If you care about the future of the Air Force in irregular warfare — basically, in an era where manned air combat is less relevant than at any other time in the Air Force’s history — you have to read Air Force Capt. Daniel Magruder’s Small Wars Journal essay, and it wouldn’t be such a bad idea to read my Washington Independent post on Magruder, either. To get far far nerdier, it’s worth comparing Magruder’s essay to Maj. Gen. Charlie Dunlap’s controversial monograph Shortchanging the Joint Fight?, about which you can still strike up a vigorous debate with counterinsurgents who wonder what Dunlap was up to.
In a masterpiece of poststructural narrative, Dunlap may or may not be a counterinsurgent and his monograph either brings the Air Force into the era of counterinsurgency or executes a precision strike upon it. You really can debate this forever. To be both brief and fair, Dunlap argues that air power has more application in complex counterinsurgency operations, including urban combat, than conventional understandings of counterinsurgency appreciate, and his big example is how technological advancements make precision-guided munitions more accurate in killing insurgents with minimal collateral damage than artillery. (THIS IS HIGHLY DEBATABLE AND I AM NOT ATTEMPTING TO ADJUDICATE THE DISPUTE THX.) Air Force intelligence assets and cyberwarfare expertise also get short shrift in COINdinista bibles like FM 3-24, and that’s a point that’s aged well in the nearly two years since Dunlap wrote his treatise now that the COIN crowd has lined up behind the "full-spectrum operations" concept.
But then Dunlap hacks away at counterinsurgency principles. He says that human intelligence is overrated. He says that using U.S. ground power to protect a population from an insurgency is ultimately unsustainable — that’s something most COINdinistas agree with, by the way; the argument, Smiths-like, is How Soon Is Unsustainable — and inexplicably contends air power can fill the gap. He says that exploiting the "psychological impact" of U.S. airpower is key, while not giving much effort to considering that airpower scares the shit out of civilian populations. As a result, counterinsurgents wondered if Dunlap was really saying COIN itself is unsustainable and we should all just go back to outmoded styles of warfare that just happen to favor massive Air Force budgets. (THIS IS HIGHLY DEBATABLE AND I AM NOT ATTEMPTING TO ADJUDICATE THE DISPUTE THX.) There was a brief Kumbaya moment when Dunlap co-authored a gauzy, insubstantial beef-squashing piece with John Nagl on SWJ ("[America's] enemies ought to beware. And update their wills.") but it as awkward pairing as anything on the Judgment Night soundtrack.
Anyway, Magruder’s piece raises no such ambiguities. He accepts the relevance of irregular warfare to the current U.S. defense posture and then asks how the Air Force can make itself relevant to that. I can’t imagine it was the easiest piece for an airman to write — he conspicuously mentions how many of his service’s chiefs of staff through the years have been fighter pilots — but it’s a bracing and intellectually thorough essay. (I AM NOT SAYING DUNLAP’S WASN’T THX.) Like Dunlap, Magruder argues that there’s a place for the Air Force in counterinsurgency, but the only place that their specific arguments converge is over the value of unmanned aerial vehicles like Predator drones. It’s worth noting that Magruder is a captain and veteran of both Iraq and Afghanistan, while Dunlap is a two-star general from a different generation, so that inevitably colors both their perspectives, despite the bullshit that Jeff Sessions wants to sell you.
Tags: coin, looooooooong war
Login Here


3 Comments
Spotlight


Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About ATTACKERMAN
RSS/XML Feed
There’s been a lot of reporting describing the AF as the most socially conservative branch of the military and also a lot of reporting describing the AF as internally very anti-innovation. I’ve always wondered if that’s an active correlation–if the whole branch is simply not best suited to forward thought on any front.
I think it’s inarguable that the Air Force is less relevant today. The Navy has a better strategic platform, manned bombers are so vulnerable as to require standoff weapons to even remain in use, cyberwarfare is a grossly over-hyped threat that has no real utility, the US would be incredibly stupid to start an ASAT arms race and I really can’t see that you need a whole service branch to provide CAS to the ground pounders.
It’s another uniquely modern American argument where the logical answer is obvious but taboo to even discuss, so we have these arguments over the suitability of a square peg for use in a round hole…
mikehy
Colorado Springs is the home of Focus on the Family, right? So yeah, IIRC, the fundies have made a priority of trying to convert people at the AF Academy(with the help of W’s minions). What lasting impact will that have? I don’t know.