Middle Eastern Tank Threat

Soviet T-72 tanks, at the time the most powerful main battle tanks outside our own, changed dramatically depending on the level of analysis-it was only high
at the technical level (lethality). o
At the tactical level (reliability), because of very poor troop training, the long-term storage of most tanks in warehouses, and the cannibalization of tanks at random for parts, the threat fell to low; o
At the operational level (availability), because of the quantity of tanks scattered around the country, the threat rose to medium; and o
At the strategic level (sustainability), where various constraints would not permit this country to sustain tank operations for more than two weeks, the threat again fell to low.
We considered this very significant to the perspective of the policymaker or commander making decisions about the over-all structure of the force to be deployed to this region, even in the absence of related information about civil and geographic factors.
Integrated Analysis. In a second example, which illustrates the importance of civil and geographic factors to the over-all analysis of any peacekeeping situation or related acquisition and employment decisions, the Commandant of the Marine Corps asked us to evaluate the Marine Corps requirement for a follow-on procurement of the M1A1 tank. We examined civil and geographic factors for the sixty-nine countries (now eighty) which comprised the expeditionary environment, and discovered these "strategic generalizations": o
Intervisibility (Line of Sight Ranges). 91% of the countries in the Marine Corps environment offered line of sight distances of 1,000 meters or less, making the M1A1 irrelevant to operations in those countries; o

Download 384.47 Kb.

Share with your friends: