战略与国际研究中心-New-Forms-of-War-and-Arms-Control-in-the-Middle-East_90页_304kb

Summary of New Forms of War and Arms Control in the Middle East

Core Content

This document by Anthony H. Cordesman, published in February 2000, explores the evolving nature of warfare and arms control in the Middle East, focusing on the Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA), asymmetric warfare, superterrorism, and information warfare. It emphasizes the technological shifts that have redefined the balance of power and the challenges these pose for traditional arms control mechanisms.

Main Views and Key Information

The Changing Impact of Technology on Warfare

• Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA): A significant transformation in military capabilities due to advanced technology, particularly in command, control, communications, computers, and intelligence (C⁴I), battle management systems, sensors, and smart munitions.
• Shift from Platforms to Systems: Modern warfare is increasingly dependent on systems integration, precision-guided weapons, and real-time data processing rather than sheer numbers of platforms.
• New Tempo of Operations: Advanced forces can operate at a much faster pace due to improved targeting, intelligence, and logistical support.
• Information Warfare: The use of information, economic interdependence, and environmental warfare (e.g., disrupting supply lines) is becoming a critical component of modern conflict.

Asymmetric Warfare and Its Implications

• Asymmetric Warfare: Less advanced states are using unconventional tactics to counter high-tech adversaries, such as proxy warfare, terrorism, and cyber operations.
• Technological Vulnerabilities: Less advanced states suffer from poor command and control systems, lack of C⁴I/BM capabilities, and inadequate training and infrastructure.
• Superterrorism: The use of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) by non-state actors and the challenge of counterterrorism and counterproliferation are highlighted.

Arms Control and Proliferation Challenges

• Arms Transfers and Technology Transfer: While arms deliveries to developing nations have declined, technology transfer remains a concern.
• CFE Treaty (Conventional Force Reductions in Europe): The treaty was designed to reduce conventional forces in Europe and prevent surprise attacks. It established ceiling limits on tanks, artillery, armored vehicles, and aircraft.
• Verification and Implementation: The CFE Treaty includes on-site inspections, transparency measures, and confidence-building mechanisms to ensure compliance.
• New Forms of Arms Control: The document suggests that arms control must evolve to address asymmetric threats, WMD proliferation, and information warfare.

RMA and Its Components

RMA – Part One

• Decoupling of Political and Military Command: Military leadership is increasingly independent from political control.
• Unity of Command: Improved coordination and integration of combined arms, multi-service forces, and AirLand Battle tactics.
• Emphasis on Maneuver and Deception: The US and other advanced states shifted focus from attrition warfare to maneuver and deception.
• 24-Hour Warfare: Advanced forces can conduct operations day and night, in all weather, and at beyond-visual-range.
• C⁴I/BM Integration: Near real-time command, control, communications, intelligence, battle management, targeting, and battle damage assessment are now critical for military success.

RMA – Part Two

• Beyond-Visual-Range Air Combat: Advanced forces have superior air-to-air combat, air defense suppression, and precision strike systems.
• Deep Strike Capabilities: The ability to conduct deep strikes and precision targeting allows for more effective and strategic bombing.
• Technological Superiority: Western and Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) forces have a critical edge in tanks, artillery, air defense, and naval systems.
• Training and Simulation: Realistic combined arms and AirLand training is essential for modern warfare.
• Leadership and Initiative: NCOs and enlisted personnel play a key role in innovative and adaptive leadership.

RMA – Part Three

• Reliance on NCOs: Advanced forces depend heavily on non-commissioned officers and skilled personnel.
• Military Readiness: RMA forces have more realistic standards for readiness and sustained funding.
• Integrated Force Structures: The integration of C⁴I/BM systems is crucial for combined operations and battle management.

Technology Vulnerabilities of Less Advanced Powers

• Centralized Command Structures: Many states have over-centralized, compartmentalized, and inadequately trained command systems.
• Lack of Strategic Assessment: Many nations lack the understanding of RMA and high-tech warfare.
• Inadequate Battle Management: Most Middle Eastern states lack space-based systems, theater reconnaissance, and effective targeting.
• Weakness in Air and Land Defense: Poor air combat training, outdated systems, and limited air defense capabilities.
• Operational Limitations: Many states struggle with sustainability, logistical support, and maneuverability in modern warfare.
• Inability to Use WMDs Effectively: While WMDs can be used for intimidation or population targeting, many states lack the technical and doctrinal capacity to use them effectively in complex operations.

New Issues for Arms Control

• Measuring Asymmetry: Traditional arms control measures are inadequate for addressing capability asymmetries.
• New Metrics: Arms control must consider quality, operational tempo, and system integration.
• Technology as a Factor: While technology is important, readiness, systems interoperability, and software upgrades are also critical.
• Focus on Prevention: Simplicity and conflict prevention may be more effective than complex arms control regimes.

Arms Control Strategies

• Freeze Status Quo: Stabilizing current force levels to prevent escalation.
• Accept Non-Parity: Recognizing that non-state actors and asymmetric threats may not be countered by traditional arms control.
• Transparency and Confidence Building: Measures such as inspection, surveillance, and warning systems can help build trust and reduce tensions.
• Supplier and User Transparency: Ensuring that arms suppliers and users are transparent to prevent proliferation.
• Extended Deterrence: The need for deterrence beyond national borders is highlighted as a potential solution to asymmetric threats.

CFE Treaty Overview

• Significance: Signed before the collapse of the USSR, the CFE Treaty aimed to reduce conventional forces and prevent surprise attacks.
• Ceiling Limits: The treaty imposed equal ceilings on key armaments, including tanks, artillery, armored vehicles, aircraft, and attack helicopters.
• Implementation: The treaty required a graduated reduction schedule, with 25% by 1993, 60% by 1994, and 100% by 1995.
• Verification: The treaty included on-site inspections, transparency measures, and confidence-building to ensure compliance.
• Limitations: The treaty did not anticipate the RMA, and some provisions are now outdated due to technological advancements and new conflict forms.

Conclusion

The document argues that arms control must evolve to address the new forms of warfare, including asymmetric warfare, superterrorism, and information warfare. It suggests that simplicity, transparency, and focus on conflict prevention are key to managing these emerging threats. The CFE Treaty is presented as a model for arms control, but its effectiveness is limited by technological changes and the asymmetry of power in the Middle East.