Why should we spend money on defence?
I often compare defence spending to an insurance. You are paying for something that you might not need very often but you will be glad to have it when you need it.International politics comprise many things: diplomacy, economic relations, supporting development programmes, taking action against climate change etc. Is military force really needed? Are other options not better? Yes, sometimes. Violent conflicts are usually complicated affairs. An adequate response requires action on several policy domains but military action is sometimes required.
You often hear the expression: "When your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like nail." It is true that uncareful use of military force can do more good than bad. But the opposite is true as well. Sometimes diplomacy alone won't cut it. Or sometimes diplomacy will work better just because military force is a possible and real option. The Syrian government used chemical weapons against the Syrian opposition forces and civilians in 2013. The US considered military intervention because of these actions. In the end, the Syrian government gave up all of its chemical weapons to ward off an intervention. Getting these deadly weapons out of there was definitely a good thing.
Many people argue that bombardments alone won't stop ISIS/Daesh. That is true as well. The best way to stop Daesh is to create an effective and working peace agreement between the Assad government and the opposition and secondly to restore the trust and cooperation between the different segments of the Iraqi population. But, the thing is...
Diplomacy and negotiations take time and you don't have a lot of time when Daesh is conducting a fast-paced Toyota Blitzkrieg. In 2014 Daesh could easily drive around in columns of 50+ vehicles. They could use heavy artillery and tanks against lesser armed opponents like the Kurdish and Syrian militia's. They can't do that anymore because of the presence of coalition aircraft. The Toyota Blitzkrieg has been stopped. Now there is more time to come up with a comprehensive strategy.
Many folks are concerned that aerial bombardments will cause civilian deaths, known as collateral damage. Unwanted civilian deaths have to be avoided. Some activists claim that the best way to do this is by not engaging in any military activity (and not having a military). But the world is unpredictable. We live in an uncertain multipolar world with many powerful states and none-state groups. Secondly we don't have a timemachine to go back and start things over. You can only deal with the world as it is. Fighter jets are quickly associated with 2003 Iraq style operations. Some people draw the conclusion that having military jets will unavoidably lead to this kind of operations. So it is better not to have any jets at all.
In August 2014 Daesh surrounded 40000 Yezidi's on mount Sinjar. Things were looking very bleak for them until they were relieved by Kurdish militia's and US bombardments. Without the Kurdish ground forces and US bombardments Daesh would have slaughtered thousands of people. Sometimes doing nothing can lead to massive collateral damage as well.
That is why military capabilities remain important. You can be confronted with unexpected situations that force you to act. Doing nothing is not always an option. This is why it is important to have the right tools just in case anything happens. Avoiding unwanted deaths can not be done exclusively by a strict non-intervention policy. You will need to have appropriate military means as well. It doesn't need to be the shiniest, most expensive stuff but it needs to be adeaquate.
Military force is part of the toolbox for international relations. For screws, use a screwdriver. For nails, use a hammer. For anything else, use duck tape.Do we really need expensive jetplanes?
Your car is not built to last for 40 years, neither are aircraft. Fighters fly high and fast. This has an effect on the airframes. Fighters are only meant to last for a certain amount of flight hours. The Belgian F-16's are expected to reach the end of their life cycle around 2020. Belgium must either provide replacements or go without fighters.
Many other NATO and/or European countries have fighter aircraft, can't we buy something else?
Yes, but...
1)Well-trained and experienced pilots are an essential part of the aircraft. Belgium has very good and experienced pilots. It would be a shame to waste their potential.
2)NATO (and EU) expects every member to do its share as a part of the alliance. Which means that Belgium has to do its part as well. Belgium is a small country but not poor. Fighter aircraft tend to be pricey compared to simpler weapons like artillery. Other countries like Greece, Romania and the Baltic states don't have the funds to get them. It makes sense to let the wealthier countries provide the more expensive weapons.
3)Belgium is located in the west of Europe, safely tucked away behind France and Germany. It would be stupid to invest in heavy equipment like self-propelled artillery or main battle tanks because Belgium doesn't have the transport capacity to get them where they are needed. Aircraft on the other hand are very mobile and can operate from foreign airfields. Did I mention artillery and tanks? Well Belgium doesn't have any anymore. We don't need them but we do need fighters because they are really the only heavy weapon system that is still left.
What is it supposed to do other than fly?
Fighter jets are used for several things.1)Firstly they are used to patrol the skies. Belgium has signed an agreement with the Netherlands to do this together. At any time there are jets ready to take off when required. If an aircaft enters our airspace without permission or if a commercial airliner is in trouble, then a fighter will go check it out.
This is what the Belgian airspace looks like:
2)The Baltic states don't have jets. That is why other countries take part in the Baltic air policing. The mission is essentially the same as described above. The difference is that relations between Russia and Europe has soured since the revolution in Ukraine. Since then, there have been many confrontations between Russian and European aircraft. This makes the Baltic air policing a bit more demanding and dangerous.
3)Fighters are still warplanes, but Belgium won't act on its own. It can be expected that large operations will be conducted with many other partners who will bring additional capabilities.
Belgium will only buy one type of aircraft. This means that it needs to perform many roles including both air-to-ground and air-to-air missions. However Belgium has used its F-16's a lot more for A2G than for A2A. This makes air-to-ground capabilities a bit more important.
Cost and ease of maintenance is another aspect. What do you get for your money? Pilots need constant training.A low cost/flight hour and high availability rates will allow pilots to fly more.
Belgium is a member of the EU and NATO. Cooperation is easier when using an aircraft that is in service with many other countries.
From the official survey
Survey Belgium
Belgian Air Component Air Combat Capability Mission and Roles
In order to execute its level of ambition, the Belgian Defence ACCap must be able to execute, in a
multinational cooperative and interoperable environment, the following NATO missions4
and/or
roles in a low, medium and high threat environment:
• Defensive Counter Air (DCA) / Air Policing
DCA operations protect friendly forces and vital interests from enemy air attacks; as such it is
synonymous with Air Defence and Air Policing. DCA consists of all active and passive air
defence operations to detect, identify, intercept, and destroy or negate enemy air and missile forces attempting to attack or penetrate friendly battle space, or to nullify or reduce
the effectiveness of such attacks should they escape destruction.
• Offensive Counter Air (OCA)
OCA operations consist of offensive operations to destroy, disrupt or degrade enemy air and
missile threats including their supporting systems both before and after launch, as close to
their source as possible. OCA includes attack operations, air-to-air missions (sweep & escort
operations), suppression and destruction of enemy air defences (SEAD/DEAD).
• Air Interdiction (AI)
AI is the action to destroy, disrupt, degrade, divert or delay the enemy’s surface potential by
targeting fielded enemy ground forces and the infrastructure directly supporting them
before they can be used effectively against friendly forces, or otherwise achieve their
objectives. It is carried out at such distance from friendly forces that detailed integration of
each air mission with the fire and movement of friendly forces is normally not required.
Thus, it may offer the potential to reduce or even eliminate the requirement for ground
combat.
• Close Air Support (CAS)
CAS operations require detailed integration with the fire and movement of friendly forces for
fratricide avoidance and targeting guidance by third parties. It provides ground or
amphibious forces with aerial firepower in offensive and defensive operations, by day and
night, to destroy, suppress, neutralize, disrupt, fix or delay enemy forces in close proximity to
friendly ground forces.
Furthermore following missions have been identified as key mission types contributing to the
operational flexibility of the weapon system.
• Non-Traditional Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (NTISR)
The use of sensor systems that, while not primarily designed for ISR operations, can
contribute vital information to the development of battle space awareness and increase joint
force ability to conduct decisive operations.
• Strike Coordination and Reconnaissance (SCAR)
A mission flown for the purpose of detecting targets and coordinating or performing attack
or reconnaissance on those targets. Strike coordination and reconnaissance missions are
flown in a specific geographic area and are an element of the command and control
interface to coordinate multiple flights, detect and attack targets, neutralize enemy air
defence and provide battle damage assessment.
Logistics
The future sustainment concept will also need to present an effective and flexible solution to operate from the Main Operating Bases in Belgium as well from the Deployed Operating Bases with a minimum of personnel, as little maintenance as possible and with just the spare parts and support equipment necessary.Multinational cooperation
The Belgian Defence seeks to implement an operationally relevant ACCap for the coming 40 to 50
years with advanced avionics and weapons capabilities which can be easily used within the
operational framework of NATO and EU and is easily maintainable. Belgian Defence recognizes the
benefits linked to international cooperation regarding standardization of fighter aircraft including
its associated equipment, the communalization of the operational requirements and the
conservation of the interoperability of the ACCap.
Therefore the Belgian Defence wishes to enter into a robust partnership with (an)other
governmental organization(s) over the life cycle of the ACCap covering the procurement, the
production, the overall support and the follow-on development of the ACCap.
Acquisition Costs
Respondents are requested to provide, at least, the following ROM costs :
a) Unit recurring flyaway price of the proposed number of fighter aircraft as configured in your
responses to chapter 6. The unit recurring flyaway cost includes the costs for the aircraft to
be flyable and operational in all mission configurations
b) The cost of weapons (initial payload) and to indicate how those weapons can be procured;
c) All other ancillary equipment such as ground support equipment, flight simulators, initial
spare parts, …
d) All other ancillary services such as training, on-site technical support, …
e) Non recurring cost associated to the program
f) Provide a macroscopic view on the required funding flow in support of the acquisition phase
of the new ACCap.
No comments:
Post a Comment