LASER-guided robotic machine guns, electronic tags that cling to soldiers鈥�
clothing and call in mini-missiles, or fields full of simple vibration
sensors鈥攁ll these could one day provide substitutes for anti-personnel
landmines, according to a report from the US National Academy of Sciences.
In 2006, the US is set to belatedly join 139 other countries in agreeing to
the Ottawa Convention outlawing anti-personnel landmines, so Congress asked the
academy to assess alternatives. George Bugliarello of the Polytechnic University
in New York, who chaired the academy鈥檚 committee, says their aim was to identify
鈥淥ttawa-compliant鈥� technologies that discriminate between troops and
civilians.
Most antipersonnel landmine alternatives include what the military call a
鈥渕an-in-the-loop鈥濃�攕omeone who assesses the threat before a weapon is
activated. One such system recommended by the academy is the
鈥渘onself-destructing鈥� mine. When someone steps on it, it alerts an observer who
decides whether to detonate it or not. But academy committee member Larry
Lehowicz says the military have requested a controversial modification that
allows the mine to be switched to automatic. 鈥淭here鈥檚 an argument to have a
switch so you could put it on automatic if your position is about to be
overrun,鈥� says Lehowicz. But automatic operation would breach the treaty, he
says. Instead, the academy recommended Ottawa-compliant switches that let the
mines go off randomly in the next few minutes, or pass control to people further
away.
Advertisement
The academy also recommends development of a laser-radar directed machine gun
(LDMG). Scattered around an area, the multi-barrelled weapons are rotated to
scan the ground up to 500 metres in front of them. The laser radar detects
potential targets while a computer tries to identify them. Staff at a command
centre take the decision whether to fire. The LDMG would be able to fire
incapacitating rubber projectiles or lethal explosive munitions.
Meanwhile, the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency is already
looking at two alternatives to anti-personnel mines. The focus of its research
is a 鈥渟elf-healing鈥� minefield (快猫短视频, 30 September 2000, p 4),
in which anti-tank mines hop around to replace cleared mines. Another approach
is to scatter a field with thousands of tiny electronic burrs that cling to a
soldier鈥檚 clothing. Tracking the position of the burrs pinpoints the intruders.
鈥淲e really want to put a tag on the enemy and have a munition that can home in
on that target,鈥� says Tom Altshuler of DARPA鈥檚 advanced technology office. By
homing in on a tag, the system would get around a problem with man-in-the-loop
systems: the target may have moved by the time you鈥檝e given the order to fire.
But getting the system to work will be tough, says Altshuler. 鈥淚t鈥檇 be nice to
tell the difference between a two-legged and a four-legged creature,鈥� he
says.
The academy also recommended systems that simply sense enemy troops.
Thousands of sensors could be dropped from planes, or fired by artillery. To
conserve power, they would just detect sound or vibration, but switch on
power-hungry video cameras as an enemy got nearer. 鈥淓ssentially you鈥檇 need no
landmines at all,鈥� says Lehowicz.
鈥淲hat was positive is that they came to the
conclusion that alternatives exist鈥� although some of it鈥檚 scary stuff,鈥�
admits Mark Hiznay of Human Rights Watch in Washington DC. 鈥淏ut they didn鈥檛 look
at changes in strategy to see if these kinds of things are even needed anymore.鈥�
