Lethal Airpower and Intervention
Abstract
The end of the Cold War seems to have ushered in a new age of interventionism for the United States; using force to further foreign policy ends no longer carries the threat of superpower confrontation. If the dangers of intervening have declined, though, so too have the motivations for doing so. The zero-sum game with America's arch-rival is over, thus the relative importance of world events is no longer calculated by the same win-lose logic that dominated the Cold War. As American policy-makers grapple with the issues of whether and how to best intervene in the post-Cold War world, they may be tempted to call upon lethal forms of airpower. Airpower seems to offer the United States a quick, clean, and cheap means for employing force. In this study, the author explores various types of intervention, the American doctrine for when and how to employ military forces, and the capabilities and limitations of lethal airpower. lie concludes that lethal airpower may indeed be the instrument of choice in many circumstances. However, airmen will likely be challenged to gain the freedom needed to employ airpower effectively whenever relatively unimportant national interests are at stake. Given the leeway to employ airpower as they see fit, airmen may find that the limitations of their tools present serious impediments to meeting the policy-makers' expectations. This study should be of some value, then, to strategists, air operations planners, and those individuals advising policy-makers on the options for employing military force.
Document Details
- Document Type
- Technical Report
- Publication Date
- Jun 01, 1996
- Accession Number
- ADA360551
Entities
People
- Mark A. Bucknam
Organizations
- Air University