GlobalSecurity.org In the News

The Independent November 21, 2006

The future of war

By Andrew Buncombe

At a recent exhibition of new military technology one independent expert stood almost agog as the prototype for a new killing machine was rolled out. It went by the acronym of URV or Unmanned Robot Vehicle - and it looked like something from the movies.

"It was frightening. The [URV] has laser radars at the front and these things were scanning up and down and from side to side," said John Pike, director of GlobalSecurity.Org, a Washington-based military studies group. "It was the most Sixties, sci-fi thing I have ever seen."

Pike and others believe this is the future of warfare - or at least part of the future. Technology will increasingly allow the most sophisticated and best equipped militaries - primarily that of the US - to fight battles using robots rather than soldiers: robots which can detect, assess and attack a target.

"Robots can kill without mercy, remorse or pity. They are all stone-cold killers," said Pike. "And we don't have to write letters to their families."

The United States army is already developing an arsenal of robotic weapons that could be deployed within a decade or so. In the air, Unmanned Air Vehicles (UAVs) are now being used extensively in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere - both for surveillance as well as dropping so-called "Hellfire" missiles. The US is trying to develop ways for UAVs or drones to work in swarms, attacking targets en masse or operating an aerial delivery system to cover an entire region.

Technology is also changing the nature of munitions.

Already there are devastating thermobaric bombs which have more destructive power than any other conventional weapon, while microwave bombs or transient electromagnetic devices (TEDs), which release a massive burst of electromagnetic energy sufficient to disable computers without killing people, are also in development.

Space may become the next battlefield, and it is in this area that technology is really pushing at the boundaries.

Reports in the US suggest that ideas either on the drawing board, or else already in development, include killer satellites that could destroy an enemy's satellites, a Common Aero Vehicle (CAV) that could swoop with hypersonic speed up to 3 000 miles to attack a target, Hyper-Velocity Rod Bundles which would fire tungsten bars weighing 100kg from a permanently orbiting platform - and even a space-based laser that uses mirrors to direct the sun's rays against ground targets.

This last project - known as the Eagle or Evolutionary Air and Space Global Laser Engagement - was contained along with other such radical ideas in a 2004 Air Force plan to transform space into a weaponised zone.

Developments in the US and Israel in body armour have incorporated nanotechnology, greatly increasing its protective capabilities - in effect making it likely that there will soon be vests that can even stop armour-piercing rifle rounds. Improved personal protection, coupled with advances in medical technology, have meant wounded soldiers now have a better chance of survival.

The ratio between dead and wounded among US troops in Iraq is one to eight, while in Vietnam it was one to three.

There is much debate in military circles about the way future wars will be fought. Max Boot, of the Council on Foreign Relations, believes technology will continue to be very important both for the US and its enemies.

"More destructive capacity into the hands of ever-smaller groups of individuals"

"I think that cyberwarfare and biotechnology are particularly threatening to the West because they - along with nuclear proliferation - will put more destructive capacity into the hands of ever-smaller groups of individuals," he said. "We need to keep innovating to find potential solutions - biotechnology can provide not only killer viruses but also lifesaving antidotes."

But Boot and others also highlight the increasing threat from non-traditional enemies - irregular foes and guerrillas who fight on "an asymmetric battlefield". Some go so far as to suggest that this new fourth-generation warfare has left conventional warfare outmoded.

Experts such as William Lind and Winslow Wheeler say confronting this enemy puts much higher value on intelligence, language skills and cultural understanding.

"There are two visions for the future. One is weapons- and computer-driven. The other is the idea of fourth generation warfare against the sort of enemy we face in Iraq and Afghanistan," said Mr Wheeler, of the Centre for Defence Information (CDI).

Pike believes development will be driven by the US, whose military budget already matches the combined totals of the next dozen or so countries. Despite being three years into a war that has led to the death of around 2,800 US and 120 UK troops, and perhaps as many as 655,000 Iraqis, he is concerned that new technology will further encourage the US to military action rather than diplomacy.

"Some fear it will lead to the lone super-power going on the rampage,"he said. "If you think that people are fed up with America now, just give it time."