Air Force Community - Air Force Times

Nonlethal options needed

Despite millennia of investment in developing better weapons, the options remain staggeringly binary — kill or not kill.

That’s too simplistic in today’s complex world. It demands greater investment in nonlethal weapons so urgently needed in places such as Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan.

Needed capabilities include knockout agents, heat and sound beams, laser “dazzlers” to dissuade attackers, and nonkinetic systems that disable vehicles. But progress has been slow, despite field commanders’ calls for more humane systems.

Critics say the Pentagon’s inability to deliver working systems has prompted field commanders to seek effective commercial wares, only to find themselves stymied from procuring them.

Admittedly, nonlethal progress is also hampered by international convention. Sleep-inducing agents are banned as chemical weapons, while systems that cause temporary blindness are viewed as inhumane — grounded on twisted logic that it’s better to kill someone than blind them or put them to sleep.

Advances in warfare usually face resistance but gain acceptance thanks to visionary leadership. Unmanned systems are a good recent example.

Absent nonlethals, field commanders rely on lethal force or its threat to do their job. But while no weapon, no matter how well intentioned, will be risk-free, it only makes sense to have nonlethal options when something less than deadly force is required.