INTRODUCTION
Throughout history, technology has influenced the nature of warfare significantly. From machine guns, tanks, submarines and tactical aircraft that were used in the battlefields of World War 1, technology has progressively brought forth nuclear weapons, strategic bombers, inter-continental missiles, precision-guided munitions and integrated communications-satellite-computer systems that have profoundly affected the way nations prepare their defence.1 Today's technology has reached quite a sophisticated level, producing weapons systems that are said to be "smart". Future advanced technology - such as artificial intelligence, neural and network, and image processing - will produce weapons systems which will not only be "smart" but intelligent as well.2
IMPLICATIONS FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE
Just as technology and national defence have long been inter-related, technologists (developers of new technology for defence) and soldiers (executors of national defence and consumers of technology) have long been strategic partners in developing technological solutions in enhancing national defence capability. Soldiers look to the technologists to develop new technology that would enhance defence capabilities by improving operational performance, increasing systems reliability and providing greater mission flexibility while reducing costs, maintenance requirements and time required for the development and production of the technology.3 Technologists look to defence as a market where their ideas can attract resource support to be tested operationally and as a consumer of their efforts.
Why Invest in Technology?
Technology is often seen as a panacea in national defence, capable of providing a comparative advantage in maintaining national security, prestige and influence. All major powers have equipped their military forces with the best available technology to give them decisive advantages over their opponents.4
The major powers also maintain research and development capabilities to avoid being caught without any counter-measures and outwitted in a technological sense. They even conceal their projects from public view to prevent potential opponents from developing counter-measures or similar technology themselves. Nations who feel threatened or have ambitions to extend their borders would accelerate their pace of military innovation for fear that if they lag behind, it would be difficult for them to catch up in terms of higher quality technology. This is because the amount of time required to develop new technology, engineer it into a weapon and manufacture the operational system is greater than that required for developing new technology. By the time the system is delivered, it no longer contains the latest available technology.
Advantages
Proponents who argue for greater investment in sophisticated technology for strategic forces would cite the following advantages that technology offers.5
Technology enhances tactical victory. Superior technology can therefore deter potential opponents even beyond the real increase in military power it provides. It can be employed to counter missile attacks by renegade nuclear powers, defeat aggressors with fewer casualties on all sides and help deter challenges to national security. Wars will continue to be fought with technology. As borne out by the Gulf War in 1991, there is no substitute for technological superiority. The armed force that is able to harness and integrate sophisticated technology effectively into its operational doctrine will preserve the lead over its opponents and gain potential victory against numerically superior opponents.
Technology yields payoffs and spin-off uses. The development and integration of advanced technology will yield many payoffs such as enhanced operational performance and reliability, increased training realism and effectiveness, reduced purchase and operating costs, and simplified maintenance requirements. Defence-related research will also yield technologies that offer non-defence spin-off uses such as in jet transport aircraft and digital computers.
Technology optimises soldiers' skills. The approach in using technology to warfare takes advantage of the citizen soldiers who have grown up with high technology and are particularly adept at using complex machines, electronics devices and computers. It will also overcome constraints imposed by limited human resources.
Technology reduces surprise. A strong technology research programme, supplemented by an aggressive intelligence programme, will reduce the chances of being surprised by a dramatic advance in an opponent's technology. The intelligence programme would have uncovered any new technologies with potential military applications, on which other nations might be developing.
Technology provides allies with assistance. High technology weapons that confer a strong advantage on the battlefield provide an option for providing military assistance to allies. This is preferable to sending fighting troops to their defence. For example, providing an ally with advanced fighter aircraft and the training to operate them could be as effective as sending troops to its defence, but much preferable in political terms.
Limitations
There are, however, limits to how aggressive a defence technology programme a nation needs. Firstly, new or emergent technology can only produce real advantages when they replace old ones. When a new system is introduced, improvements come rapidly and cheaply. However, after several successive generations, it becomes increasingly difficult to achieve the force multiplication which one initially seeks.
Secondly, given the long gestation period for developing new systems, the very latest weapons when delivered are out-of-date in terms of what technology could offer. Thirdly, although new technology can enhance defence capabilities, it disrupts established postures and procedures, thus compounding the uncertainties and risks posed by foreign threats. As the US's Strategic Defence Initiative has illustrated, while economic costs and potential benefits of advanced technology are enormous, uncertainties confounding threat assessments, performance evaluations and doctrinal justifications for defence systems are also enormous.6
Fourthly, as propounded by critics who view application of technology in defence with suspicion, existence of arms undermines international stability. Lastly, investment in high technology has come - often mistakenly - to be seen as the solution to problems which are essentially political. The technological "quick fix" may seem to permit reduction of military establishments by substituting high technology for manpower. It may also seem to offer much cheaper and more powerful means of destruction, such as nuclear weapons.
How Technology Should be Used?
Before one promotes technology to be in service of a robust and flexible defence of national values and interests, one would want to ask the following questions. What technology should be exploited to enhance defence? What technology should be pursued? At what pace and scale? How is the "right" technology to be identified, developed, integrated and applied so that the synergistic effects of component systems could contribute to the overall strategic deterrence system of national defence? Between technology and doctrine, which should be paramount? Should technology serve doctrine and so produce weapons that fit preconceptions and preferences? Or should doctrine be adapted to make best use of what technology has to offer? How can the economic, political and security risks attending these choices be assessed and minimised? The decisions would require visionary insights and a confident grasp of how technology would evolve and fit into the overall operational settings, given that the typical life cycle of modern sophisticated defence systems is about three to four decades. One would also have to consider the fact that the solutions proposed by the technologists for today's defence problems may also influence future research and development in technology and future defence procurement and expenditure, and the overall defence posture. This would also require the consideration of how scarce defence resources could be diverted from ongoing procurement to future research.
SINGAPORE'S APPROACH TO USE OF TECHNOLOGY IN DEFENCE
The mission of the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) is to protect Singapore's interests, sovereignty and territorial integrity from external threats.7
Its strong deterrence capability provides the foundation for peace and security in Singapore and inspires confidence in Singapore as a dynamic economy and a safe location for foreign investors, contributing to Singapore's growth and prosperity. As CDF, LG Bey Soo Khiang, puts it:
"A strong SAF also assures foreign investors, a crucial ingredient for Singapore's success, that Singapore is a safe place for long-term investments".8
Technology as a Force Multiplier
The SAF's size and effectiveness are constrained by Singapore's small population and lack of natural resources. For the SAF to maintain its credibility as a modern fighting force, it has to continuously upgrade its equipment and people, and strives to be at the forefront of technological development. It achieves them through the force multiplier effects of technology. The effectiveness and fighting capability of each soldier is multiplied through better weaponry, tightly integrated defence command-and-control systems, and efficient operational and logistics systems.9 CDF, LG Bey Soo Khiang, again:
"An important edge we must have is the ability to absorb new and advanced technology ... Not only to absorb them, but to integrate them into a system so that we can fight as an integrated and complete system..."10
Though technology is important, it is the effective integration of technology into a system that will be the key to warfare success.
Being Smart Buyers of Technology
Singapure , then Second Minister for Defence (Services), said in 1989, "... We had to be smart buyers of weapon systems, and smart users of weapon systems. The Ministry of Defence needed highly competent engineering and scientific staff. We sought people who would know how to evaluate and buy the right equipment and weapons, and then modify, develop and upgrade them to suit the special requirements and tactics. Such people add value to our purchases and make every defence dollar spent on hardware count. This is what defence technology is about".11
BG (NS) Lee's statement is proven in the ability in developing the new Infantry Fighting Vehicle and upgrading the existing systems such as the Supers, the Army's Personnel Carriers and guns and the Navy's Missile Gunboats. The development and upgrading of the systems were achieved through joint collaboration with the local defence industries (Singapore Technologies) and Defence Technology Group. The upgraded Supers have more powerful, fuel-efficient and reliable engines similar to those used in F-18 fighters.13 The upgraded feature the powerful Harpoon anti-ship missile, which can disable large ships such as destroyers.14
The has also embarked on upgrading its F-5 Fleet. The upgrade will extend their usefulness by another 10 to 15 years and give the upgraded aircraft improved fighting capabilities comparable to new and more modern fighters, such as F-16s, but only at a fraction of the cost of buying the new aircraft. In the process of acquiring, modifying, mastering and maintaining and upgrading weapon systems, and the have also acquired the knowledge and skills in the latest technology.
Acquiring superior technology, as in acquiring new technology and upgrading existing system, is a complex process. Technology cannot be learned and developed overnight. This would require the to continuously assess its mission and need for technology. It would also require to continuously source among the defence SUPPLIERS of the world and assimilate the right technology and weaponry in equipping the to meet its operational needs and develop the necessary support infrastructure for the.
Another aspect to being on the technological frontier is the training and development of human resources. Given the increasing complexity of modern warfare, maintaining a technological edge alone is not enough to sustain the effectiveness. The soldiers must therefore be trained to fight tomorrow's war. They must reach a high level of technological expertise to be able to use highly sophisticated weapon systems. These systems also maximise Singapore's advantage of having highly educated citizen soldiers.
CONCLUSION
Technology will remain vital to national defence. It will change the way the armed forces operate in their core competencies and reshape their operational strategies. A key feature of a credible armed force will be its ability to exploit technology, to create a synergistic effect among its operating systems and organizations.
Technology can be tailored to specific environments leading to highly effective weapon systems that win wars, without having to rely on the other countries' technology plans and priorities and weapon concepts. For example, the British were the first to employ the concept of flying air-planes from ships but they failed to incorporate carrier aviation into the British Royal Navy. They were then focused on the problem of combating in the confined waters of the North Sea, the Mediterranean Sea and the Atlantic Ocean. Instead, the Americans and Japanese were the first to develop carrier aviation due to their need to travel long distances and fight major naval engagements.
To maintain a prudent degree of military superiority over potential opponents, steady efforts will be required to examine and understand how new and evolving technology could be exploited to provide superior weapons and supporting system for the armed force. New technology should release the constraints upon present operating practices rather than being constrained by them. The rewards from new technology will not come from one-to-one substitutions of better weapons for old ones. New types of weapon systems may have to be developed and tested to understand their potential for altering the art of war.
There are, however, dangers in allowing oneself to become technological promises. The capacity for devastation which military technology has provided, while imposing great caution, makes the potential cost of error literally incalculable. When viewing future technology, one should also avoid taking a one-dimensional view as it takes more than technology to revolution warfare. One must also zealously guard against neglecting the non-technological dimensions, which include the military organizational structures and operational concepts. In this way, one can then be confident of remaining a master of technology rather than becoming a hostage to it.
0 comments:
Post a Comment