The Regional Threat

The Regional Threat by Lieutenant Colonel John K. Boles 111 and Captain Vincent C. Schmoll This article is derived from the DCD Threat Briefing given during Armor Conference 7990. For the last 30 years or so our focus has been on the Soviet Union as our primary threat, as well it should have been. But things have changed. During the past year, we have witnessed dramatic and unprecedented changes on the world political scene. As widespread as these changes may be, perhaps the most far reaching and significant are the fundamental changes occurring within the communist world - changes that could potentially defuse, or in some cases inflame, the threat of military conflict throughout the world. Although the Soviet Union remains the only country capable of destroying the United States, potential threats to U.S. interests and national security exist in every region of the world. Threat forces range from highly developed, well-organized military or paramilitary units possessing highly lethal weaponry to poorly organized groups who rely on small-unit operations, subversion, sabotage, and terrorism to support political aims and objectives. This is nothing new - these regional threats have been around for a long time. It’s only been with the recent apparent reduction of tlie Soviet threat that their importance has come to the surface. Volatile situations exist in many areas of the world, ranging from disagreements over national boundaries to differences in religious beliefs or involvement in drug trafficking. The countries involved, however, should not be taken lightly. In many cases, their military capabilities are second to none, with the ability to employ nuclear weapons, chemical and biological weapons, and with a military arsenal of men and equipment to rival any country on earth. These countries have a vast potpourri of weapons and equipment from any country that sells arms. And the quantity and quality of armored vehicles pose no exception. This increasingly available and lethal weaponry in the hands of some developing nations will transform formerly minor conflicts in faraway lands into regional conflicts of potentially worldwide concern. As government loyalties or affiliations change, so then may change the types of weapons and from whom they are obtained. They may be antiquated or modem, imported or indigenous, but they will be effective on the battleground of the future. Older tanks, ATGMs, and recoilless rifle systems are still a deadly combination against a light force without tank support or extensive antiarmor weapons. An additional wild card in our intelligence preparation of the battlefield will be the variety of tactics encountered, loosely based on the differing combat doctrines taught by the various countries that have in the past supplied training packages or advisors in conjunction with the sale of their weapons systems. There are those, then, who say the Soviet Union is no longer a threat - that it is now merely another Third World country with its own societal and economic problems, like many other countries in the world. There’s no denying that the USSR has its share of internal problems, however, to say that the USSR is no longer a threat is to be dangerously misinformed. In spite of the diminished threat of a conventional Soviet attack on Europe, the USSR retains the strategic military capability to do so. Consequently, the United States. must still be prepared to support our allies and deter or defend against such a threat, if necessary. Additionally, the Soviets have the capability to extend their influence into unstable regions of the world through surrogate nations that are increasingly armed with sophisticated weapons. Our own doctrine has identifed several likely regions of contention in the world. They are central Europe and the Soviet Union, the Mideast, Lath America and the Caribbean, Asia, and Africa.

EUROPE

As I hope you are aware, there will be a massive reorganization and reduction of both Western and Soviet force structures once the Conventional Forces Europe (CFE) agreement is implemented - NATO, in fact, could be forced to discard as many as 10,OOO tanks under the upcoming conventional forces treaty, with the Soviet Union affected similarly. The total quantity of armor in the region is now about 80,000 vehicles. Logically, most of 30 ARMOR - JUly-AUQUSt 7990

"Mikhail Gorbachev qualitatively improved - Soviet offensive capabilities through continued I k , . -; 'd * ,4 ground force modernization during his first four years as head of the Soviet Union. 'I - n. . soviet T-80 MET - A new standard. the vehicles affected by the treaty will find their way to many other countries of the world through arms sales. Despite the apparent diminished risk of a conventional war in central Europe, however, the Soviets continue to represent the single largest threat to the region. Even without its Warsaw Pact allies, the Soviet Union still has the preponderant military force within striking range of western Europe. Nevertheless, while the Soviet Union and parts of the Eastern Bloc move toward reform and closer economic ties to the West, rapid, radical change associated with the ethnic and national rivalries of eastern Europe, held back for 50 years, as well as the issue of German reunification, could prove a catalyst for instability and violence. Mikhail Gorbachev qualitatively improved Soviet offensive capabilities through continued ground force modernization during his first four years as'head of the Soviet Union. These improvements have included the introduction of self-propelled artillery, multiple rocket launchers, and infantry fighting vehicles. Based on these actions, as well as historical precedent, it is clear that the Soviet Union will most likely continue modernization efforts and maintain the technological capability to produce advanced weapons systems to protect its national security. Moreover, a Soviet army made smaller by treaty, may prove no less capable and may even be improved through streamlining.

LATIN AMERICA

Forces in Latin America and the Caribbean are characterized by isolated terrorists, organized guerrilla units, and/or hostile organized government forces. Stability in Latin America is threatened by serious economic, social, and political problems in some areas, and by insurgencies and terrorists fueled by drug money. The Cubans - and indirectly, the Soviet Union - also represent a significant threat to the stability of the region. In the past, the Cubans have tried to undermine U.S. influence by encouraging Marxist-Leninist regimes, supporting communist insurgencies - as in El Salvador - and by attempting to increase political and military ties. Castro has hoped, by these efforts, to supplant the United States as the predominant military and political power in Latin America. Armor is still very much part of the equation, with over 3,000 tanks in the region. Additionally, the Soviets are also aggressively seeking new clients for military arms sales to expand access to the region and obtain hard currency. In this region, the population tends to be concentrated in a few urban centers, many in coastal areas, with numerous small villages scattered throughout the interior. With some exceptions, the interior areas are characterized by dense rain forests and mountainous terrain. Lines of communication are limited, and are of poor quality. Climate varies, from warm and wet in lower elevations to dry and cold in Andean regions.

THE MIDDLE EAST

Probably nowhere else are vital U.S. interests as much at risk as in the Middle East. The area has long been one of the most volatile in the world, and will likely remain so in the foreseeable future. The primary U.S. interest in this region is the maintenance of open access to the petroleum resources critical to much of the Western industrialized world. Also of major concern to the United States is the preservation of the territorial integrity and independence of the state of Israel. Centuries of religious and territorial disputes have become even more dangerous today when carried out by expansionist states and fanatical regimes armed with increasingly sophisticated weapons. The continued power vacuum in Lebanon, the unending hostility between opposing Islamic factions, and the growing military imbalance among countries of the Gulf region all represent examples of tensions that have the potential to develop into a multinational conflict ultimately involving the United States. The acquisition of a chemical or nuclear capability will also provide a poten- . tially more lethal dimension to any conflict in the region, and as illustrated during the Iran-Iraq War, some nations are prepared to go beyond the deterrent effect of these weapons and actually use them against their enemies. With the strategic oil reserves of the region remaining significant into the next century, security in the area is of considerable Western concern. For-ARMOR - JUly-AUgUSt 1990 31

‘1 significant factor of the regional threat, however, is that now forces ranging from small bands of insurgents to large, well-organized armies are armed with a tremendous diversity of some of the most up-to-date weapons. The British encountered armor, even in the Falklands ces in the Mideast are characterized by relatively modem armored and mechanized forces using both Soviet and Western tactics. There are currently more than 12,000 tanks in the region. In the Mideast, the population tends to be widely distributed in agricultural areas, a few major cities, and around major oil production facilities. Extensive coastlines and numerous ports provide a variety of sea approaches, and the interiors are harsh deserts with mountains and escarpments. Lines of communication are generally adequate only around major urban areas. The climate ranges from temperate to hot, and strong winds will contribute to poor visibility.

ASIA

The primary interest of the United States in Asia is its continued economic, military, and political stability. To this end, we and our allies must have unimpeded access to the various air and sea lines of communication that cross the region. We must also depend on stable allies for forward deployment or contingency bases. The primary threat to our regional interests, therefore, is Soviet naval and air power. In addition to China and the Soviet Union, however, ,two other nations - North Korea and Vietnam - also possess large ground forces and significant amounts of military hardware, which could potentially threaten regional stability. Forces in these regions range from small bandit-style insurgents to those that are characterized by relatively modem armored and mechanized organizations having some of the most sophisticated weapons systems available - both indigenous and imported. Some 23,000 tanks contribute to the lethality and survivability of these forces. The population tends to be widely distributed in agricultural areas, or packed into densely overcrowded cities and urban areas. The majority of the world’s population also lies in these two regions - China with 1.1 billion people, and India with 834 million, making up more than onethird of the earth‘s people. Climate and terrain encompass virtually any and all that you can imagine, from desert to rain forest, flood plain to the highest mountains in the world, and from warm and wet in lower elevations to dry and cold in the upper elevations.

AFRICA

The primary interest of the United States in Africa is its use in contingency operations. To respond to crises in the Middle East, we must have access to the sea lanes around Africa and the air space over the continent. The United States also has a continued interest in the strategic mineral resources of central and south Africa. Metals like titanium are critical to our advanced aircraft construction. The loss of these vital resources to a hostile power would jeopardize the strategic capabilities of the United States. Racial, ethnic, and nationalist rivalries, as well as social and demographic problems will continue to be the primary causes of regional conflict in Africa. The Soviets, logically, are also interested in the natural resources and strategic locations within the African region. Additionally, the sale of weapons to African nations for hard currency, augmenting the 7,000 tanks currently on hand, will cause what were once considered small, isolated wars to become more lethal and potentially more significant conflicts. Critical to this discussion is an awareness that the forces and people we encounter will either win or lose the war on their home terrain. They will fight, not in a foreign land far from their families and supply lines, but for the very survival of their families and their way of life on the land upon which they were raised and trained. An intangible factor such as this can be a significant force or strength to the ultimate outcome of a battle, such as we faced in Vietnam and the Soviets in Afghanistan. You might think there aren’t many places left in the world to worry about after that, and you’re probably right. Nevertheless, the threat has grown from one fairly manageable area, i.e. Europe, to literally the rest of the world. The critical point of this whole discussion, however, is that, at the tactical and operational level, the real threat is not the region of the world in which we may have to fight, but rather the weapons systems and technologies that we will encounter. Don’t get me wrong - the enemy’s terrain, training, force structure, national or religious fervor, and plain guts are still tremendously important. But all things taken equally, it is the weapons system that is the 32 ~ ARMOR - July-AuguSt 1990

I I "Modified T-55s and T-62s are as lethal and survivable as some versions of the the T-72, and significantly increase the potential of these 3U-4U-year-old tanks." This T-55 IS retrofitted with a laser rangefinder most lethal and/or survivable that wins the battle in the end. It is virtually impossible to create a force that can contend with every threat or to be able to cover every region. A significant factor of the regional threat, however, is that now forces ranging from small bands of insurgents to large, well-organized armies are armed with a tremendous diversity of some of the most up-to-date weapons available. A peasant who, five years ago, was on horseback armed with a musket and machete is now armed with a 4,000- meter, user-friendly ATGM. All he has to know is how to put the crosshairs on the target and pull the trigger. So, how do the Soviets fit into all this? They have been the world's leading producer of military weapons systems since World War 11, and the sale of their older tanks, ATGMs, artillery, and the like to their allies throughout the world has been ongoing for quite a number of years. The extent of this proliferation has only recently become significant, due to our increased awareness of the regional threat. Almost 70 percent of the tanks currently on hand in developbig nations are of Soviet manufacture or design. There is another significant aspect of arms sales worth mentioning now that our focus is on the various regions of the world and not so much on the Soviet Union. It has become quite obvious that it is not only Soviet military technology with which we need to be concerned. Military sales are a significant part of any country's military production, and the selling of Western weapons systems is no exception. In fact, the quantity and diversity of Western systems in potentially hostile hands is just as significant, if not more so, as those of the Soviet Union. Couple that with a variety of indigenous vehicles produced by a given country, or take into account a country's modification to an imported system, and you can begin to appreciate the nature of thesbeast. To put things into perspective, I want to briefly paint you a picture of the types and quantities of systems that we are talking about, and where they are located. I also want you to understand that it is not merely a matter of numbers alone - the synergism of the types of weapons systems, coupled with the varied terrain, doctrines, training, force structures, and the like, is very signifcant. We wlll no longer have the luxury of going against an enemy who is doctrinally correct (whatever that means), or one against which we can template ourselves. Other than the United States and the Soviet Union, there are currently 25 other countries in the world with more than 1,OOO tanks in their inventories - in some cases, significantly more. Granted, other than the two superpowers, most of these armored vehicles are of the older variety and in some ways are considered obsolete on today's battlefield. Nevertheless. the majority of them are still a lethal threat to many of their adversaries. 50-year-old T-34s are still being offered for sale. The T-55 and the T- 62, however, with their 100-mm and 115-mm main guns, respectively, make up the majority of tanks that are to be found outside of the Soviet Union. Thousands of each of these vehicles were produced, and have been the'primary tank for sale by the Soviets. Obsolete by today's standards, many of these vehicles have undergone a substantial retrofit, either in the USSR prior to export or by the addition of a retrofit kit once it is delivered. This retrofit amounts to a laser rangefinder, the addition of side skirts for ATGM standoff, improved fire control, enhanced armor protection, and improved ammunition. Modified T-55s and T-62s are as lethal and survivable as some versions of the the T-72, and significantly increase the potential of these 30-40-year-old tanks. Export models of the T-72 are showing up in ever-increasing numbers in many countries of the world. These tanks have an automatic loader, three-man crew, and a 125- mm main gun. Newer versions have a laser rangefinder, grenade launchers, and improved fire control. Several countries outside the Soviet Union produce this vehicle, including the Czech and Slovak federated republic, India, Iraq, Poland, Romania, and Yugoslavia. Over 12 versions of the T-72 exist, and it is still in production. It's probably safe to say that the standard for the regional tank threat is, or soon will be, a T-72 equivalent. Beginning with the Soviet vehicles, you should know that factory-fresh, Vehicles like the T-80, with its advanced fire control and 125-mm ARMOR - July-AuguSt 1990 33

"The AMX-13 and AMX-30, with their 90-mm or 105-mm guns, are found in sufficient quantities in Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Lebanon to be a potent threat to any adversav." gun, are currently only in Soviet hands. However, considering their dire need for hard currency and the ongoing reduction of forces in their army, it is conceivable that the T-80 may show up on the market block one of these days. Bear in mind that the T-80 fires an ATGM through the gun tube to a range of 4ooom. The BMP infantry fighting vehicle, produced since 1967, is now in use in over 20 countries throughout the world in many different variants. Its low silhouette and onboard ATGM capability make it an extremely efficient weapons system. Over the years, a tremendous quantity of Western armored vehicles have been sold throughout the world. Moreover, many countries that are considered a potential threat to the West, such as Iran and Libya, were in some cases receiving aid or security assistance from the United States, Great Britain, France, and West Germany in the not too distant past. During that period of time, their military hierarchy inherited not only a lot of equipment, but also based their training, doctrine, and force structure on their host country. Keep that thought, because I want to touch on this a little later on. Tanks produced by the United States, to include the M4, M41, M47, M48, and M60, as well as the venerable M113 armored personnel carrier, are in use throughout the world. We find the older tanks, such as the M4 with its 76-mm gun, in Paraguay, Taiwan, and Chile. The M41 and M47, upgunned to 90-mm are lethal against a current main battle tank, at least from the side. The upgunned M48 and M60 series with a 105-mm cannon are also extremely potent adversaries, and are lethal to a range of 4ooom. We find the M48 or M60 in Morocco, Tunisia, South Korea, Egypt, Iran, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia, and there is a move afoot to sell many of the M60Als in Europe to Egypt. Currently, the M1 and MlAl tanks are not found outside of U.S. forces' control; however there are bids from Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Pakistan, and Egypt to purchase Mls in the future, and Egypt may even begin producing the M1. The Mll3 armored personnel carrier is exported to more than 45 countries in a variety of configurations. Many of these vehicles have been significantly retrofitted with enhanced armors, reactive armor, and indigenous gun systems, such as the YPR-765 found in the Netherlands and the Philippines - sort of a mini-Bradley with a 25-mm Chain Gun - so that the M113's potential is still around after more than 30 years of production. One interesting factor for our soldiers fighting our own tanks, which we supposedly didn't have to worry about before, is the target identification problem, especially in a close-in battle. Conceivably, with everyone in an identical or very similar looking tank, things could get a bit dicey, especially in the confusion and chaos of battle and the speed with which it will be fought. Both the British Centurion and Chieftain are found in Kuwait, Iran, and Israel. Bear in mind that these countries had ties with Great Britain in the past, either as a colony or for security assistance. The 35-year-old Centurion would be obsolete on today's battlefield. The Chieftain, which used to be the main battle tank of the UK and is still in its service, has a 105-mm cannon, weighs 54 tons, and is quite a bit more survivable than the Centurion. Both of these tanks are fairly big and slow. The British also produce and export the small Scorpion light tank and Saracen armored personnel carrier, which have variants associated with reconnaissance and light forces. France produces and sells the AMX-series tank, to include the AMX-13 and AMX-30. These tanks are smaller than most others, weighing in at about 15 and 37 tons respectively. While not as lethal as a T72, the AMX-U and AMX-30, with their 90-mm or 105-mm guns, are found in sufficient quantities in Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Lebanon to be a potent threat to any adversary. Germany has sold their Leopard-series tank and Jagdpanzer armored personnel carriers to other nations on a limited basis. Any force with these systems is lethal out to 4OOO meters. Outside of Germany, the Leopard can be found in Switzerland, Belgium, and Denmark, as well as in Greece and Turkey. Several other countries in the world Droduce and export their own - - 34 ARMOR - JUly-AuguSt 7990 tanks. Brazil has the largest and best-equipped forces in South America and, with the help of other nations, has its own armament industry with the potential to become a world arms exporter. The Brazilian Osorio is a mini-version of the M1, with a 120-mm cannon, and is currently for sale. The Republic of Korea produces the ROKIT, another mini-M1 clone. And China long has been a major exporter of arms, although only recently it has come into its own in armored technology with the T69. There are also countries, such as Iraq and Israel, which have successfully modified older tanks to suit their purposes without having to produce a totally new vehicle. Iraq has added a 125-mm cannon with automatic loader to the old Soviet T55, and has added enhanced armor and fire control improvements as well. In recent years, the proliferation of both Western and Soviet antitank guided missiles in the Third World has given those forces a cost-effective, accurate, long-range, user-friendly weapons system that can destroy just about whatever it hits with minimum effort. Most ATGMs generically have an effective range of more than 3000m with a 90-percent probability of hit. Currently, the Soviets export five different types of ATGMs to countries such as India, Iraq, Syria, and Cuba. Western systems, such as the Milan and HOT, the Euromissile effort of France and West Germany, and the U.S. TOW are in the hands of Syria, Morocco, Iraq, and Israel, to name a few. These missiles are found mounted on the ground, in vehicles, and on helicopters, and for their range and ac- ~~ curacy are possibly the most potent tactical threat that an armored force may face.

SUMMARY

In summary, the real threat is not so much where or who we will fight as it is what we will fight. The international situation is complicated by the proliferation of modern, high-technology weaponry in the Third World. Certainly the most alarming aspect of this proliferation is the growing number of nations in position to acquire weapons of mass destruction - chemical, biological, and even nuclear. Even in the absence of such weapons, impressive conventional arsenals possessed by Third World nations pose an immediate concern. The armored forces that we may encounter in the foreseeable future will range from antiquated T34s and M4s to tanks equivalent to the T72 in survivability and lethality. Realize that target identification will also be a problem with the combination of both Western and Soviet vehicles on the battlefield. Technologies available to most countries will range from antiquated systems to the most modern available for the cost. Reactive armor currently defeats all known chemical energy unitary shaped charges, and can be added to any tank. Improvements in ammunition, fire control, and gun systems are an integral part of the modernization of older systems, such as the T55 and T62. Antitank guided missiles are a lethal and inexpensive counter to armor and will undoubtedly prove to be a significant factor in future war. Technologically, countries of the Third World are as capable to ARMOR - JUly-August 1990 the degree that their economies and allies will allow. Clearly, there exists the possibility of U.S. military involvement in several regions of the world. The most volatile regions also involve some of our most crucial interests. Many potential adversaries in these regions have significant military forces, including large quantities of armor, artillery, or huge numbers of ground forces. Any U.S. armed intervention must have the capability to successfully combat these forces. LTC John K. Boles 111 is Threat Manager for the U.S. Army Armor School. As an Armor officer, he has served in Armor positions in Vietnam, Germany, and the United States. As a Soviet Foreign Officer, he has served with the United States Military Liaison Mission to the Group of Soviet Forces in (East) Germany, and in his current position. A 1985 CGSC graduate, he will soon be reassigned to Fort Leavenworth, CAC Threats Directorate. Captain Vincent C. Schmoll was commissioned in 1982 from ROTC at Georgetown University, Washington, DC. He attended the Counterintelligence and HUMINT Course at Fort Huachuca, Ariz., and sewed six years in the 66th MI Brigade in USAREUR. He is currently assigned to the Directorate of Total Armor Force Readiness at Fort Knox, where he has worked on Threat studies aspects of the Armor White Paper. 35