Defense Articles

An abstract of the authors’ legal analysis published in the Spring 2002, 31 University Baltimore Law. Review 157.)

When we send fine young Americans into harm’s way, we have a moral and legal obligation to provide them with Rules of Engagement (ROEs) that protect their right of self-defense. Our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines must expect ROEs that best ensure their safe return, to the maximum extent possible consistent with the mission parameters. Indeed, this is the stated policy of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff’s Standing Rules of Engagement (SROEs). (1) The SROEs are silent, however, concerning that ultimate and maximum exercise of self-defense–the use of deadly force. Simply stated, the SROEs fail to answer, clearly and unequivocally, the foremost question of those at the tip of the spear: “When can I pull the trigger?”

Silence at the strategic level regarding the use of deadly force level has resulted in the confusing and potentially life-threatening absence of operationally specific guidance at the tactical level. (2) As recently as March 25, 2001, the roles of engagement in place for soldiers serving in the peacekeeping action in Kosovo gave specious guidance on the use of deadly force that required them to “shoot to wound.” (3) This order should not be surprising considering the restrictive guidelines given in Bosnia for NATO’s Implementation Force (IFOR): “If you have to open fire, you must: Fire only aimed shots, and fire no more rounds than necessary and … stop firing as soon as the situation permits.” (4) Further, warning shots were permitted, even encouraged, and the use of deadly force against assailants fleeing an attack was not even covered. These rules remained the same for the Peace Stabilization Force (SFOR), as well. (5) More disturbingly, many commanders have imposed “no rounds in the chamber” roles for perimeter security and patrols. (6)

It would be an understatement to say that confusion exists among commanders and judge advocates as to what constitutes a reasonable use of deadly force by U.S. forces and when that force is authorized. (7) It is no wonder that commanders are left with insufficient legal guidance and ad hoc methods for training their troops on when and how to use deadly force. The United States military forces, whose mission was once described as “to kill people and break things” has a 300-page regulation on the issuance of I.D. cards, (8) but lacks any specific guidance on the use of deadly force for its soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines on world-wide deployments. (9) After having examined some sources upon which to base that guidance, this article concludes with a proposed appendix to the SROEs on the use of deadly force as the benchmark mechanism with which to provide that specific guidance. In light of the recent terrorist activity in this country, the need for clear and robust guidance is essential.

International law, as well as the common law of the United States, provides ample support for the establishment of vigorous guidelines concerning the use of deadly force. As discussed later in this article, every relevant legal system in the free world makes aggression a crime and protects the right of self-defense. This right is often referred to as an “inherent right” or a “divine right.” Our own federal common law, as well as many latter-day constitutional law cases concerning this right, strongly defines and permits a rigorous force protection stance. Judge advocates and commanders crafting rules of engagement have ignored this rich source of law favorable to a vigorous defensive posture.

Incorporation of federal constitutional law and common law into the development of enhanced force protection and self-defense rules will only enhance our forces’ ability to accomplish their missions. From humanitarian assistance to force-on-force conflicts, if potential opponents believe our forces vulnerable, the mission is compromised. Recurrent, hands-on tactical exercises that provide service members an opportunity to viscerally experience the psychological and physiological dynamics of tactical encounters recognized by the law is a critical requirement for effective training. Those so trained however, need clear and concise legal guidance demonstrating that both legal and political support is present if deadly force is used.

The Present SROE Use Of Deadly Force Policy

“The purpose of these SROE is to provide implementation guidance on the application of force for mission accomplishment and the exercise of the inherent right and obligation of self-defense.” (10) So begins the unclassified Enclosure A to Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction 3121.01A and yet, this purpose is not being served. The policy appearing on virtually every page of the SROE states that the Rules “do not limit a commander’s inherent authority and obligation to use all necessary means available and to take all appropriate actions in self-defense of the commander’s unit and other U.S. forces in the vicinity.” The use of deadly force, however, is not accompanied by any implementation guidance. In fact, the words “use of deadly force” never appear in the SROEs, which begs the question–Is it any wonder that confusing, confounding and dangerous tactical rules of engagement (ROEs) exist? While cognizant of the fact that some of this confusion stems from improper training, without clear and unhindered rules, we may have fumbled before the kickoff.

A U.S. defense official expressed dissatisfaction during a recent visit to Japan over Tokyo’s interpretation that it cannot exercise collective self-defense under the country’s pacifist Constitution, a Japanese lawmaker said Wednesday.

Richard Lawless, the U.S. deputy defense undersecretary for Asia and Pacific affairs, was quoted as saying it would be ”crazy” of Japan not to shoot down a missile clearly heading toward the United States even when capable of doing so, apparently suggesting a change in interpretation.

Former Defense Agency Director General Shigeru Ishiba, who heads the ruling Liberal Democratic Party National Defense Division’s subcommittee on defense policies, said Lawless also told him that such a situation does not exemplify the U.S.-Japan alliance.

Ishiba introduced Lawless’ remarks relating to Japan’s missile defense scheme at the subcommittee’s meeting in the morning. The deputy undersecretary was in Japan until Wednesday to attend talks with Japanese counterparts.

U.S. Ambassador to Japan Thomas Schieffer has also voiced hope for debate on Japan’s role in a joint missile defense system with the United States, such as the legality of Tokyo’s intercepting missiles including those flying near its territory toward the United States.

In December 2003, when the Cabinet decided to go ahead with introducing a missile defense system, then Chief Cabinet Secretary Yasuo Fukuda said in a statement the deployment ”is aimed solely at defending our country.”

”It will be operated at our independent-minded discretion and will not be used for the defense of a third country, so poses no problems in terms of collective self-defense,” the statement says.

But in mid-November, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe suggested reviewing Fukuda’s statement, calling for studying whether Japan can intercept U.S.-targeted missiles under its Constitution. Tokyo’s official interpretation of the Japanese Constitution bans Japan from coming to the aid of an ally militarily.

Defense Agency Director General Fumio Kyuma has pointed out that Japan as yet has no capability to intercept missiles.

Chief Cabinet Secretary Shinzo Abe, all but certain to be Japan’s next premier, again expressed his strong ambition Tuesday to revise the nation’s pacifist Constitution and enable the exercising of the right to collective self-defense on specific occasions.

But Abe, known for his hawkish position on security issues, also did not rule out the possibility of just changing the government’s interpretation of the war-renouncing Constitution to achieve the goal. The current interpretation prohibits Japan from exercising the U.N.-guaranteed right.

”Given the expectations for Japan to contribute actively on the international stage and to maintain stability and security in the region, we must consider more seriously specific cases (to exercise the right),” Abe told a news conference in response to a reporter’s question, citing changes in international affairs since the Constitution was written 60 years ago.

”Of course I think that revising the Constitution and enacting a new one should be the next thing to be put on the political schedule. We should, however, also consider (enabling the exercising of the right) under the current interpretation or a new interpretation,” he said.

The top government spokesman also said Japan needs new legislation to enable the overseas dispatch of Self-Defense Forces at any time without having to pass special laws on each occasion as is currently required.

Abe is the front-runner in the race to succeed Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi. Revising the 1947 Constitution, drafted by the U.S. postwar occupation, is top on his policy agenda, in which he also calls for a greater role by Japan in diplomacy and by its troops in international missions.

He has said that removing the self-imposed restrictions on exercising the right of collective self-defense will enable Japan to work ”more effectively” with the United States in their security alliance. Under the current interpretation, Japan cannot take action to defend its ally even when the ally is under attack.

Shinzo Abe, the front-runner in the Liberal Democratic Party presidential race, said Friday he wants to set up a new section in the government to consider if Japan can exercise the right to collective self-defense on specific occasions.

He also said in a news program of public broadcaster NHK that the government has already started studying in which cases Japan may be allowed to exercise it.

Under the current government interpretation, Japan cannot take action to defend an ally even when the ally is under attack.

Abe, the chief Cabinet secretary, said, however, ”It is necessary to review the current interpretation so Japan will be able to defend itself and play its roles in the world.”

Citing as an example a case in which a U.S. vessel traveling side by side with a Japanese one in international waters is attacked, Abe said, ”Is it possible for Japan to turn a blind eye to the U.S. ship under attack?”

His comments came after he officially filed his candidacy for the Sept. 20 LDP leadership election, together with Finance Minister Sadakazu Tanigaki and Foreign Minister Taro Aso.

Abe also showed his willingness to visit Asian countries first if he becomes prime minister, while suggesting he may raise the consumption tax in fiscal 2009 to boost the government’s share of contributions to the basic pension.

Remington is fancying up their classic police pump gun, the Model 870, with combat-style accessories, as the 870 Max.

Look to sell folding stocks for your customers’ existing home-defense pump guns. Choate remains a leader in this field and Brownells offers a wide selection.

The LaserMax LMS-1202 Tactical Laser/Light is designed for Remington’s 870, 1100 and 11-87. It has a white light unit on the right and a laser sight on the left, each riding between the barrel and magazine ahead of the slide handle or forend. It requires a shotgun with extended magazine for mounting.

Federal’s HST (Hydra-Shok Two) will get a lot of interest from your customers. A rangemaster from a large Northwestern police department recently told me his agency has dropped .45s and limited their officers to 9mm Glocks, all loaded with Federal HST 147-grain. Designed by Tom Burczynski, who brought us the original Hydra-Shok and PMC’s StarFire, the new bullet shares elements of both of those proven designs.

Hornady TAP (Tactical Application, Police) has been very well accepted in the law enforcement community. For 2005, Hornady has introduced a “civilian version.” Lay in a supply of TAP For Personal Defense. Your customers likely already are asking about it, motivated by advertising.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Healthy Sales

The vibrant overall tone of the SHOT Show indicated that the many thousands of dealers in attendance were expecting a healthy year of sales. Join them!

Remington has formed a subsidiary, Spartan Gunworks by Remington, to handle a line of Russian-made “value-priced break-action shotguns.” Seventeen single-shot, side-by-side and over-and-under shotguns are part of the initial offering. According to Remington officials, the guns are primarily targeted for the mass-merchandising market.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

“There is a market for this product and we realize it’s a product that we can’t produce in the United States,” said AI D. Russo Jr., Remington’s manager, marketing communications. “The product is very well made and very safe. It has met all of our stringent safety standards and all the SAMMI safety standards. We put the guns through exhaustive testing and we’re rather conservative in making sure these firearms reflect the Remington standard.”

Handling the imports from Russia is European American Armory. There are three single-shot models in the Spartan line, including a youth model. There are seven models each of over-and-unders and side-by-sides, with two double-trigger models in each category.

Tristar Sporting Arms offers three models of shotguns designed for women: the Turkish-made Models 333L and 333SCL Spotting and the Italian-made Rizzini TR-L.

The Model 333L was introduced several years ago and set the design base for subsequent Tristar shotguns designed for women by a woman.

“When I worked at the Fajen Custom Shop, I took all the women’s measurements from all the custom guns we made for women and averaged them to get the measurements for this gun,” said Marry Fajen, former vice president of Reinhart Fajen.

The result is a shotgun that takes into account that women have longer necks, less shoulder mass and higher cheekbones than men. Its straight styling allows for this difference. The straight alignment with the barrel produces straight-back, into-the-shoulder recoil, instead of the up-and-back recoil women get when using a man’s stock. This lessens the amount of felt recoil.

Because women’s arms are usually shorter than men’s, the Tristar ladies shotguns sport a 13 1/2-inch length-of-stock pull compared to the 14 1/2-inch pull on men’s guns. Additional features include a 3-inch drop at the heel and 1/4-inch cast-off. This allows the female shooter to place the butt of the shotgun securely into her shoulder, and to get a sight picture without tilting her head.

The “toe out” feature moves the bottom edge of the stock buttplate 1/2-inch to the right, angling the toe away from the breast area and fitting it more naturally in a woman’s shoulder pocket without canting. This also allows women shooters to mount the gun in the same place every time.

Fajen also said the Tristar firearms are very easy to shorten.

“She can just remove the recoil pad and saw off an inch, if necessary,” Fajen said.

The Turkish 333SCL Sporting has the same features as the 333L, but includes “sporting” elements. These are an 11mm sporting rib with target bead, sporting recoil pad, elongated forcing cones, ported barrels and four CT-4 extended stainless choke tubes. The 333L and 333SCL Sporting come in 12 and 20 gauge.

The Italian-made TR-L is of the same design and is also available in 12 and 20 gauge. The TR-L sports a semi-fancy walnut stock, 3-inch chambers, choke tubes, auto ejectors and a ventilated 10mm rib.

Fajen said that despite not having the time to promote the ladies guns as much as she would like, they’ve been selling relatively well.

“When I present them, or a lady shoots the gun, they really like them,” she added.

AIRLINE INDUSTRY INFORMATION-(C)1997-2004 M2 COMMUNICATIONS LTD

CAE Inc, a Canadian provider of simulation and modelling technologies, has announced that it will supply two full flight simulators for Emirates Airlines.

Emirates will reportedly buy a Boeing 777 and an Airbus A320 simulator, both of which are to be installed by spring 2006, for the Emirates-CAE Flight Training Centre.

The contract has been valued at CAD31m.

ON May 10, 2003, Vermont National Guard officials dedicated the Readiness and Regional Technology Center at Norwich University in Northfield, Vt.

The $8.8 million building has more than 88,000 square feet of space and houses the headquarters of the 86th Armored Brigade, weapon and command-post simulators, and the Air and Army Information Operations Schools.

The weapon simulators include an engagement skills trainer, JANUS system and an M1 Abrams Full-crew Interactive Skills Trainer.

The EST allows Soldiers to “fire” virtually all small arms, including the 9mm pistol and the 50-cal. machine gun. It provides individual marksmanship, collective squad-level training and “shoot-don’t shoot” scenarios.

Trainees “fight” against “enemy troops” that are projected on a screen. The system then records the number and type of rounds fired, and their accuracy.

The JANUS system provides battle-staff training for brigade, battalion, company and platoon operations. Soldiers receive immediate feedback on their tactical plans as they fight a virtual enemy. The simulator provides an almost infinite combination of virtual terrain, weather and digitized enemy forces.

The M1 Abrams trainer offers a wide range of scenarios. And it also tracks “fired” tank rounds and provides summaries of target hits for commanders and tank crews.

Additionally, a simulations network consisting of four M1 trainers, one M2 Bradley trainer and a Guard Unit Armory Device Fail-Crew Interactive Simulation Trainer, GUARDFIST-II, will be installed by mid-July.

GUARDFIST-II will provide simulated battlefield scenarios for the training of field artillery forward-observer tasks.–BG Eugene A. Sevi, chief of staff, Vermont Army National Guard

FIRST Great Western, Britain, has unveiled the first of three train driver simulators designed to both assess existing drivers and train new ones. The simulators are a full-size mock-up of the cab of a diesel high-speed train. They have been developed in conjunction with Bentley Systems, Primary Image, and EMD.

Real-time images of typical sections of the Great Western network are displayed on a 4 by 3.7m screen together with sound.