Military Technology 06/2020

the expeditionary force can expect to have to rely largely on organic as- sets to gain and maintain the upper hand. These criteria reflect the char- acteristics of armoured forces in general and of the tank in particular. Having a highly mobile protected direct fire weapon system (a tank by any other name) would be invaluable. However, given its weight and mass, the typical MBT is hardly optimized for expeditionary deployment. Both countries’ militaries have developed systems that balance different char- acteristics to allow them act with intervention forces as a surrogate MBT. Historical Precedent The critical advantage in having direct assault support in hand with the earliest elements of an expeditionary landed force was a hard lesson learned in World War II. Early in the war, the weakly designed Japanese tanks scored inordinate successes against the British Army in the push through Malaysia. Their unexpected appearance, even in small numbers, in supposedly impenetrable terrain caused successive defensive lines to crumble. Then again, in amphibious assaults in the Pacific and Europe, it became quickly apparent that the presence of direct fire support on the beach provided the critical difference. When they were, casualties could be lighter and movement inland smoother, as demonstrated by the British experience in Normandy. However, where they did not make it to the beach, or could not get off the beach, as happened on Omaha Beach, casualties could be egregious. Recognition of the crucial need for a direct fire capability forward in the assault was exemplified in devel- opment and fielding of the DD Duplex Drive M4 SHERMAN, which had a floatation screen and propeller, allowing it to swim ashore. Taking this to another level was the LVT(A)s amphibious vehicle, which mounted a turret with, eventually, a 75mm howitzer. These could actually precede The execution of an expeditionary military intervention is rightly con­ sidered one of the most difficult and challenging of all operations. Expeditionary operations are a risky affair, yet projecting military power and influence far from one’s home country is recognized as a mark of global influence and an essential tool of global geo­ politics. The United States and – to a lesser degree, both France and the United Kingdom – have expeditionary capabilities. Now, however, they are being joined by both the Russian Federation and the Peoples Republic of China (PRC). Russia’s presence today in Syria could scarcely have happened even at the height of the Soviet Empire. While Russia is re-establishing its airborne forces, the PRC is focused on building amphibious assault and ground forces opti­ mized to operate on its peripherals, designed to extend its physical presence and challenge or even pre-empt moves by those seeking to contravene their perceived interests. Yet these forces are de­ cidedly different in structure, equipment and tactical employment, with a unique emphasis on mechanization and particularly the in­ troduction of armoured vehicles to provide direct assault support in expeditionary scenarios. The Expeditionary Imperative The critical difference in the expeditionary operation is that it must be launched with no physical presence in proximity to the targeted objec- tive. There is no possibility of prior build-up to support either assault or subsequent follow-up. Intervention forces must move substantial distanc- es to the area of operations. Combat power must be established from zero to that required to overcome opposition on the ground, subsequent attempts to counter the insertion and to capitalize on and exploit initial successes. Aggression, speed of manoeuvre and overwhelming shock are key – both to achieving the initial foothold and to exploiting success. Given its relative isolation and the imperative to operate independently, Stephen Miller is a former US Marine and defence industry executive hands-on operational, system development, acquisition and field support experience pro- vide a unique perspective on their critical connection. Topic MT 6/2020 · 19 Stephen W Miller Direct Assault Support of Expeditionary Interventions China and Russia Extend Their Reach The ZTL11 uses speed and manoeuvrability to engage overmatching threats from more advantageous positions to the flank or rear of the target. (Photo: cnr.cn )