![\"\"](\"https:\/\/ipdefenseforum.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/05\/Urban_5422679_CMYK.jpg\")
<\/a>Much of that projected urban growth \u2014 which the U.S. National Intelligence Council has called a \u201ctectonic shift\u201d \u2014 will occur in the Indo-Pacific, a region already bulging with many of the planet\u2019s metropolises, including Tokyo, New Delhi, Shanghai, Mumbai, Beijing and Dhaka.<\/p>\n
This demographic revolution places immense burdens on nations to ensure sustainable development while maintaining societal stability. It\u2019s also transforming the nature of urban warfare.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe city is the most powerful tool humanity has for social and economic development,\u201d Antonio Sampaio, research fellow for conflict, security and development at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, wrote in a July 2018 article for Bloomberg CityLab. \u201cHigh rates of urbanization are associated with many positive outcomes including higher income and lower infant mortality. This positive linkage is being threatened by the joint challenge of rapid urbanization and destabilization in some of the world\u2019s most conflict-affected regions,\u201d Sampaio wrote. \u201cIf aid donors, international organizations and armed forces don\u2019t prioritize rapidly growing cities and work together to stabilize them, slow-burning tensions can escalate into violent conflict.\u201d<\/p>\n
Should such friction spark fighting, the density, complexity and interconnectedness of the world\u2019s biggest population centers would present a combustible mix. \u201cThe challenge of megacities is unlike [anything] we\u2019ve had to deal with in history,\u201d according to Dr. Russell Glenn, director of plans and policy at the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC).<\/p>\n
A SEISMIC RECONFIGURATION<\/strong><\/p>\n In many ways, the renewed focus on urban conflict can be viewed as a return to the past. From the campaigns of Napoleon through World War I, military studies emphasized battles on open ground free of civilians, according to a review of urban warfare published by Oxford University Press.<\/p>\n For much of history, however, urban warfare \u2014 often in the form of siege operations \u2014 had been the primary means of waging war. It began reasserting its dominance during World War II. In January 1944, as Allied forces prepared for D-Day landings and the eventual liberation of Nazi-occupied Europe, the U.S. War Department published its first formal urban warfare doctrine,\u00a0Basic Field Manual (FM) 31-50: Attack on a Fortified Position and Combat in Towns<\/i>.<\/p>\n Various factors have spurred the reemergence of urban warfare\u2019s strategic importance. Among them, the 2017 Oxford University Press review noted: \u201cThe search by less powerful armies for an asymmetric advantage among the urban population and landscape, the increased emphasis on revolutionary (insurgency) warfare, and dramatic global population demographic shifts from rural to urban geography.\u201d<\/p>\n The seismic reconfiguration of the world\u2019s population predicted for the coming years \u2014 defined as a \u201cmegatrend\u201d by the United Nations \u2014 promises to reshape military thinking at every level from equipment and training to tactics and strategy. Australia\u2019s 2020 Defence Strategic Update, unveiled in July 2020, noted that population growth and urbanization are compounding threats to political stability, such as food and water scarcity and pandemics.<\/p>\n Australia\u2019s military \u201cmust have the ability to have a persistent ground presence, operate in complex terrain, and defeat adversaries through close combat,\u201d noted the companion 2020 Force Structure Plan.<\/p>\n Given the nature of the modern battlefield, Australia\u2019s Defence Department announced it would establish \u201ca contested urban environment research office\u201d to coordinate the development and rapid implementation of \u201cconstantly evolving combat equipment.\u201d Additionally, the Force Structure Plan highlighted the vital role of geospatial intelligence, or GEOINT, in creating 3D models of urban areas to aid deployment of precision-guidance weapons.<\/p>\n A LOOMING LIKELIHOOD<\/strong><\/p>\n In recent decades, lessons learned from military engagements in theaters ranging from Mogadishu, Somalia, to Baghdad, Iraq, and Grozny, Chechnya, have informed urban warfare planning.<\/p>\n A 2017 report by the Rand Corp., \u201cReimagining the Character of Urban Operations for the U.S. Army: How the Past Can Inform the Present and Future,\u201d gleaned several key findings from analyzing such conflicts, including:<\/p>\n The role of armored ground forces in allowing freedom of movement and \u201cshrinking the operational problem of a large urban area down to a neighborhood.\u201d<\/p>\n The need for \u201cinnovative forms of intelligence, including new sources and methods of collection, particularly open source information from nonmilitary sources.\u201d<\/p>\n The value of military leaders who can think beyond established methods and operational norms to reduce \u201cthe challenge of urban combat to a manageable scope.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cUrban environments pose significant challenges for ground forces and have traditionally been avoided when at all possible, but increasing urbanization of the world\u2019s population seems to ensure that urban combat is in the Army\u2019s future,\u201d noted the TRADOC-sponsored report.<\/p>\n Indeed, the U.S. Army\u2019s then-chief of staff had spoken of that looming likelihood a year earlier.<\/p>\n The future battlefield, Gen. Mark Milley told the Association of the U.S. Army in 2016, will be \u201calmost certainly in dense urban areas, and against elusive, ambiguous enemies that combine terrorism and guerrilla warfare alongside conventional capabilities mixed with large civilian populations.\u201d<\/p>\n It will be an arena far removed from the rural battlefields for which the Army historically had been \u201cdesigned, manned, trained and equipped,\u201d said Milley, who in October 2019 was appointed chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the nation\u2019s highest-ranking military officer.<\/p>\n A subsequent Rand report, \u201cThe U.S. Army and the Battle for Baghdad: Lessons Learned \u2014 And Still to Be Learned,\u201d gave impetus to such considerations, noting that the multiyear, multiphase conflict in Iraq \u201cprovides a wealth of information about how to reimagine future urban combat.\u201d<\/p>\n The 2019 U.S. Army-sponsored report outlined a slate of recommendations, including a call for military planners and leaders to continue studying \u201cthe broader question of urban operations and megacities but understand that, because each city is an independent entity, studies should focus on specific cases of where the Army might be engaged in urban combat and what types of adversaries it will likely face.\u201d<\/p>\n A CRUSH OF CHALLENGES<\/strong><\/p>\n Beyond a crush of humanity, whether packed into sprawling slums or sleek skyscrapers, what might armies encounter in the world\u2019s megacities? Transportation systems \u2014 at, above or below street level \u2014 may be efficient or overwhelmed. Municipal governments and civil authorities might provide stability and support or, simply, corruption and chaos. Certainly, tens of millions of smartphones and digital devices will create a cacophony of electronic noise that could swamp networks and disrupt battlefield communication and navigation.<\/p>\n<\/a><\/a><\/p>\n