Recently, commentators of all
stripes have consumed vast amounts of digits and toner describing the various
failures of the Presidential war on Iran. And to be sure, when you are dropping
bombs, shooting missiles, and sinking ships, you have engaged in a war. The
President unilaterally decided to engage in this armed conflict, bypassing the
Constitutional requirement for gaining congressional authorization. To be sure,
legislators of both parties shirked their duty to enforce the checks and
balances laid out in our constitution; but, that is a discussion for another
day. The commentators have labeled this conflict a failure for various reasons.
Depending upon their outlook and
political orientation, they blame the President for a lack of goals, shifting
goals, the wrong goals, the lack of planning, the failure to develop
international support for the operation, underestimating the resilience of the
enemy, and the list goes on. Perhaps they are correct. All those things and
more doom an operation, military or otherwise, to failure. But I have yet to
see anyone articulate the primary reason for failure…boots on the ground.
Contrary to popular belief, airpower
does not win wars. Wars are won when a grubby, goat-smelling, bone-weary
soldier raises a flag and says, “This piece of dirt is mine and you cannot come
here.”
Airpower is a combat multiplier. It
enhances or eases the job of ground forces. Airpower may bring the troops into
combat and keep them supplied. Airpower may keep enemy aircraft off the ground
forces. Airpower may interdict an enemy’s ability to supply their own forces;
but, airpower does not win wars. Of course many will bring up Hiroshima and
Nagasaki as examples of airpower winning the war.
While dropping the atomic bomb may
have hastened the end of the WW II in the Pacific, it was the very real threat
of invasion, soldiers stepping on Japanese soil, saying, “This is ours and you
do not control it,” that ended the war. The Japanese emperor had seen us
inexorably take island by island, marching ever closer to Japan. He knew that not
only could we invade and conquer his land we also possessed the willpower to do
so. Rather than submit his country to such complete devastation, he
capitulated. While airpower certainly paved the way, the threat of ground
troops marching over Tokyo ended the war.
Going into this conflict, the
President and his advisors failed to take this basic military truth into
account. It doesn’t really matter how many bombs you drop or missiles your
fire, until you have troops on the ground to enforce your will, a determined
enemy remains undefeated. He underestimated the Iranian government’s ability to
absorb destruction; military as well as civilian. Under the thrall of
technological superiority, he and his advisors assumed that after the initial barrage
of munitions the threat of continued incoming rockets would drive an enemy to
their knees, forcing them to seek some sort of negotiated end to the war. They,
like so many inexperienced in the realities of modern warfare, underestimated
the resiliency of a government and its citizenry.
While horribly destructive and
intensely frightening, areal bombardment rarely drives a citizenry to abandon their
government. In Germany and Japan, civilians remained largely behind their
governments even under the terrifying strategic bombing campaigns. Londoners
remained stalwart and steadfast during the blitz. In more modern times, the
destruction of the Twin Towers did not result in an American retreat. Areal
attacks while they impede industry, can be overcome by a determined and
creative adversary. During WW II the German aircraft industry peaked in 1944
under some of the heaviest strategic bombing of the war years.1 Distributed
production and other strategies enabled Germany to continue to increase their
numbers of fighter aircraft up until the very end. Japanese manufacturers produced
consistent gains up until through 1944 as well.2
This does not mean that airpower is
unimportant; however, planners and advisors must be honest about its
capabilities and more importantly its limitations. Depending on airpower alone
to bring an enemy to its knees is a strategy destined for failure. We may find video
of missiles and bombs streaking toward a target enthralling. We may embrace the
idea of winning on the cheap; but, war is never cheap, not in blood or
treasure. Airpower, while absolutely paramount, does not ensure victory. To
win, at some point grunts have to raise the flag and say, this is mine now, not
yours.
1.
https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/history/aircraft-ww2-de-production.htm
2.
https://historydashboard.org/world-war-2-aircraft-production/
No comments:
Post a Comment