POINTER V36N3-4 the Utility of Military Force Against Non-Traditional Threats

8/7/2019 POINTER V36N3-4 the Utility of Military Force Against Non-Traditional Threats

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/pointer-v36n3-4-the-utility-of-military-force-against-non-traditional-threats 1/7POINTER, JOURNAL OF THE SINGAPORE ARMED FORCES VOL.36 NO.3-4

13eatures

The Utility o Military Force AgainstNon-Traditional Threats

by COL Ong Yu Lin, LTC Tan Cheng Kwee and MAJ Fredie Tan

ISAF Troops From Singapore, Helping with Reconstruction

INTRODUCTION

One eect o globalisation is that states areincreasingly vulnerable to shocks, contagion eects

and spillover consequences o developments ar

beyond the conf nes o any state’s geographical

boundaries. Seemingly unimportant events in a araway

land can have signif cant impact and maniest as threats

to national security. International security, regional

security and national security are now intricately

linked, orming a seamless web. States now have to

Abstract:

Non-Traditional (NT) threats have made the national security landscape more complex and uncertain than

beore. This requires the state to anticipate threats which are increasingly multi-dimensional, asymmetric in

nature, sudden and unexpected. The vital and only eective weapon against such threats is knowledge and an

integrated whole-o-government response is preerred. Knowledge is nothing without understanding, and to

achieve understanding, there is a need to make sense o the situation. It is only appropriate that a properunderstanding be achieved at the national level, beore making decisions on utilising elements o national

power, to deal with the NT threat. Although the ongoing structural and capability transormation in the military

has made the military a more useul tool within the national toolkit against NT threats, it should not be

distracted rom its primary mission o deending the state’s sovereignty and territor ial integrity.

Keywords: Non-Traditional Threats, OOTW, Joint Force Transormation

grapple with maintaining and promoting security

against a widened spectrum o threats that are

increasingly transnational and non-traditional innature. These non-traditional threats are oten

undef ned, unpredictable and unexpected. They

also have both internal and external drivers and

ramif cations. These threats are o ten interwoven

with traditional security threats, are capable o

exploiting multiple vulnerabilities, and can put the

state at serious risk.

The military has been the key national institution

o the state in deending its independence and

territorial integrity against traditional military threatsrom other states. Although such traditional threats o

inter-state con ict have receded into the background,

they have not disappeared. States continue to

retain and build up their military orces as it is the

state’s primary responsibility to secure its territorial

integrity. Emerging threats are, however, increasingly

non-traditional in nature, which many states are not

prepared to deal with. The need to simultaneously

deal with both traditional and non-traditional

threats has thereore increased the burden on the

Cyberpioneer


http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/pointer-v36n3-4-the-utility-of-military-force-against-non-traditional-threats 2/7

POINTER, JOURNAL OF THE SINGAPORE ARMED FORCES VOL.36 NO.3-4

14eatures

state. More importantly, the use o military orce

alone is unlikely to achieve a strategic outcome, and

an integrated whole-o-government (W.O.G) approach

is required.1

The changing security paradigm and the reduced

likelihood o conventional inter-state wars have

brought into question the relevance, purpose and utility

o the military orce beyond its traditional security

roles. This paper argues that the changing nature o

con ict has orced the military to change its operating

procedures, warf ghting concepts and organisation,

not only to win wars decisively, but also to win the

peace. In doing so, the current military transormation

has also extended the utility o the military to combat

non-traditional threats. New military capabilities to

win the peace can be easily adapted or use against

non-traditional threats, and we will examine how these

military capabilities can be used in non-traditional

security roles.

While the military remains an

important instrument o national

security, the military is not a

comprehensive instrument to pit

against the entire spectrum o

non-traditional threats.While the military remains an important instrument

o national security, the military is not a comprehensive

instrument to pit against the entire spectrum o

non-traditional threats. Employing the military against

all non-traditional security threats will seriously

jeopardize its main mission: deending national

sovereignty and territorial integrity. However, the

military will remain the most versatile and exible

state institution as the military orce undergoes

urther transormation to meet the demands o uture military operations which are becoming an

interwoven mix o traditional and non-traditional

threats. Such operations will demand multi-national

cooperation involving coalition military orces and

coalition government and non-government agencies.

Paradoxically, this trend will also continue to make

the military the most relevant state institution against

the enemies o the state as well as ensuring a

undamental new role or the military in the uture.2

CHANGING NATURE OF CONFLICT ANDRESPONSES

The changing nature o con ict and its challenges

are best described by Charles Krulak’s “3-Block War”,

and Rupert Smith’s “war amongst the people”. The

“3-Block War” is one where “soldiers may be conronted

with the entire spectrum o tactical challenges in thespan o a ew hours and within the space o three

contiguous city blocks”. These soldiers may be required

to conduct a ull scale o military actions, including

peace support operations and humanitarian relie.3

These military activities will also take place amongst

the people and the opponents will extend beyond

traditional state actors to include non-state ones.

The operation continuum is also being redef ned, as

war is unlikely to be ollowed by victory and peace,

but by continued con ict.4

The need to operate in such a complex and dynamic

operational environment has orced the military to

build new capabilities to win wars decisively and to

win the post-war con icts switly. These new

capabilities to win wars amongst the people allow

the military to execute operational concepts such as

dominant manoeuvre, ocused combat service support,

multi-dimensional orce protection, and knowledge-

based command, control, and communication.

In addition, there are also intelligence, precision

engagement, inormation operations, and civil-militaryand media operations. Increasingly, the def nition o

combat power is extending beyond the traditional

domains o f repower, protection and mobility to

include an expanding suite o non-kinetic capabilities

that ocus on understanding the culture, shaping

the minds and swaying the will o the opposing

combatants and non-combatants. These new

military capabilities can be adapted or use against

non-traditional threats in continued con icts and

Operations Other Than War (OOTW).5

The changing security paradigm is one where

military threats are becoming interwoven with

non-military threats, and the distinction between

combatants and non-combatants is increasingly

dif cult. Destroying an opposing state’s inrastructure

to reduce its war f ghting capacities will also have

signif cant consequences on its civil population.

As a result, uture operations will have to be more

precise, using precision weapons and higher quality




15eatures

troops possessing the exactitude and stealth o

current Special Forces units. Future operations will

also include both violent and non-violent applications

o military power, conducted in conjunction with

government and non-government agencies as well as

coalition partners to deal with a widened spectrum

o post-con ict consequences. Moreover, shrinkingdeence budgets and rising costs o military equipment

dictate the need to employ all available military assets

available rom the Army, Navy and Air Force to achieve

the desired eects. Future operations will necessarily

be more integrated across the Services and the

conduct o operations will go beyond operating

jointly to operating in a seamless manner.6 Military

orces will continue to undergo transormation;

structurally, doctr inally and conceptually to ulf l

new missions and roles and also improve cooperation

with external agencies.

EMPLOYMENT OF MILITARY CAPABILITIESAGAINST NON-TRADITIONAL THREATS

The term ‘non-tradit ional (NT) threat ’ is a dif cult

term to def ne and literature reviews only oer a list

o examples. Moreover, there is also no agreement on

the number o such threats. Amidst this discussion,

non-traditional threats do share our key characteristics:

(1) transnational in nature and hence aect more

than one state at the same time; (2) extend beyond

the military sphere and consequently military options

alone will seldom achieve the required eects; (3)

oten occur quietly and inconspicuously in the orm

o aint signals, masked by noise and are oten hard

to detect, causing surprise when they are detected;

and (4) are requently interwoven with traditional

security threats, and usually emanate rom non-state

actors.

With the receding threat o inter-state con ict,

states are now acing a clear and present security

challenge rom non-traditional threats. Given thisreality, it is natural that the military has been

increasingly employed or these non-war military

operations both domestically and internationally. In

many countries the military is the most important and

best developed state instrument, and governments

are discovering that civilian agencies simply cannot

cope with the magnitude o these problems. However,

employing the military against all non-traditional

security threats will seriously distract it rom its

main purpose o deending national sovereignty

and territorial integrity. Hence, the military can be

employed against certain NT threats either as the

lead agency or as a supporting agency. This will be

elaborated on in the ollowing paragraphs:

(A) Transnational Crime

Transnational crime reers to activities such as

narcotics and arms traf cking, human smuggling,

prostitution, credit card raud, extortion, gambling,

contract murders, and money laundering. It is a

real and protracted threat to the nation-state as

it can undermine political institutions, erode the

legitimacy and credibility o governments to provide

a minimum level o protection or individuals.

Criminal activity can also cause widespread death and

social destruction. Money laundering can threaten a

nation’s banking system and undermine conf dencein the entire f nancial system.

Under normal circumstances, the civil police orce

is the lead agency in the f ght against transnational

crime. The military can be employed as a supporting

agency in remote border regions and territorial

waters to curb illegal migration, drug and arms

traf cking. The military may employ it s intelligence

and surveillance systems or intelligence collection

and early warning especially i such capabilities are

not available to the civil police orce. However, the

military is not designed or and should not be used

to deal with other types o transnational crime.

Transnational terrorism includes

activities that seek to destabilise,

instil ear and erode the legitimacy

o the state, through methods

such as assassination, kidnapping,

hijacking, cyber-attacks, and the useo chemical, biological, radiological

and explosive devices.

(B) Transnational Terrorism

Transnational terrorism includes activities that

seek to destabilise, instil ear and erode the legitimacy

o the state, through methods such as assassination,

kidnapping, hijacking, cyber-attacks, and the use




16eatures

o chemical, biological, radiological and explosive

devices. Signif cantly, the trend o terror ism has

evolved; targeting state inrastructure and citizens

to erode conf dence in the legitimacy and competency

o the state. Terrorist attacks against f nancial

targets can spark f nancial panic and cause f nancial

turmoil. Cyber-terrorism against a nation’s powergrid or IT inrastructure can bring a nation and an

inter-connected world to a stand-still. Bio-terrorism

can cause widespread human and social destruction.

Counter-terrorism is a national eort with public

vigilance and police action as the f rst level o response.

In the event that terrorist groups become capable o

conducting large scale military operations, the military

should be the lead agency. The military can also be

employed to assist the Police to protect national key

installations o strategic or symbolic signif cance. Most

militaries today also possess a Chemical, Biological,

Radiological and Explosive (CBRE) unit that can be

the lead agency against bio-terrorism threats or as a

supporting agency to a developed Civil Deence orce

with similar CBRE capability.

(C) Medical Epidemics

Medical epidemics include the widespread

transmission o inectious diseases such as SARS,

cholera or malaria. The dramatic growth in personal

travel or business or pleasure, and the expansion o

global trade has increased the risk o rapid spread

o inectious disease rom one part o the world to

another. Inectious diseases aect the quality o

a nation’s human capital. Medical endemics erode

national conf dence and investor conf dence, which

translates into economic issues aecting national

development and hence uture security and stability.

Inectious diseases can devastate the economy,

potentially contributing to increased unemployment,

reduce social stability and, in the worse case, cause

political collapse.

The military can be employed as either the lead

agency in a national consequence management team

or as a supporting agency to the national health

agency. The military can assist in the management o

quarantine areas and in contact tracing, as the SAF

did during the SARS epidemic in Singapore. This is

the employment o the managerial leadership

capability o the military, rather than its warf ghting

capability.

(D) Natural Disaster

The range o natural disasters include orest

f res, cyclones/hurricanes, earthquakes, oods and

droughts. The impact o natural disasters on human

lie and sustainable economic development can be

disastrous. Damage caused by natural disasters oten

produce social disorder, environmental degradationand medical endemics. These consequences are oten

exacerbated in ragile or weak states, as seen in

Haiti where ragile state institutions disintegrated

ater the devastating earthquake in January 2010.

No country, no matter how big or developed,

can mobilise suf cient resources and the specialised

capabilities necessary to alleviate the suering o

all vict ims o a natural disaster. However, international

organisations, aid agencies, and other international

rescue services can provide the necessary assistance.7

The current transormation o the military, however,makes it well placed to operate with these

organisations to switly and eectively deliver relie

to the victims.

Military orces have a critical role to play

in Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relie

(HADR) operations as they possess the necessary

transportation, engineering resources and manpower

to provide a critical quick response in the initial

stages o disaster relie and rescue operations. The

military can transport aid to aected areas and

assist in its distribution, especially in remote and

dif cult-to-reach areas. While the military orce

is unlikely to provide complete relie to all victims,

through its initial actions it can stabilise the situation

or international organisations and aid agencies to

ollow up in the subsequent phases.

Sail Banda 2010




17eatures

The military with its lit and engineering assets is

well-equipped to be the lead agency in disaster relie

operations, but it can be subordinated to a national

emergency management

agency to support the

Civil Deence orce. It can

also play an importantrole in the evacuation

o citizenry beore the

disaster. Its surveillance

and intelligence assets

can also be used or

damage assessments

to aid the national

disaster coordinating

agency make plans and

coordinate relie eorts.

I necessary, the militarycan also be employed as

a f rst response orce to

restore an acceptable

level o security against

armed local gangs that

might have emerged in the post-disaster period.

(E) Intra-State or Regional Conf icts

According to a World Bank report, about a billion

people live in countries aected by ragility and

con ict.8

Fragile states are def ned as “countries acingsevere development challenges, weak institutional

capacity, poor governance, and political instability.

Oten these countries experience ongoing violence

as the residue o past severe con ict. Ongoing armed

con icts aect three out o our ragile states.”9

Con icted aected or post-con ict countries can

be countries that have (1) suered a severe and

long-lasting con ict, (2) experienced a short, but

highly intensive, con ict leading to a disruption

o development or (3) a newly sovereign state that

has emerged through the violent break-up o aormer sovereign entity. More importantly, these

con ict-aected and ragile states have “a one in

six chance o al ling into civil war in any f ve year

period, and that a typical post-con ict country has

a 50-50 chance o slipping back into war”.11

Con ict-aected and ragile states also aect the

national security and economic development o their

neighbouring countries and produce global insecurity

by becoming hotbeds or crime, disease and terrorism.12

The provision o aid is critical to the development o

these states, but an acceptable level o security and

stability is needed beore

international aid can be

own in. The military

is by ar the mostsuitable oreign policy

instrument to establish

an acceptable level o

security by preventing

or suppressing any

con icts so that aid

agencies can alleviate

the consequences o a

con ict and/or a ragile

state. Military orces are

usually deployed as parto a United Nations led or

sanctioned multinational

peace support

operation to execute

con ict prevention,

peacemaking, peace enorcement, peacekeeping, peace

building and/or humanitarian operations. Ongoing

military transormation to increase the versatility

o the military orce to operate in a complex war

environment has also provided the military a capability

to conduct such peace support operations. While themilitary can play a crucial initial role to establish

security, a multi-dimensional whole-o-government

approach is needed to provide the initial expertise

while developing indigenous capabilities to rebuild

national institutions. This whole-o-government

approach ocuses on (1) promoting governance, (2)

protecting civil population, (3) improving security,

(4) restoring essential services and (5) stimulating

sustainable economic development.13

CONCLUSIONHow and in what role the military is employed

domestically against NT threats will depend on the

state o development, competency and capability o

the other national agencies vis-a-vis the nature o the

non-traditional threat the state is acing. Generally,

when the other national agencies are well developed;

the military is likely to be employed in a supporting

role. Likewise, immature national agencies necessitate

a larger role or the military.




18eatures

The military in developed states is most likely to

be undergoing transormation to cope with changes

in the battlef eld. At the same time, while the other

state agencies are also developing to deal with NT

threats, they may not be adequate or the task and the

military then has to be re-organized to handle certain

NT threats, either in a leading or augmenting role.This process is aided by the current transormation

o military, thus making it relatively easy to adapt

its new capabilities or application against NT threats

and to work in a coordinated or a seamless manner

with other state agencies. As the capacity and

capability o the other state agencies are developed

over time, the military should relinquish its lead

role and ocus on its primary mission o deending

state sovereignty and territorial integrity.

The severity that non-traditional threats pose to

national security cannot be understated and the rolethe military can possibly perorm is dependent on

both the state o development o the military and the

capacity and competency o other state instruments.

These NT threats aect the national security o all

types o states.14 Some countries or regions are more

prone to insecurity depending on their exposure to

globalization. It is in states with weak sovereignty

that the emergence o insecurity is most strongly

elt and these are oten located in the developing

and post-colonial world. Ironically, it is also in these

countries that the military is employed as the mainstate instrument against all threats.

These NT threats have made the national security

landscape more complex and uncertain than beore.

This requires the state to anticipate threats which are

increasingly multi-dimensional, asymmetric in nature,

sudden and unexpected. The vital and only eective

weapon against such threats is knowledge and an

integrated whole-o-government response is preerred.15

Knowledge is nothing without understanding, and to

achieve understanding, there is a need to make sense

o the situation. It is only appropriate that a proper

understanding be achieved at the national level, beore

making decisions on utilizing elements o national

power, to deal with the NT threat. Although the

ongoing structural and capability transormation

in the military has made the military a more useul

tool within the national toolkit against NT threats, it

should not be distracted rom its primary mission

o deending the state’s sovereignty and territorial

integrity.

ENDNOTES

1. Rupert Smith, The Utility o Force: The Art o War in the

Modern World (Knop Publishing, January 2007), p. 378.

2. Ong Yu-Lin, “Employment o the Military Against Non-

Traditional Threats: An Isomorphism or a Metamorphism

o Roles”, World Military Review , Number 5, Issue 433

(2009), pp. 42-45.

3. Gen. Charles C. Krulak, “The Strategic Corporal: Leadership

in the Three Block War”, Marines Magazine (January 1999).

4. Smith, pp. 5-6.

5. According to the Army Operations Manual (October

2006), OOTW encompasses the use o military capabilities

across the range o military operations short o war. It

can be applied to complement any combination o other

instruments o national power. OOTW ocus on deterring

war, resolving con icts and promoting our wider national

interests. These could also include protecting our overseas

citizens and oshore assets, and even contributing topromote regional stability.

6. Ong Yu-Lin, “The Future o Joint Operat ions”, World

Military Review , Number 12, Issue 428 (2008), pp. 54-56.

7. Teo Chee Hean, “Modes O Security Cooperation:

Conf dence-Building, Partnerships, Alliances”, Keynote

Address at 7th IISS Asian Security Summit Shangri-La

Dialogue, Singapore (1 June 2007).

8. World Bank Group, http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/

EXTERNAL/PROJECTS/STRATEGIES/EXTLICUS/0, contentM

DK:22230573~menuPK:6434002~pagePK:64171531~piPK:

64171507~theSitePK:511778,00.html

9. World Bank Group, http://www.worldbank.org

10. Paul Collier, The Bottom Billion: Why the Poorest Countries

are Failing and What can be Done About it , (Oxord: Oxord

University Press, 2007), p. 32; Paul Collier and Anke

Hoe er, “Post Con ict Risks”, Journal o Peace Research,

Vol. 45, No. 4 (2008), pp. 461-478.

11. Ibid.

12. Paul Collier, “Breaking the Con ict Trap”, A World Bank

Policy Research Report (2003).

13. Peter Chiarelli and Patrick Michaelis, “Winning the Peace:The Requirement or Full Spectrum Operations”, Military

Review (Jul-Aug 2005), pp. 4-17.

14. Thomas Quiggin, Seeing the Invisible: National Security

Intelligence in an Uncertain Age (World Scient if c

Publishing, 2007), p. 231; Implications or the Asia-Pacif c

(Barton: Australian Strategic Policy Institute, 2006), p6.




19eatures

COL Ong Yu Lin is a Guards Of cer by training. He is currently a Senior Project

Of cer in HQ Guards where he was the previous Deputy Chie Guards Of cer.

He holds a Bachelor o Science in Physics rom the National University o

Singapore, a Master o Management in Deence Studies rom the University

o Canberra, Australia, and a MBA rom the Nanyang Fellows Programme in

Nanyang Business School, Nanyang Technological University. COL Ong has

also attended the Royal Military Academy at Sandhurst, U.K., the U.S. Army

Inantry School at Fort Benning, the Australian Command and Sta College,

and the Chinese People’s Liberation Army National Deence University.

COL Ong previously held the appointments o Commanding Of cer, 1st

Battalion Singapore Guards, Commander, 3rd Singapore Inantry Brigade and

Commander, Of cer Cadet School (OCS).

LTC Tan Cheng Kwee is a Guards of cer by training. He is currently the

Commanding Of cer, 1st Battalion Singapore Guards. He is a recipient o the SAF Overseas Scholarship. He holds a Bachelor o Science (Electrical

Engineering) (Highest Honours) rom the University o Illinois at Urbana-

Champaign. LTC Tan attended The Basic School, U.S. Marine Corps in 2000

and the Indonesian Command and Sta College (Seskoad) in 2008 where he

emerged the top international student graduate. LTC Tan has ormerly held

the appointments o Operations Of cer, 7th Singapore Inantry Brigade, and

Of cer-Commanding o ‘B’ Company, 3rd Battalion Singapore Guards.

MAJ Tan Eng Han, Fredie is currently the the Commanding Of cer, 3rd

Battalion Singapore Guards. He is a Guards Of cer by vocation and was

commissioned in 1997 at Of cer Cadet School, SAFTI MI. He is a recipient

o the Academic Training Award (Local) in 2000 and holds a Bachelor o

Commerce (Management) rom the University o Adelaide, Australia. He

attended the USMC Expeditionary Warare School (class o 2006) and the

Singapore Command and Sta College in 2009. He previously held the

appointments o Head Capability Development Branch, (2010) and Doctr ine

Of cer (2006-2008) in HQ Guards, Coy Commander, 3rd Bn Gds (2004) and

Platoon Commander/ Instructor, OCS (1999 thru 2003).

POINTER V36N3-4 the Utility of Military Force Against Non-Traditional Threats

Documents

Transcript of POINTER V36N3-4 the Utility of Military Force Against Non-Traditional Threats