Aerial Campaigns and Different Targets Carla Martinez Machain , Kansas State University

1. Aerial Campaigns and Different Targets Carla Martinez Machain, Kansas State University carlamm@ksu.edu • Research Questions • How does the choice of aerial military strategy affect the outcome of a campaign? • Does the success of aerial campaigns depend on the strategy of the opponent on the ground? • How can terrain affect the effectiveness of aerial campaigns? • Previous Work • Previous work on military strategies: • Mearsheimer (1983), Stam (1996),Bennett & Stam (1998) • Reiter & Meek (1999) • Focus on ground strategies • Previous work on air power: • Pape (1996), Horowitz & Reiter (2001), Allen (2007). • Distinction between aerial and military strategies • Terrain • Generally, air power less effective in mountainous, jungle, or urban terrains • Identification of targets more difficult • Modern aerial strategies rely on identification of key targets • Non-modern strategies focus on general destruction • Data from Fearon & Laitin (2003) and Stam (1996) • H2:When the adversary is fighting in rough terrain, the effectiveness of a modern strategy of air power will decrease, relative to the non-modern system. • The Opponent’s Ground Strategy • Aerial surveillance is intermittent by nature, modern ground strategies may take advantage of these breaks (Biddle 2007) • Modern ground strategies less vulnerable to non-modern air campaigns • Modern aerial strategy identifies key points that can halt a modern ground attack • Possibility of slowing down modern ground attack • Data from Knuth (2012) • H1:When the adversary is using a modern strategy, the effectiveness of a modern strategy of air power by the attacker will increase, relative to the non-modern system. • Aerial Strategy Classification • Modern Air Power: • Targeted use. • Against key decisive targets. • Does not necessarily seek to destroy all of the enemy’s forces, not punitive. • Non-modern Air Power • Aims to destroy the enemy • Can include punitive attacks • Less focus on selective attacks (Warden 2000, Biddle 2004) • Conclusions • Modern aerial campaigns appear to be more effective than non-modern aerial campaigns in combating an opponent that is applying the modern system on the ground. • Using modern air power against an opponent fighting in rough terrain is riskier, as it becomes more difficult to predict the outcome of the attack.