Embracing the Spectrum of Urban Operations
Firsr and foremost: Urban operations is a broad concept by itself. here is a simplified way to understand what we are looking at:
Two important terms derived of Urban warfare: urban area and urban environment.The first is a subset of the second.
An urban area is a topographical complex where man-made construction or high population density is the dominant feature. Focusing on urban areas means concentrating on the physical aspects of the area and their effects on tactics, techniques, and procedures.
The urban environment includes the physical aspects of the urban area as well as the complex and dynamic interaction and relationships between its key components-the terrain (natural and man-made), the population, and the supporting infrastructure-as an overlapping and interdependent system of systems.
When trying to understand complex scenarios, humans often construct models that simplify the intricacies of the world. Similarly, when confronted with a wide spectrum, we break it down into discrete elements in order to understand it. However, when doing so, there is the risk of mistaking the model for reality and reducing the whole to a single viewpoint. Our understanding of urban operations is not safe from that pitfall. When it comes to urban operations, Close Quarters Combat (CQB), an umbrella term for tactics, techniques and procedures (TTPS) for engagements in confined spaces, has garnered consistent attention. Evolving from its prominence during the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, CQB has not only permeated military and law enforcement circles but has also found its way into enthusiast communities and pop culture. This heightened spotlight on CQB has triggered debates and led to claims that this focus may inadvertently restrict a comprehensive view of the larger landscape of urban operations.
At the heart of this discussion is the concern that focusing too much on Close Quarters Battle (CQB) might overshadow other important aspects of urban warfare. Some critics believe that putting too much emphasis on CQB can lead to a narrow view, making it seem like urban warfare is completely dependent on it. A growing number of people feel that in today's large-scale urban battles, the usual CQB tactics might not always be the best fit. However, thinking only in terms of "to use CQB or not" could be a too simplistic approach, failing to consider the complex and varied nature of urban operations which involve a variety of strategies, needs, and potential missions.
Understanding the Urban Environment
Urban operations inherently reflect the intricacies of the urban environment itself. Cities, complex amalgamations of artificial structures, sprawling infrastructure, and complicated human networks, pose a diverse array of challenges that demand a multifaceted approach. As global urbanization persists, with a significant population residing in coastal cities, the scope of urban operations expands beyond the conventional image of large-scale combat operations between near-peer adversaries.
While the conventional perception often aligns urban operations with major combat scenarios against near-peer opponents, this perspective can be limiting. Western nations might find themselves grappling with diverse challenges, ranging from low-intensity conflicts to asymmetric adversaries. Even in engagements against near-peer opponents within urban terrain, the spectrum of conflict intensities can fluctuate considerably within the same urban landscape. In one part of the city, forces might be engaged in high intensity combat, using crew-served weapons, tanks and IFVs, artillery and drones against each other. In another part of the same city, an infantry element might be systematically clearing buildings, making sure no enemy is hiding among civilians. In a third part, military forces might be handing out humanitarian help. All of this might happen within a mere three-block radius.
Beyond Special Operations: Grasping the Versatility
Urban operations have gradually become synonymous with the domain of Special Operations Forces (SOF), a perception solidified by the surge in prominence of SOF-style CQB. The portrayal of such tactics across social media and popular culture has cemented its image, often eclipsing the broader spectrum of urban operations. Consequently, a counter-narrative has emerged, asserting that CQB might not hold relevance within the realm of LSCO against near-peer adversaries. This assertion stems from observations of the specificity of SOF-style CQB techniques, leading some to extrapolate its ineffectiveness to scenarios beyond its intended context.
However, such categorical conclusions overlook a crucial aspect: the inherent adaptability of CQB as a combat system within confined spaces. CQB isn't a rigid formula; instead, it offers a versatile framework that can be calibrated along the intensity spectrum. At one end, CQB can manifest with heightened intensity, involving explosive breaches, integration of heavy crew-served weapons, guided missile systems, and even armored vehicles and indirect fires. At the opposite end lies a measured approach, focusing on meticulous room-to-room progression and positive identification of individuals. This versatility belies the notion that CQB is exclusively tailored for a specific scenario. Its applicability transcends rigid boundaries, aligning with the context and objectives at hand, thus ensuring its viability across a diverse range of operational requirements. CQB is a tool and how you use it is up to you.
Conclusion
In navigating the intricate landscape of urban operations, it becomes evident that the notion of focusing solely on one aspect, be it CQB or the supremacy of combined arms, falls short of capturing the multifaceted reality. The urban operations spectrum defies singular categorizations, encompassing a plethora of intensities and scenarios that coalesce within a single engagement. Urban warfare, with its complex challenges and adaptable environments, necessitates an approach that appreciates the diverse strengths of each facet. Close Quarters Combat, offering a versatile toolkit for engagements within confined spaces, isn’t limited to a specific niche; rather, it adapts to the required intensity, from measured progress to high-stakes confrontations. Likewise, the concept of combined arms, an operational level concept, works on a larger scale, harmonizing various assets to attain overarching objectives. These paradigms are complementary and context-dependent, merging into a cohesive strategy. As we embrace the spectrum of urban operations, it is paramount to leave behind the confines of tunnel vision and recognize that these are complementary concepts that work on different levels and enhance each other.