In the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks on the US, Washington is making broad-based military deployments aimed at retaliating against the terrorists and any regime that might be harboring them. The goal is to completely root out terrorism.
War seems imminent. The only questions remaining are when and how. Before we discuss how the US will fight this war, we should understand the environment of -- and the limitations facing -- military operations.
First, the US is up against uncertain enemies. Apart from their leaders, the identity and whereabouts of the other terrorists are unclear, which creates difficulties for the US. Moreover, even the hunt for their leaders won't be easy, as they have long engaged in terrorism, and have come to know the strengths and weaknesses of US high tech warfare. Such knowledge might limit the effectiveness of a US military operation.
Second, the enemy has an inferior capacity for regular combat. This is because the training that the enemy receives centers completely on terrorism. Well-equipped and well-trained troops usually enjoy superiority, which might suggest they would have the upper hand in military action. But, there are numerous ways in which the enemy can engage in destruction. Moreover, these activities are usually hard to guard against and therefore can easily compensate for the terrorists' inadequate combat capabilities.
Third, the terrain in which the enemy is located is unfavorable. Afghanistan is located in a mountainous region, making it easy for the terrorists to defend themselves and making it difficult for the US' high tech equipment to work effectively. If the US was to wage sophisticated high-tech warfare against the terrorists, the outcome would be unpredictable.
As for the question of whether the US should undertake other forms of military action, it would be a grave mistake for the US to send its regular ground forces to Afghanistan due to their unfamiliarity with the terrain, as well as other logistical concerns.
The US military operation, therefore, should adopt the following three principles:
One, undertake small-scale military operations. Since the enemy's combat capacity is inferior and is widely dispersed, US troops, equipped with various sophisticated weapons, should be able to successfully carry out small-scale military operations. Such operations are also better suited to mountainous areas.
Two, emphasize the mobility and flexibility of military operations -- since the enemy is broadly dispersed and is highly mobile, the US will have only a very limited amount of time to strike. The US must remain highly mobile and flexible, so that it will be able to make quick strikes upon obtaining accurate intelligence. Such mobility and flexibility will require coordination and skilled command of high-tech weaponry.
Three, expect a prolonged anti-terrorism campaign. The US executive branch has fully realized that the campaign may drag on for quite a long time due to the enemy's elusiveness. Moreover, since the enemy might be located all around the world, the US should take not only military action but also transnational judicial actions if it is to be effective.
In terms of specific military action, the US will largely depend on its naval and air power, launching sophisticated long-distance attacks against the terrorists' bases to avoid being trapped in ground battles and to keep US casualties to a minimum.
These actions may include attacking enemy bases with Tomahawk cruise missiles. For some bases, the US might also send its special operations forces, transported and shielded by
airpower, to deal a deadly blow to the enemy.
The US troops currently stationed in the Middle East are capable of undertaking offensive operations, given the enemy's inferior combat capability and broad degree of dispersal. The US has shortcomings, however, in special operations forces, logistical manpower and in weapons and ammunition that will be needed later.
More than 100 US and British fighter jets have been deployed in Saudi Arabia and Turkey, and on two US aircraft carriers as well, while the US' F-117 Stealth aircraft have already been transferred to India. These warplanes are capable of launching numerous air attacks. A large number of Tomahawks have also been placed on US warships and are capable of attacking enemy
targets.
The US is likely to carry out several small-scale, but highly mobile and flexible military operations, in tandem with global judicial actions. The question is: Can the US really eradicate terrorism? Only time will tell.
Arthur Ding is director of the Research Division III at the Institute of International Relations at National Chengchi University.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs