this writer Click here to send this author comments or questions.

What is Helium? | Buy Web Content | Contact Us | Privacy | User agreement | DMCA | User Tools | Help | Community | Helium’s Official Blog | Link to Helium

Helium, Inc.
200 Brickstone Square Andover, MA 01810 USA