BASIC Comment
Limitations on the role of airpower in counter-insurgency
23 May 2007
Back to the BASIC Comment
index
NATO faced an exceptional challenge in 2006
when it expanded into southern and eastern Afghanistan and
overcame strong resistance by the Taliban in part by using
overwhelming firepower. While such methods inflicted a 'tactical
defeat' on the Taliban and caused significant insurgent casualties,
it also killed a great number of civilians. In counter-insurgency,
the civilian populace forms the 'center of gravity' whose
support must be won through good governance and the effective
provision of security.
Although NATO deemed these non-combatant deaths
its 'one mistake' in 2006, the same mistake is being repeated
in 2007, and the Afghan people are growing weary. NATO and
U.S. troops under Operation Enduring Freedom have been involved
in multiple incidents this year where non-combatants were
killed, and the use of close air-support was often the immediate
culprit. From the bombing of a wedding
party in 2002 to the deaths of scores of civilians in
an airstrike
in Herat province last month, Afghan civilians have all
too often been killed by the forces there to assist them.
Airpower can play a vital role in counter-insurgency
operations, ranging from support of ground troops to reconnaissance
and resupply. In Afghanistan, employing aircraft in these
latter roles has been critical and has allowed operations
in areas that would otherwise be inaccessible. In close air
support of ground forces, aircraft also can be an invaluable
resource, and platforms ranging from Apache helicopters to
AC-130 gunships have been employed in this capacity in Afghanistan,
with devastating effect on insurgents.
Unfortunately they have had a devastating effect
on civilians too, and despite the best efforts of the pilots
and ground forces equipped with the most advanced technology
to avoid them, civilian deaths are rapidly undermining the
tolerance Afghan civilians have for their government and the
international forces. President Karzai has pleaded in the
past for military forces to exercise restraint in using firepower,
and again this month stated
that "civilian deaths…have reached an unacceptable level."
Given the shortfall of personnel, military commanders argue
they have little choice but to employ airpower in their operations,
but over the long run, this is not a sustainable method for
fighting an insurgency such as that in Afghanistan.
The widespread use of airpower to compensate
for lack of ground forces will erode the support for foreign
troops and the willingness of the population to assist them,
thus making their already difficult task much harder. NATO
member states must carefully consider the recently repeated
calls to send reinforcements to Afghanistan if they genuinely
intend to live up to the rhetoric about not abandoning Afghanistan.
|
