Page 345 - Airpower in 20th Century - Doctrines and Employment
P. 345

345
            u.s. air forCe doCtrine:. tHe searCH for deCisive effeCt


            developed theories of deterrence based on nuclear weapons. 30
               Faced  with  the  need  to  deter  a  Soviet  enemy  that  could  threaten  America’s
            European allies with overwhelming ground forces, the Americans found it cheaper
            and simpler to deter the Soviets by a superior airpower force that could guarantee
            massive nuclear destruction in the USSR in case of overt aggression. The nuclear
            deterrence theories assumed that the Soviets were highly rational actors who would
            carefully weigh the risk of openly attacking America or American allies and would
            back  away  from  overt  confrontation.  It  was  a  theory  and  doctrine,  if  cruel  and
            ruthless in its implications, also worked to maintain peace and stability in Europe
            for decades.
               On the other hand, in the immediate postwar world the Americans paid little heed
            to how airpower might respond to a war carried out by a proxy power for limited
            aims in an area on the margin of American interests. Would America use nuclear
            weapons if core interests and values were not at stake? Would the emphasis on the
            strategic bomber force and lack of resources for its tactical air forces prove to be a
            strategic mistake?
               The Korean War initiated by the invasion of communist North Korea against a
            Western-aligned South Korea in June 1950 provoked American and international
            intervention to defend the South Koreans. American airpower based in Japan and
            Pacific bases was the first American response to the North Korean attack. Although
            the  Americans  and  their  allies  had  air  superiority  at  the  start  of  the  war,  the
            overwhelming airpower advantage failed to stop the relentless North Korean advance
            that carried the invader up to a small perimeter around Pusan. Finally, American and
            UN reinforcements, backed up by a massive application of available airpower, finally
            enabled the UN forces to hold the line. Aerial interdiction carried out in a manner no
            different from World War II helped cripple North Korean logistics and demoralize
            the communist ground forces, but airpower alone could not be decisive in this type
            of war. It was only the American amphibious landing at Inchon that turned the tide
            in Korea in 1950.
                            31


            30
                Brodie and Kahn were prolific and influential; authors. The key works on nuclear war theory by
               Bernard Brodie are: Bernard Brodie, The Absolute Weapon: Atomic Power and World Order (New
               York: Harcourt, 1946); Strategy in the Missile Age (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1959);
               From Cross-Bow to H-Bomb (New York: Dell, 1962); Escalation and the Nuclear Option (Princ-
               eton: Princeton University Press, 1966). Herman Kahn wrote several important books on nuclear
               war theory to include: Thinking about the unthinkable (New York, Horizon Press, 1962); On thermo-
               nuclear War (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1960). Kahn worked closely with the military
               developing special studies as a member of the Rand corporation. Some of Kahn’s Rand studies
               include Report on a Study of Non-Military Defense, 1958; and The Nature and Feasibility of War
               and Deterrence, 1960.
            31
                 An overview of the air war in Korea is found in Alan Stephens, “The Air War in Korea, 1950-1953”
               in A History of Air Warfare, ed. John Andreas Olsen (Washington DC: Potomac Books, 2010) pp.
               85-106.
   340   341   342   343   344   345   346   347   348   349   350