features 13

The Utility of Military Force Against

Non-Traditional Threats

by COL Ong Yu Lin, LTC Tan Cheng Kwee and MAJ Fredie Tan

Abstract:
Non-Traditional (NT) threats have made the national security landscape more complex and uncertain than
before. This requires the state to anticipate threats which are increasingly multi-dimensional, asymmetric in
nature, sudden and unexpected. The vital and only effective weapon against such threats is knowledge and an
integrated whole-of-government response is preferred. Knowledge is nothing without understanding, and to
achieve understanding, there is a need to make sense of the situation. It is only appropriate that a proper
understanding be achieved at the national level, before making decisions on utilising elements of national
power, to deal with the NT threat. Although the ongoing structural and capability transformation in the military
has made the military a more useful tool within the national toolkit against NT threats, it should not be
distracted from its primary mission of defending the state’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Keywords: Non-Traditional Threats, OOTW, Joint Force Transformation

INTRODUCTION grapple with maintaining and promoting security

One effect of globalisation is that states are
increasingly vulnerable to shocks, contagion effects
and spillover consequences of developments far
beyond the confines of any state’s geographical
boundaries. Seemingly unimportant events in a faraway
land can have significant impact and manifest as threats
to national security. International security, regional
security and national security are now intricately
linked, forming a seamless web. States now have to
against a widened spectrum of threats that are
increasingly transnational and non-traditional in
nature. These non-traditional threats are often
undefined, unpredictable and unexpected. They
also have both internal and external drivers and
ramifications. These threats are often interwoven
with traditional security threats, are capable of
exploiting multiple vulnerabilities, and can put the
state at serious risk.

The military has been the key national institution

of the state in defending its independence and
territorial integrity against traditional military threats
from other states. Although such traditional threats of
inter-state conflict have receded into the background,
Cyberpioneer

they have not disappeared. States continue to

ISAF Troops From Singapore, Helping with Reconstruction
retain and build up their military forces as it is the
state’s primary responsibility to secure its territorial
integrity. Emerging threats are, however, increasingly
non-traditional in nature, which many states are not
prepared to deal with. The need to simultaneously
deal with both traditional and non-traditional
threats has therefore increased the burden on the

POINTER, JOURNAL OF THE SINGAPORE ARMED FORCES VOL.36 NO.3-4

2. 13-19 The Utility Of Military Force Against Non-traditional Threats.indd 13 16/03/2011 17:01
 features
state. More importantly, the use of military force
alone is unlikely to achieve a strategic outcome, and
an integrated whole-of-government (W.O.G) approach
is required.1
The changing security paradigm and the reduced
likelihood of conventional inter-state wars have
brought into question the relevance, purpose and utility
of the military force beyond its traditional security
roles. This paper argues that the changing nature of
conflict has forced the military to change its operating
procedures, warfighting concepts and organisation,
not only to win wars decisively, but also to win the
peace. In doing so, the current military transformation
has also extended the utility of the military to combat
non-traditional threats. New military capabilities to
win the peace can be easily adapted for use against
non-traditional threats, and we will examine how these
military capabilities can be used in non-traditional
security roles.
While the military remains an
important instrument of national
security, the military is not a
comprehensive instrument to pit
against the entire spectrum of
non-traditional threats.
While the military remains an important instrument
of national security, the military is not a comprehensive
instrument to pit against the entire spectrum of
non-traditional threats. Employing the military against
all non-traditional security threats will seriously
jeopardize its main mission: defending national
sovereignty and territorial integrity. However, the
military will remain the most versatile and flexible
state institution as the military force undergoes
further transformation to meet the demands of
future military operations which are becoming an
interwoven mix of traditional and non-traditional
threats. Such operations will demand multi-national
cooperation involving coalition military forces and
coalition government and non-government agencies.
Paradoxically, this trend will also continue to make
the military the most relevant state institution against
the enemies of the state as well as ensuring a
fundamental new role for the military in the future.2
POINTER, JOURNAL OF THE SINGAPORE ARMED FORCES
2. 13-19 The Utility Of Military Force Against Non-traditional Threats.indd 14
14
CHANGING NATURE OF CONFLICT AND
RESPONSES
The changing nature of conflict and its challenges
are best described by Charles Krulak’s “3-Block War”,
and Rupert Smith’s “war amongst the people”. The
“3-Block War” is one where “soldiers may be confronted
with the entire spectrum of tactical challenges in the
span of a few hours and within the space of three
contiguous city blocks”. These soldiers may be required
to conduct a full scale of military actions, including
peace support operations and humanitarian relief.3
These military activities will also take place amongst
the people and the opponents will extend beyond
traditional state actors to include non-state ones.
The operation continuum is also being redefined, as
war is unlikely to be followed by victory and peace,
but by continued conflict.4
The need to operate in such a complex and dynamic
operational environment has forced the military to
build new capabilities to win wars decisively and to
win the post-war conflicts swiftly. These new
capabilities to win wars amongst the people allow
the military to execute operational concepts such as
dominant manoeuvre, focused combat service support,
multi-dimensional force protection, and knowledge-
based command, control, and communication.
In addition, there are also intelligence, precision
engagement, information operations, and civil-military
and media operations. Increasingly, the definition of
combat power is extending beyond the traditional
domains of firepower, protection and mobility to
include an expanding suite of non-kinetic capabilities
that focus on understanding the culture, shaping
the minds and swaying the will of the opposing
combatants and non-combatants. These new
military capabilities can be adapted for use against
non-traditional threats in continued conflicts and
Operations Other Than War (OOTW).5
The changing security paradigm is one where
military threats are becoming interwoven with
non-military threats, and the distinction between
combatants and non-combatants is increasingly
difficult. Destroying an opposing state’s infrastructure
to reduce its war fighting capacities will also have
significant consequences on its civil population.
As a result, future operations will have to be more
precise, using precision weapons and higher quality
VOL.36 NO.3-4
16/03/2011 17:01
 features
troops possessing the exactitude and stealth of
current Special Forces units. Future operations will
also include both violent and non-violent applications
of military power, conducted in conjunction with
government and non-government agencies as well as
coalition partners to deal with a widened spectrum
of post-conflict consequences. Moreover, shrinking
defence budgets and rising costs of military equipment
dictate the need to employ all available military assets
available from the Army, Navy and Air Force to achieve
the desired effects. Future operations will necessarily
be more integrated across the Services and the
conduct of operations will go beyond operating
jointly to operating in a seamless manner.6 Military
forces will continue to undergo transformation;
structurally, doctrinally and conceptually to fulfil
new missions and roles and also improve cooperation
with external agencies.
EMPLOYMENT OF MILITARY CAPABILITIES
AGAINST NON-TRADITIONAL THREATS
The term ‘non-traditional (NT) threat’ is a difficult
term to define and literature reviews only offer a list
of examples. Moreover, there is also no agreement on
the number of such threats. Amidst this discussion,
non-traditional threats do share four key characteristics:
(1) transnational in nature and hence affect more
than one state at the same time; (2) extend beyond
the military sphere and consequently military options
alone will seldom achieve the required effects; (3)
often occur quietly and inconspicuously in the form
of faint signals, masked by noise and are often hard
to detect, causing surprise when they are detected;
and (4) are frequently interwoven with traditional
security threats, and usually emanate from non-state
actors.
With the receding threat of inter-state conflict,
states are now facing a clear and present security
challenge from non-traditional threats. Given this
reality, it is natural that the military has been
increasingly employed for these non-war military
operations both domestically and internationally. In
many countries the military is the most important and
best developed state instrument, and governments
are discovering that civilian agencies simply cannot
cope with the magnitude of these problems. However,
employing the military against all non-traditional
security threats will seriously distract it from its
POINTER, JOURNAL OF THE SINGAPORE ARMED FORCES
2. 13-19 The Utility Of Military Force Against Non-traditional Threats.indd 15
15
main purpose of defending national sovereignty
and territorial integrity. Hence, the military can be
employed against certain NT threats either as the
lead agency or as a supporting agency. This will be
elaborated on in the following paragraphs:
(A) Transnational Crime
Transnational crime refers to activities such as
narcotics and arms trafficking, human smuggling,
prostitution, credit card fraud, extortion, gambling,
contract murders, and money laundering. It is a
real and protracted threat to the nation-state as
it can undermine political institutions, erode the
legitimacy and credibility of governments to provide
a minimum level of protection for individuals.
Criminal activity can also cause widespread death and
social destruction. Money laundering can threaten a
nation’s banking system and undermine confidence
in the entire financial system.
Under normal circumstances, the civil police force
is the lead agency in the fight against transnational
crime. The military can be employed as a supporting
agency in remote border regions and territorial
waters to curb illegal migration, drug and arms
trafficking. The military may employ its intelligence
and surveillance systems for intelligence collection
and early warning especially if such capabilities are
not available to the civil police force. However, the
military is not designed for and should not be used
to deal with other types of transnational crime.
Transnational terrorism includes
activities that seek to destabilise,
instil fear and erode the legitimacy
of the state, through methods
such as assassination, kidnapping,
hijacking, cyber-attacks, and the use
of chemical, biological, radiological
and explosive devices.
(B) Transnational Terrorism
Transnational terrorism includes activities that
seek to destabilise, instil fear and erode the legitimacy
of the state, through methods such as assassination,
kidnapping, hijacking, cyber-attacks, and the use
VOL.36 NO.3-4
16/03/2011 17:01
 features
of chemical, biological, radiological and explosive
devices. Significantly, the trend of terrorism has
evolved; targeting state infrastructure and citizens
to erode confidence in the legitimacy and competency
of the state. Terrorist attacks against financial
targets can spark financial panic and cause financial
turmoil. Cyber-terrorism against a nation’s power
grid or IT infrastructure can bring a nation and an
inter-connected world to a stand-still. Bio-terrorism
can cause widespread human and social destruction.
Counter-terrorism is a national effort with public
vigilance and police action as the first level of response.
In the event that terrorist groups become capable of
conducting large scale military operations, the military
should be the lead agency. The military can also be
employed to assist the Police to protect national key
installations of strategic or symbolic significance. Most
militaries today also possess a Chemical, Biological,
Radiological and Explosive (CBRE) unit that can be
the lead agency against bio-terrorism threats or as a
supporting agency to a developed Civil Defence force
with similar CBRE capability.
(C) Medical Epidemics
Medical epidemics include the widespread
transmission of infectious diseases such as SARS,
cholera or malaria. The dramatic growth in personal
travel for business or pleasure, and the expansion of
global trade has increased the risk of rapid spread
of infectious disease from one part of the world to
another. Infectious diseases affect the quality of
a nation’s human capital. Medical endemics erode
national confidence and investor confidence, which
translates into economic issues affecting national
development and hence future security and stability.
Infectious diseases can devastate the economy,
potentially contributing to increased unemployment,
reduce social stability and, in the worse case, cause
political collapse.
The military can be employed as either the lead
agency in a national consequence management team
or as a supporting agency to the national health
agency. The military can assist in the management of
quarantine areas and in contact tracing, as the SAF
did during the SARS epidemic in Singapore. This is
the employment of the managerial leadership
capability of the military, rather than its warfighting
capability.
POINTER, JOURNAL OF THE SINGAPORE ARMED FORCES
2. 13-19 The Utility Of Military Force Against Non-traditional Threats.indd 16
16
(D) Natural Disaster
The range of natural disasters include forest
fires, cyclones/hurricanes, earthquakes, floods and
droughts. The impact of natural disasters on human
life and sustainable economic development can be
disastrous. Damage caused by natural disasters often
produce social disorder, environmental degradation
and medical endemics. These consequences are often
exacerbated in fragile or weak states, as seen in
Haiti where fragile state institutions disintegrated
after the devastating earthquake in January 2010.
No country, no matter how big or developed,
can mobilise sufficient resources and the specialised
capabilities necessary to alleviate the suffering of
all victims of a natural disaster. However, international
organisations, aid agencies, and other international
rescue services can provide the necessary assistance.7
The current transformation of the military, however,
makes it well placed to operate with these
organisations to swiftly and effectively deliver relief
to the victims.
Military forces have a critical role to play
in Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief
(HADR) operations as they possess the necessary
transportation, engineering resources and manpower
to provide a critical quick response in the initial
stages of disaster relief and rescue operations. The
military can transport aid to affected areas and
assist in its distribution, especially in remote and
difficult-to-reach areas. While the military force
is unlikely to provide complete relief to all victims,
through its initial actions it can stabilise the situation
for international organisations and aid agencies to
follow up in the subsequent phases.
Sail Banda 2010
VOL.36 NO.3-4
16/03/2011 17:01
 features 17

The military with its lift and engineering assets is
well-equipped to be the lead agency in disaster relief
operations, but it can be subordinated to a national
emergency management
agency to support the
Civil Defence force. It can
also play an important
role in the evacuation
of citizenry before the
disaster. Its surveillance
and intelligence assets
can also be used for
damage assessments
to aid the national
disaster coordinating
agency make plans and
coordinate relief efforts.
If necessary, the military
can also be employed as
a first response force to
restore an acceptable
level of security against
armed local gangs that
might have emerged in the post-disaster period.
(E) Intra-State or Regional Conflicts
According to a World Bank report, about a billion
people live in countries affected by fragility and
conflict.8 Fragile states are defined as “countries facing
severe development challenges, weak institutional
capacity, poor governance, and political instability.
Often these countries experience ongoing violence
as the residue of past severe conflict. Ongoing armed
conflicts affect three out of four fragile states.”9
Conflicted affected or post-conflict countries can
be countries that have (1) suffered a severe and
long-lasting conflict, (2) experienced a short, but
highly intensive, conflict leading to a disruption
of development or (3) a newly sovereign state that
has emerged through the violent break-up of a
former sovereign entity. More importantly, these
conflict-affected and fragile states have “a one in
six chance of falling into civil war in any five year
period, and that a typical post-conflict country has
a 50-50 chance of slipping back into war”.11
Conflict-affected and fragile states also affect the
national security and economic development of their
neighbouring countries and produce global insecurity
by becoming hotbeds for crime, disease and terrorism.12
The provision of aid is critical to the development of
these states, but an acceptable level of security and
stability is needed before
international aid can be
flown in. The military
is by far the most
suitable foreign policy
instrument to establish
an acceptable level of
security by preventing
or suppressing any
conflicts so that aid
agencies can alleviate
the consequences of a
conflict and/or a fragile
state. Military forces are
usually deployed as part
of a United Nations led or
sanctioned multinational
peace support
operation to execute
conflict prevention,
peacemaking, peace enforcement, peacekeeping, peace
building and/or humanitarian operations. Ongoing
military transformation to increase the versatility
of the military force to operate in a complex war
environment has also provided the military a capability
to conduct such peace support operations. While the
military can play a crucial initial role to establish
security, a multi-dimensional whole-of-government
approach is needed to provide the initial expertise
while developing indigenous capabilities to rebuild
national institutions. This whole-of-government
approach focuses on (1) promoting governance, (2)
protecting civil population, (3) improving security,
(4) restoring essential services and (5) stimulating
sustainable economic development.13
CONCLUSION
How and in what role the military is employed
domestically against NT threats will depend on the
state of development, competency and capability of
the other national agencies vis-a-vis the nature of the
non-traditional threat the state is facing. Generally,
when the other national agencies are well developed;
the military is likely to be employed in a supporting
role. Likewise, immature national agencies necessitate
a larger role for the military.

POINTER, JOURNAL OF THE SINGAPORE ARMED FORCES VOL.36 NO.3-4

2. 13-19 The Utility Of Military Force Against Non-traditional Threats.indd 17 16/03/2011 17:01
 features
The military in developed states is most likely to
be undergoing transformation to cope with changes
in the battlefield. At the same time, while the other
state agencies are also developing to deal with NT
threats, they may not be adequate for the task and the
military then has to be re-organized to handle certain
NT threats, either in a leading or augmenting role.
This process is aided by the current transformation
of military, thus making it relatively easy to adapt
its new capabilities for application against NT threats
and to work in a coordinated or a seamless manner
with other state agencies. As the capacity and
capability of the other state agencies are developed
over time, the military should relinquish its lead
role and focus on its primary mission of defending
state sovereignty and territorial integrity.
The severity that non-traditional threats pose to
national security cannot be understated and the role
the military can possibly perform is dependent on
both the state of development of the military and the
capacity and competency of other state instruments.
These NT threats affect the national security of all
types of states.14 Some countries or regions are more
prone to insecurity depending on their exposure to
globalization. It is in states with weak sovereignty
that the emergence of insecurity is most strongly
felt and these are often located in the developing
and post-colonial world. Ironically, it is also in these
countries that the military is employed as the main
state instrument against all threats.
These NT threats have made the national security
landscape more complex and uncertain than before.
This requires the state to anticipate threats which are
increasingly multi-dimensional, asymmetric in nature,
sudden and unexpected. The vital and only effective
weapon against such threats is knowledge and an
integrated whole-of-government response is preferred.15
Knowledge is nothing without understanding, and to
achieve understanding, there is a need to make sense
of the situation. It is only appropriate that a proper
understanding be achieved at the national level, before
making decisions on utilizing elements of national
power, to deal with the NT threat. Although the
ongoing structural and capability transformation
in the military has made the military a more useful
tool within the national toolkit against NT threats, it
should not be distracted from its primary mission
of defending the state’s sovereignty and territorial
integrity. ß
POINTER, JOURNAL OF THE SINGAPORE ARMED FORCES
2. 13-19 The Utility Of Military Force Against Non-traditional Threats.indd 18
18
ENDNOTES
1. Rupert Smith, The Utility of Force: The Art of War in the
Modern World (Knofp Publishing, January 2007), p. 378.
2. Ong Yu-Lin, “Employment of the Military Against Non-
Traditional Threats: An Isomorphism or a Metamorphism
of Roles”, World Military Review, Number 5, Issue 433
(2009), pp. 42-45.
3. Gen. Charles C. Krulak, “The Strategic Corporal: Leadership
in the Three Block War”, Marines Magazine (January 1999).
4. Smith, pp. 5-6.
5. According to the Army Operations Manual (October
2006), OOTW encompasses the use of military capabilities
across the range of military operations short of war. It
can be applied to complement any combination of other
instruments of national power. OOTW focus on deterring
war, resolving conflicts and promoting our wider national
interests. These could also include protecting our overseas
citizens and offshore assets, and even contributing to
promote regional stability.
6. Ong Yu-Lin, “The Future of Joint Operations”, World
Military Review, Number 12, Issue 428 (2008), pp. 54-56.
7. Teo Chee Hean, “Modes Of Security Cooperation:
Confidence-Building, Partnerships, Alliances”, Keynote
Address at 7th IISS Asian Security Summit Shangri-La
Dialogue, Singapore (1 June 2007).
8. World Bank Group, http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/
EXTERNAL/PROJECTS/STRATEGIES/EXTLICUS/0, contentM
DK:22230573~menuPK:6434002~pagePK:64171531~piPK:
64171507~theSitePK:511778,00.html
9. World Bank Group, http://www.worldbank.org
10. Paul Collier, The Bottom Billion: Why the Poorest Countries
are Failing and What can be Done About it, (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2007), p. 32; Paul Collier and Anke
Hoeffler, “Post Conflict Risks”, Journal of Peace Research,
Vol. 45, No. 4 (2008), pp. 461-478.
11. Ibid.
12. Paul Collier, “Breaking the Conflict Trap”, A World Bank
Policy Research Report (2003).
13. Peter Chiarelli and Patrick Michaelis, “Winning the Peace:
The Requirement for Full Spectrum Operations”, Military
Review (Jul-Aug 2005), pp. 4-17.
14. Thomas Quiggin, Seeing the Invisible: National Security
Intelligence in an Uncertain Age (World Scientific
Publishing, 2007), p. 231; Implications for the Asia-Pacific
(Barton: Australian Strategic Policy Institute, 2006), p6.
VOL.36 NO.3-4
16/03/2011 17:01
 features 19

COL Ong Yu Lin is a Guards Officer by training. He is currently a Senior Project

Officer in HQ Guards where he was the previous Deputy Chief Guards Officer.
He holds a Bachelor of Science in Physics from the National University of
Singapore, a Master of Management in Defence Studies from the University
of Canberra, Australia, and a MBA from the Nanyang Fellows Programme in
Nanyang Business School, Nanyang Technological University. COL Ong has
also attended the Royal Military Academy at Sandhurst, U.K., the U.S. Army
Infantry School at Fort Benning, the Australian Command and Staff College,
and the Chinese People’s Liberation Army National Defence University.
COL Ong previously held the appointments of Commanding Officer, 1st
Battalion Singapore Guards, Commander, 3rd Singapore Infantry Brigade and
Commander, Officer Cadet School (OCS).

LTC Tan Cheng Kwee is a Guards officer by training. He is currently the

Commanding Officer, 1st Battalion Singapore Guards. He is a recipient of
the SAF Overseas Scholarship. He holds a Bachelor of Science (Electrical
Engineering) (Highest Honours) from the University of Illinois at Urbana-
Champaign. LTC Tan attended The Basic School, U.S. Marine Corps in 2000
and the Indonesian Command and Staff College (Seskoad) in 2008 where he
emerged the top international student graduate. LTC Tan has formerly held
the appointments of Operations Officer, 7th Singapore Infantry Brigade, and
Officer-Commanding of ‘B’ Company, 3rd Battalion Singapore Guards.

MAJ Tan Eng Han, Fredie is currently the the Commanding Officer, 3rd
Battalion Singapore Guards. He is a Guards Officer by vocation and was
commissioned in 1997 at Officer Cadet School, SAFTI MI. He is a recipient
of the Academic Training Award (Local) in 2000 and holds a Bachelor of
Commerce (Management) from the University of Adelaide, Australia. He
attended the USMC Expeditionary Warfare School (class of 2006) and the
Singapore Command and Staff College in 2009. He previously held the
appointments of Head Capability Development Branch, (2010) and Doctrine
Officer (2006-2008) in HQ Guards, Coy Commander, 3rd Bn Gds (2004) and
Platoon Commander/ Instructor, OCS (1999 thru 2003).

POINTER, JOURNAL OF THE SINGAPORE ARMED FORCES VOL.36 NO.3-4

2. 13-19 The Utility Of Military Force Against Non-traditional Threats.indd 19 16/03/2011 17:01