Abstract
Several proposals for improving NATO’s conventional forces have centred upon the potential contribution of a variety of technological developments that promise to revolutionize the effectiveness of nonnuclear weapons systems against a wide range of targets.1 Referred to under the general shorthand rubric of ‘emerging technologies’, or ‘ET’, what is envisaged is the integration of a wide range of advances in munitions, precision guidance, sensor, data processing and communications technologies into complex high-capability weapons systems.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes and References
ESECS, Strengthening Conventional Deterrence in Europe (New York: St Martin’s, 1983), and Strengthening Conventional Defense in Europe: A Program for the 1980s, ESECS II (Boulder, Colorado, and London: Westview, 1985).
Sir Roy Mason, ‘Lecture to the International Institute for Strategic Studies’, 1983.
James A. Tegnelia, ‘Emerging Technology for Conventional Deterrence’, International Defense Review, 5 (1985), p. 646.
James W. Canan, ‘Here Come the Superchips’, Air Force Magazine April 1984, pp. 48–54; and US Department of Defense, Annual Report of the Secretary of Defense, Caspar W. Weinberger, to the Congress, Fiscal Year 1986 (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 4 February 1985), p. 265.
Edgar Ulsamer, ‘A Roadmap to Tomorrow’s Tactical Airpower’, Air Force Magazine, December 1983, p. 45.
US Department of Defense, Secretary Caspar W. Weinberger, Annual Report to Congress, FY 1988, 12 January 1987, pp. 200–1.
Gary Mitchelmore, ‘The Big World of the Sentry’, Air Force Magazine, April 1984, pp. 70–7;
Brian Wanstall, ‘Integrating the NATO AEW Force’, Interavia, January 1984, p. 33;
and Robert King, ‘Nimrod Ax Changes UK Defense Plans’, Armed Forces Journal International, February 1987, pp. 26–7.
Clarence A. Robinson, Jr, ‘Surveillance Integration Pivotal in Israeli Successes’, Aviation Week and Space Technology, 5 July 1982, pp. 1617.
US Department of Defense, Secretary of Defense Caspar W. Weinberger, Annual Report to the Congress, FY 1987, 6 February 1986, p. 249.
Floyd D. Kennedy, Jr, ‘The Radioelectronic Struggle: Soviet EW Doctrinal Development’, Signal, December 1984, pp. 59–63;
and Gerald Green, ‘Soviet EW — Maskirova and REC’, National Defense, April 1985, pp. 34–9.
J. P. Rapalski, ‘DoD RPVs — Too Costly, Too Few, Too Late?’, Armed Forces Journal International, February 1984, pp. 62–7;
and Glenn W. Goodman, Jr, ‘U.S. Military RPV Programs have taken Big Strides in 1986’, Armed Forces Journal International, December 1986, pp. 66–70.
Lois M. Blake, ‘Multiple Launch Rockets’, Journal of Defense and Diplomacy, 1, 3 (June 1983) p. 51.
Edgar Ulsamer, ‘Smart and Standing Off’, Air Force Magazine, November 1983, p. 59.
Manfred Woerner and Peter Kurt Wurzbach, ‘NATO’s New “Conventional Option”’, Wall Street Journal, 19 November 1982, p. 30.
Michael R. Gordon, ‘Highly Touted Assault Breaker Weapon Caught up in Internal Pentagon Debate’, National Journal 22 October 1983, pp. 2152–6. Assault Breaker was not a single weapon but a number of components such as an airborne radar, tactical fusion processing centre, missile and payload, used in close coordination.
IISS, The Military Balance, 1985–1986 (London: IISS, 1985), p. 162.
For a discussion of SDI work relevant to the ATBM question, see Gregory H. Canavan, Theater Applications of Strategic Defense Concepts (Los Alamos, N.M.: Los Alamos National Laboratory, June 1985), LA–UR–85–2117 (P/AC: 85–149).
Clarence A. Robinson, Jr, ‘U.S. Develops Antitactical Weapon for Europe Role’, Aviation Week and Space Technology, 9 April 1984, pp. 46–9.
Michael Feazel, ‘German Minister Proposes Initiative to Improve European Defenses’, Aviation Week and Space Technology, 9 December 1985, pp. 19–20;
and Manfred Woerner, ‘A Missile Defense for NATO Europe’, Strategic Review 14 (Winter 1986), pp. 13–19.
Alan Dodd Frank, ‘Learning the Hard Way’, Forbes, 6 June 1983, pp. 41–2.
William J. Perry and Cynthia A. Roberts, ‘Winning Through Sophistication: How to Meet the Soviet Challenge’, Technology Review, July 1982, pp. 27–35.
See John J. Mearsheimer, ‘Precision-Guided Munitions and Conventional Deterrence’, Survival 21, 2 (March/April 1979), pp. 68–76;
Daniel Gouré and Gordon McCormick, ‘PGM No Panacea’, Survival 22, 1 (January/February 1980), pp. 15–19
and John J. Mearsheimer ‘Rejoinder’, Survival 22, 1 (January/February 1980), pp. 20–22;
and Michael L. Brown and Thomas J. Leney, ‘Conventional Defense: Technology, Doctrine and Force Structure’, in J. R. Golden, A. Clark, and B. E. Arlinghaus, Conventional Deterrence (Lexington, MA: Heath, 1984), pp. 163–76.
Benjamin F. Schemmer, ‘Interview With Philip A. Karber’, Armed Forces Journal International, May 1987, pp. 42–60;
and Vernon A. Guidry, Jr, ‘Army Modifies Missile, Seeks Edge on Armor’, Baltimore Sun, 19 July 1987, p. 1.
B. Bloom, ‘U.S. “Railroading” NATO on High-Tech Weapons’, Financial Times (London), 4 December 1983, p. 3.
David A. Brown, ‘NATO Selects Emerging Technologies’, Aviation Week and Space Technology, 16 April 1984, pp. 28–9.
Copyright information
© 1988 International Institute for Strategic Studies
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Flanagan, S.J. (1988). The Impact of New Technologies: Evolutionary or Revolutionary?. In: NATO’s Conventional Defences. Studies in International Security. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-19484-1_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-19484-1_5
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-0-333-46368-0
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-19484-1
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)