Alternative Technologies To Replace Antipersonnel Landmines PDF Download

Although FM 20-32 prescribes protective minefields to "provide the defender with close-in protection during the enemy's final assault, the U.S. military will soon be banned from using antipersonnel landmines (APL) meet this force protection role. The magnitude of human suffering resulting from landmines has caused the world humanitarian and diplomatic communities to join forces in September 1997 to produce the Ottawa Convention, a treaty that bans all APLs, to include self-destructing devices. That same month, the President directed DoD to develop antipersonnel landmine alternatives, to include mixed anti-tank systems, for use outside Korea by 2003 and for the Korean Theater by 2006. If this is achieved, the United States will then sign the Ottawa Convention. Lead for this effort fell to the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology (USD(A & T)). Based on preliminary research, the Under Secretary issued a 1997 report focused on integrating technology, combat forces, and military doctrine. The concept was that any lethal APL alternatives would incorporate real-time surveillance, precise firepower to immediately suppress enemy forces, and "man-in-the-loop" command and control Systems to cue engagement. Given the DoD interest in nonlethal weapons, it is only natural that this technology would also be among the options examined to satisfy the force protection role historically played by the APL. The die has been cast. Early in the 21th century, high-tech nonlethal and man-in-the-loop defensive weapon systems will fill the limited remnants of the 20th century antipersonnel landmine force protection role not made obsolete by operational doctrine and precision, standoff weapons.