THE choice between soldiers and technology is a key political issue. Donald Trump has insisted that the US needs ground forces in Syria, while Hillary Clinton favours a remote war.
Cruise missiles were used in 1998 to strike Al-Qaida training camps in Afghanistan without risking pilots. Drones got laser-guided missiles in 2001. Now air strikes can target individuals, such as Islamic State killer Mohammed Emwazi.
Air power is often the only option when it is politically unacceptable to deploy soldiers 鈥� but aircraft cannot hold ground. Wars cannot be won without 鈥渂oots on the ground鈥�, say military analysts and critics of the Allied air campaign against IS.
Advertisement
鈥淎ir power is often the only option when it is politically unacceptable to deploy soldiers鈥�
Long term, that may change with efforts like the US air force鈥檚 Micro Munitions Program, which is developing small, lethal drones able to occupy an area and hold it. Drones like the used by US special forces have already proven effective against light vehicles and people. The new models will be just as deadly, but able to stay in action for weeks or months.
Resembling the beetle and bird drones deployed in the film , which examines the moral case for drone warfare, at least two prototypes have been built. An insect-like 1.5-kilogram drone made by on power lines to recharge while sending video. Its rotors turn into wheels, allowing it access to buildings.
The Perching Micro Air Weapon from Design Intelligence Incorporated of Oklahoma looks like a bird, and recharges using solar cells. There is a small version for intelligence-gathering and a larger one with a warhead.
Persistent drones could sit on buildings or trees and keep watch indefinitely 鈥� with a better vantage point than a Predator drone hovering at 10,000 feet. Precise, miniature warheads have a better chance of striking targets without harming civilians, the central dilemma of Eye in the Sky.
The technology expands the potential for intervention without foot soldiers, but it may lessen the inhibitions that can stop military action. Do we want every foreign policy issue to be settled by sending in the drones?
This article appeared in print under the headline 鈥淪end in the drones?鈥�
