6 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
essentail for anyone interested in military affaris, October 13, 1998
When the Marines faced potentially hostile crowds during UN troop withdrawals from Somalia, they were equipped with weapons designed to incapacitate without maiming or killing. They had foam laced with tear gas, guns that ejected a sticky, quickly hardening material to slow the crowd's movement, small rounds of wooden pellets and hard sponge that could knock rioters down, temporarily disabling them. According to Nick Lewer and Steven Schofield, the two British authors of this highly readable and comprehensive monograph, such non-lethal weapons could in future include acoustic, chemical, and bacteriological agents that could incapacitate crowds (or terrorists) ever more effectively.
In conventional regional conflicts, our chief concern becomes destroying the enemy's equipment while minimizing civilian casualties. Lewer and Schofield explain that the technology exists for weaponry of this kind, which could be used against rogue states, such as Iraq. It might include cruise missiles with electromagnetic pulse (EMP) warheads to render command and control centers inoperable; lasers to blind an enemy's optical equipment; caustic materials to disable tanks by fusing their moving parts or devouring their gaskets.
The authors argue that these weapons are not simply capabilities in search of missions. Rather, they think, technology is converging with operational necessity, as the revolution in military affairs (RMA) allows us to improve our ability to deal with today's increasingly unorthodox and irregular battlefields. U.S.forces trying to draw order from chaos, respond to terrorist threats, operate in urban areas, and attack a regional bully's army but not his civilian population will continue to see the advantages of non-lethal weapons.
This book presents a whole host of ethical, legal, and operational issues raised by the development of such weapons. Can the expectation of minimal casualties be met? What percentage of bruising ordnance may inadvertently kill? What international laws or domestic statutes - passed in an earlier technological environment - might the use of such weapons violate? How might the public react to weapons that blind but do not kill? These issues need exhaustive analysis as the Pentagon threads its way between operational advantage and domestic acceptability in deciding which non-lethal weapons it will incorporate into its post-Cold War operational doctrine. Above all, it will have to consider what constraints should exist on the development of weapons that would be more likely than their deadlier counterparts to be used against domestic dissidents?
To ensure that its non-lethal arsenal not only complies with international and national law but registers domestic and global sensibilities, the Defense Department has established an interdisciplinary research and development advisory group. This new Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate will receive counsel from a Human Effects Advisory Panel whose members will cumulatively have the scientific and medical expertise to judge some of the issues non-lethal weapons development raises. The Panel will itself receive analyses from the Pennsylvania State University's Institute for Non-lethal Defense Technologies. The Institute has assembled experts from throughout the university community. From the College of Engineering come scientists who will test the technologies; from the College of Earth and Mineral Sciences, geologists who will evaluate their effects on the weather; from the Environmental Resource Research Institute, analysts who will assess their environmental impact; from the College of Medicine, physicians who will consider their medical effects; from the College of Health and Human Development, researchers who will provide estimates of their biomechanical and neuroendocrinal effects. The Department of Political Science will provide scholars who will try to anticipate the domestic political consequences, while lawyers from the Dickinson School of Law will warn of legal implications.
For all those engaged or interested in this project, Non-Lethal Weapons: A Fatal Attraction? Military Strategies and Technologies for 21st Century Conflict will make an excellent primer. The authors describe the daunting range of capabilities that could be placed in the R&D pipeline. They explain the essentials of each technology, and set it against the background of the medical, legal, and ethical restraints that could limit development and use. They show how such weapons have been used in the past, describe current, experimental programs for their development, and discuss how non-lethal weapons might be incorporated into future military doctrine. The book ends with a Bosnia-type scenario - both plausible and imaginative -- in which an interventionary force uses many of the capabilities they have been discussing. In sum, this book is vital reading for anyone with a professional interest in military affairs or a wish for a better understanding of a serious emerging issue that may have profound implications for the future of civil-military relations.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
