Daniel Darling
For the unmanned military systems often
referred to as “drones” or “robots” the future is now. Today there are
around 50 countries investing in the research, development and purchase
of unmanned systems in order to add them to the fabric of their armed
forces. The utility of unmanned systems has become readily apparent to
military commanders during this era of irregular warfare, with their
usage spreading to operational theaters as diverse as Afghanistan,
Gaza, Georgia, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Sudan and Yemen.
[thefastertimes.com] Among the heaviest investors in
unmanned platforms are the U.S. and Israel – two countries that have
engaged in difficult theaters where intelligence-gathering and
reconnaissance have proven invaluable for troops on the ground.
Though it had only a smattering of unmanned aerial drones on the eve of the Iraq invasion in 2003, today the U.S. has nearly 7,000 aerial drones
in its military inventory, plus another 12,000 ground robots. Israeli
industry is developing some 40 different unmanned aerial systems and
Ministry of Defense labs are exploring innovative concepts for ground
systems.
The most famous unmanned system
currently in American service is the Air Forces’ MQ-1 Predator
Medium-Altitude Long-Endurance (MALE) unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV),
which is primarily utilized for surveillance but can also be outfitted
with laser-guided missiles such as the AGM-114 Hellfire for use in
targeted air strikes.
The Predator and its newer and larger
relation, the MQ-9 Reaper, have seen increasing usage in the Afghan and
Pakistan theaters, which in turn has elicited debate
in the intelligence community as to the practicality of drone attacks
in counterinsurgency operations. While no one disputes the value of
these UAVs in providing useful intelligence to ground troops via video
feeds, questions have been raised as to whether such air strikes create
a negative perception of U.S. tactics amongst civilian populations,
therefore helping fuel the very insurgencies American forces hope to
quell.
This discussion aside, the U.S. Air Force has come to accept
that UAVs are a crucial tool for modern combat operations. Evidence of
the service’s transformation became apparent in 2009 when it trained more pilots for operating unmanned aerial systems than for manned fighter and bomber aircraft. Under its 30-year “Aircraft Investment Plan”
the Air Force is planning on the $820 million purchase of 372 MQ-9
Reapers during the period between 2011 and 2018, plus some 60-odd RQ-4
Global Hawks. Overall, from 2008 through 2013 the Pentagon expects to
invest more than $16 billion on the development and purchase of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs).
For their part, the Israel Defense
Forces (IDF) have been utilizing UAVs in combat since 1982 when they
first used them against Syrian air defenses in Lebanon. Faced with a
complex operational environment involving a blend of urban combat and
guerilla warfare, the Israelis have invested heavily in unmanned
platforms and as a result are considered pioneers in the field. Led by
Elbit Systems and Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI), the Israeli
defense industry has witnessed its UAV exports explode
in the past decade, with clients such as Georgia, India, Poland,
Turkey, and even Russia scrambling to get their hands on the platforms.
But it is for the purpose of outfitting
their own forces that Israeli industry places its greatest emphasis on
developing unmanned systems. The Israel Air Force recently declared its
Heron TP high-altitude long-endurance (HALE) UAV (referred to as “Eitan”
in Israeli service) to be operational. The 5-ton Eitan is capable of
operating above 40,000 feet and remaining airborne for 24- to 36-hour
periods. It will serve as one of the principal platforms in the Israel
Air Force’ UAV squadrons, along with the mid-size, long-endurance Hermes 450 (”Zik”) and the Heron-1 (”Shoval”).
In addition, Israeli ground forces
battalions will be receiving 100 Skylark 1 LE mini-UAVs produced by
domestic manufacturer Elbit Systems under a $40 million contract
extended by the Israeli Ministry of Defence under its “Sky Raider”
program. The Skylark mini-UAVs have also been procured by countries
such as Australia, Canada, France and Sweden.
Not content simply with unmanned aerial
systems, the Israelis are increasingly utilizing unmanned ground
systems such as the Guardium ground vehicle and the “Dawn Thunder”
Caterpillar D9 bulldozer for operations in mine-laden areas and
clearing improvised explosive devices (IEDs).
While the Israelis forge ahead in terms of land-based unmanned alternatives, the U.S. and U.K.
are the leaders in the research and development of unmanned underwater
vehicles (UUVs). Both countries are putting more and more emphasis on
UUVs for harbor surveillance, submarine detection and mine-clearance
purposes.
The boon in development, procurement
and usage of unmanned systems is a reflection of their practicality
within the battle-space. For instance, unmanned aerial systems serve as
an effective force multiplier, enhancing the stand-off attack
capabilities of the forces who wield them while also providing “over
the hill” surveillance and real-time intelligence feeds. These systems
also reduce the risk of friendly casualties, be they pilots in the air
or soldiers on the ground. Unmanned aerial drones can loiter in the air
longer than jet aircraft which rely upon the physical endurance of the
fighter pilot. Finally, UAVs are a cost-effective alternative to
expensive combat aircraft – though for now they remain a supplement to,
and not a replacement for, jet fighters.
But with the positive factors also come
negatives. These include the vulnerability of UAVs to signal-jamming,
video feed hacking, and integrated air-defenses. The latter is of
particular importance as American and Israeli drone operations have yet
to confront robust air-defense networks where their UAVs lack of
countermeasures renders them defenseless against enemy fire. There are
also ethical concerns involving the use of unmanned systems.
Governments may be led to believe that their use in the stand-off
attack role shields them from public opprobrium since their own
soldiers’ lives are not directly placed at risk. This in turn might
lead to more liberalized use of drone strikes under the false
assumption that these attacks carry with them few adverse consequences,
such as unintended civilian casualties.
Despite these negatives, the pursuit of
unmanned military systems from all corners has gone from a trickle to a
flood. Most ominously, non-state actors have gotten into the game as
illustrated by Hezbollah’s use of Iranian-made Mirsad-1 UAVs to
penetrate Israeli airspace. Through the experience of their own
operations in Afghanistan, NATO members have recognized the benefit of
unmanned systems and have scrambled to outfit their deployable forces
with them. Russia, too, has learned from battlefield experience, and
after its brief war with Georgia in August 2008 the Russian military
purchased 12 Israeli systems and is seeking a further 100 UAVs.
While the U.S. and Israel have been at
the forefront of unmanned warfare so far, the gap between the haves and
the have nots is shrinking. As that gap shrinks what was heralded only
a few years ago as the wave of the future in military operations has
suddenly become a practical tool for the wars of today.
Source: http://thefastertimes.com/defensespending/2010/03/10/unmanned-warfare-brings-the-future-into-focus/
