Air Power As A Coercive Instrument

Coercion--the use of threatened force to induce an adversary to change its behavior--is a critical function of the U.S. military. U.S. forces have recently fought in the Balkans, the Persian Gulf, and the Horn of Africa to compel recalcitrant regimes and warlords to stop repression, abandon weapons programs, permit humanitarian relief, and otherwise modify their actions. Yet despite its overwhelming military might, the United States often fails to coerce successfully. This report examines the phenomenon of coercion and how air power can contribute to its success. Three factors increase the likelihood of successful coercion: (1) the coercer's ability to raise the costs it imposes while denying the adversary the chance to respond (escalation dominance); (2) an ability to block an adversary's military strategy for victory; and (3) an ability to magnify third-party threats, such as internal instability or the danger posed by another enemy. Domestic political concerns (such as casualty sensitivity) and coalition dynamics often constrain coercive operations and impair the achievement of these conditions. Air power can deliver potent and credible threats that foster the above factors while neutralizing adversary countercoercive moves. When the favorable factors are absent, however, air power--or any other military instrument--will probably fail to coerce. Policymakers' use of coercive air power under inauspicious conditions diminishes the chances of using it elsewhere when the prospects of success would be greater.

As part of this larger study, members of the research team explored the role of air power as a coercive instrument. In recent years, decision makers have called on the USAF to play a major role in attempting to coerce foes in the Persian Gulf, the Horn of Africa, and Europe. Although the United States and the USAF have scored some notable successes, the record is mixed. The purpose of the study reported here is to better understand the phenomenon of coercion and learn what is necessary to carry it out, anticipate likely constraints on the use of force, and determine how air power can best be used to coerce. The report will be of particular interest to USAF and other Defense Department planners who seek to use force more effectively.

From Iraq to Bosnia to North Korea, the first question in American foreign policy debates is increasingly: Can air power alone do the job? Robert A. Pape provides a systematic answer. Analyzing the results of over thirty air campaigns, including a detailed reconstruction of the Gulf War, he argues that the key to success is attacking the enemy's military strategy, not its economy, people, or leaders. Coercive air power can succeed, but not as cheaply as air enthusiasts would like to believe.Pape examines the air raids on Germany, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, and Iraq as well as those of Israel versus Egypt, providing details of bombing and governmental decision making. His detailed narratives of the strategic effectiveness of bombing range from the classical cases of World War II to an extraordinary reconstruction of airpower use in the Gulf War, based on recently declassified documents. In this now-classic work of the theory and practice of airpower and its political effects, Robert A. Pape helps military strategists and policy makers judge the purpose of various air strategies, and helps general readers understand the policy debates.

The United States has vital interests to defend in many foreign countries. The strategist must understand the relationship between counterrevolutionary strategy, the military instrument, and airpower if called upon to help a friendly government defeat a revolutionary threat. Four questions can help the strategist explore the nature of this relationship. What is the role of the military instrument in counterrevolutionary warfare? What is the role of airpower in counterrevolutionary warfare? Can airpower achieve strategic effects in counterrevolutionary warfare? Can airpower make major contributions toward the success of counterrevolutionary forces? The strategy development process is a tool that can guide the strategist through a review of revolutionary theory and an analysis of counterrevolutionary strategy. The revolutionary environment must be examined to determine the actors, motivations, aims, and strategies of the revolutionary battlefield. Next, a national counterrevolutionary strategy is formulated that identifies the roles that each instrument of power must play to achieve the desired end-state. Military leaders formulate a subordinate strategy based on the assigned role(s), which includes determining how airpower can best support the national strategy. Strategy execution implies monitoring the instruments of power, reassessing the environment, and modifying ends, ways, and means as appropriate. Theory suggests the government must correctly identify the nature of the revolutionary threat before developing its counterrevolutionary strategy. After determining whether it is facing a partisan or insurgent threat (or something in between), the government tries to identify the correct mixture of persuasive and coercive operations that is needed to win over the people and neutralize the revolutionary threat. Persuasive strategies seek to gain, bolster, or otherwise amass the popular support required for legitimacy. Coercive strategies attempt to neutralize the adversary by making him irrelevant to the political process prior to total military defeat. The military instrument and its airpower tool conduct operations in pursuit of both persuasive and coercive tasks. Three historical cases are analyzed to gain experienced based insights to answer the thesis questions. The cases were the Greek Civil War, 1946-1949; the Malayan Emergency, 1948-1960; and the Insurrection in El Salvador, 1981-1992. In each of these cases the governments struggled to develop a counterrevolutionary strategy. In Greece and Malaya the government successfully neutralized the revolutionary threat. Although the Salvadoran government technically defeated the rebels, they remained an important part of El Salvador's political process. This work offers four conclusions. First, the roles of the military instrument in counterrevolutionary warfare are persuasion and coercion. Next, airpower normally assumes the role assigned to the military instrument, although airpower's unique versatility often permits the simultaneous accomplishment of both persuasive and coercive operations. Third, airpower can create both positive and negative strategic effects. Finally, airpower makes its most important contribution toward the success of counterrevolutionary forces when it is employed in support of ground operations

In this detailed but concise monograph, air power expert Tami Davis Biddle walks us through our century-long experience of air power as an instrument of warfare. Using the twin pillars of theory and history, she explains the expectations that were held for aircraft in war and then examines how those expectations played out in the actual realm of practice. This monograph, which focuses primarily on the most controversial aspect of air power, coercive bombing, takes a chronological approach that starts with World War I and comes all the way to the present day. By contrasting theory and practice, she identifies the overarching themes that have run through history and pinpoints those moments when the gaps between theory and practice have been largest. Her narrative mainly (but not exclusively) follows the experience of the U.S. Air Force. By the middle of World War II, the predecessor institution, the U.S. Army Air Forces, was investing more in aircraft than any other nation. The United States continued that pattern after the war, maintaining a large standing Air Force designed to deter threats to American interests, and to take a leading role in fighting the nation's wars.Each decade brought new capabilities and new expectations. Americans embraced aviation technology and were at the forefront of its rapid development as an instrument of military power. Not infrequently, air power proponents expected more from it than it could deliver on its own. Not every war that the Americans fought after 1945 was suited to the dominant ways and means of American air power. The ability to coerce an enemy rests heavily on an accurate calculation of enemy will, and determination to sacrifice in order to hold or gain a stake. The tendency of Americans to assume that they could successfully coerce-through numbers and power-has not always served them well. Biddle explains, however, those times when coercive air power has been effective in the last century and details the conditions undergirding that effectiveness. Moreover, she argues that early air theorist Giulio Douhet was right in one particular respect: the nation that wins and holds "command of the air" has an immense advantage in conventional warfighting. Biddle agrees with air theorist Robert Pape's argument that gaining air superiority is a sui generis function, distinct from the application of coercive air power, but that such superiority facilitates the subsequent use of coercive air power, and forms a crucial foundation for its success.

This collection of essays reflects the proceedings of a 1991 conference on "The United States Air Force: Aerospace Challenges and Missions in the 1990s," sponsored by the USAF and Tufts University. The 20 contributors comment on the pivotal role of airpower in the war with Iraq and address issues and choices facing the USAF, such as the factors that are reshaping strategies and missions, the future role and structure of airpower as an element of US power projection, and the aerospace industry's views on what the Air Force of the future will set as its acquisition priorities and strategies. The authors agree that aerospace forces will be an essential and formidable tool in US security policies into the next century. The contributors include academics, high-level military leaders, government officials, journalists, and top executives from aerospace and defense contractors.

In this monograph, Tami Davis Biddle analyzes the historical record of air power over the past 100 years. Her monograph, designed for the student of strategy, is intended to provide both a concise introduction to the topic and a framework for thinking intelligently about air power, particularly aerial bombing. Her primary aim is to discern the distinction between what has been expected of air power by theorists and military institutions, and what it has produced in the crucible of war. Aerial bombing, Biddle argues, is a coercive activity in which an attacker seeks to structure the enemy's incentives-using threats and actions to shape and constrain the enemy's options, both perceived and real. It is an important and much-utilized military instrument for both deterrence and compellence. In addition, it is a powerful tool in the arsenal of the joint warfighter. Its ability to achieve anticipated results, however, varies with circumstances. Students of strategy must be able to discern and understand the conditions under which aerial bombing is more or less likely to achieve the results expected of it by those who employ it.

This second edition of Military Strategy, Joint Operations, and Airpower introduces contemporary strategy at the operational level of war. Developed as foundational reading for all US Air Force Academy cadets, this textbook is designed to close the gap between military theory and practice.