Research Paper on NATO's Air Campaign in Kosovo

Introduction

The increased attacks on the ethnic Albanian population in Kosovo by the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia forced the northern Atlantic treaty organization to initiate air campaign attack against Siberia. The decision to initiate the attack came a year after the fighting incidences within the province and after the continued assumption and failure of other international organizations to resolve the escalating conflict using diplomatic means. The air campaign that was referred to as operation-allied force started on March 24th in the year 1999 and lasted for approximately seventy-eight days (Bekaj, 2010). The NATO forces initiated the airstrikes against Siberia in order to end the increased cases of human rights abuses. The air campaigns continued until when the Yugoslav armed forces decided to withdraw from Kosovo, and the United Nations interim administration mission was established (Webber, 2009). The northern Atlantic treaty organization carried out the airstrikes using two hundred and fourteen United States aircraft and approximately one hundred and thirty aircraft from other twelve member's nations of the NATO alliance (Borgen, 2008). NATO had various objectives or aims of conducting the attacks, some of these aims include; first, to show the seriousness of the northern Atlantic treaty organization opposition towards aggression and its continued support for peace. Secondly, the organization was focused on stopping president Milosevic from continuing to escalate attacks on civilians by imposing a significant price for conducting those attacks. Thirdly, northern Atlantic treaty organization intended to destroy Yugoslavians capability to initiate future attacks on Kosovo for instance by reducing and damaging its military capabilities. The aim of this study is to assess the effectiveness of the air campaigns against Kosovo.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Background of the Kosovo War

For a long period, there had been increased attacks and prosecution of the Albanian population in Kosovo by Siberian. These attacks lead to the formation of the Kosovo Albanian rebel group, which was, refer to as the Kosovo liberation army in the 1990s (Gow, 2009). The rebel group was formed with the aim of fighting the increasing prosecution of the Kosovo Albanian by the Siberian. The liberation army initiated its first campaign in the year 1995 when it first conducted its attack on the Siberian law enforcement agency in Kosovo (Bekaj, 2010). In the year 1996, the Albanian group also claimed responsibility for various other acts of sabotage that targeted the Kosovo police stations (Borgen, 2008). These attacks were conducted due to the rebel group's fury that the Kosovo law enforcement agency was not taking any measures to protect its population or civilians. In the year 1977, the group also acquired huge loads of arms mainly through weapon smuggling from Albania (Gow, 2009). Early in the year 1998, the Kosovo liberation army initiated various attacks that targeted Yugoslav authorities that were based in Kosovo this lead to the increase of the Siberian paramilitary and other regular Siberian forces in Kosovo with the intention of conducting a campaign aimed at seeking retribution (Gow, 2009). The campaign particularly targeted the Kosovo liberation sympathizers and other political opponents in Kosovo and led to the death of approximately 1500 to 2000 Albanians and Kosovo liberation authority (Bekaj, 2010).

The increased conflicts and deaths in the area prompted other neighboring countries to intervene with the aim of trying to seek a diplomatic solution to end the war. However, the aim of the neighboring nation did not succeed, thus prompting the northern Atlantic treaty organization to intervene, justifying the campaigns taking place in Kosovo as humanitarian war. NATO intervention precipitated a huge expulsion of the Kosovar Albanians while the Yugoslav army continued fighting. After the air campaign, thorough investigations were conducted in the area, which led to the recovery of more than three thousand remains of victims from all ethnicities. This discovery prompted the united nation administered supreme court that was based in Kosovo to make a ruling that the Siberians had conducted a campaign of terror in Kosovo that included, rapes, arsons, severe mistreatments, and murders. This affirmed the northern Atlantic treaty organization justification that the Kosovo campaign was an act of humanitarian war. The Kosovo war ended with the signing of the Kumanovo treaty that was signed by the Siberian and Yugoslav forces after they both agreed to withdraw their troops from Kosovo. The Kosovo liberation army also disbanded after the war with some of its members joining the national army while others joined the Kosovo police force. After the Kosovo war and the signing of the treaty, research was done, and it was found out that over 13500 people had been killed and others had gone missing during the two years' war. The Siberian and Yugoslav forces also caused the displacement of approximately 1.2 million individual (Borgen, 2008). On the other hand, the NATO air campaigns in the region also caused the death of approximately 488 Yugoslav deaths and destroyed numerous buildings and industrial plants (Webber, 2009). This made the air campaign the controversial since it did not also gain support from the united nation security council.

Effectiveness of the Air Campaign in Kosovo

There Was Limited Collateral Damage

Reducing collateral damage during the air campaigns was crucial for NATO so that they could maintain the needed public support, particularly from the European nations. During the onset of the air campaign in Kosovo, a key segment of the European public opinion had mixed feelings about the attack. Some of the nations were in support of the air campaign while other nations were heavily against it. Reservations were considered strong, particularly among the green members who formed the ruling coalition in Germany and also had deep roots in the pacific movements (Borgen, 2008). The northern Atlantic treaty organization was mainly cautious against creating catastrophic incidences that would sway the public opinion against the air attack operation. NATO was cautious about the damage caused since they did not want other nations to halt the bombing before their intended demands or objectives were met. The research conducted by the human right groups in the area after the air campaigns found out that only approximately five hundred Yugoslav civilians had been killed in at least ninety separate incidents throughout the entire operation(Bekaj, 2010). Five of the ten most dangerous incident mainly involved the attack on transportation routes and convoys (Bekaj, 2010). Most of the collateral damage experienced during the operation airfield force was minimal and mainly went unnoticed by the media. However, there were few attacks that that were spectacular, thus raising widespread attention. These attacks include; the bombing of the Grdelica railway bridge that led to the death of 20 civilians (Borgen, 2008). This few episodes created severe political problems, thus forcing NATO to adjust its air operations.

They Were Able to Attack Fixed Targets

Operation allied force was able to attack the fixed target that acted as the backbone of the humanitarian war. Some of these fixed targets include controls, command, intelligence, and communication centers. Attack on this target played a major role of hindering both the Siberian and Yugoslav forces from continuing with the attacks since each of the targets had a specific role in the war. The northern Atlantic treaty organization attacked the Yugoslav line of communication, army infrastructures, electric power plants, petroleum and oil industries, and the defense industries. NATO destroyed all the three Danube bridges that were mainly used by the forces to access Kosovo but left the other six Danube bridges at Belgrade(Bekaj, 2010). They also destroyed railway lines that were heading to Kosovo and also damaged other five roads in several corridors. Hitting fixed targets that could cripple the Siberian and Yugoslav helped NATO to minimize the number of casualties since the field targets prevented the organization from conducting random attacks. The attack on fixed targets also helped to protect NATO reputation mainly by ensuring that the public opinion did not oppose their decision to conduct the air campaign in Kosovo. The northern Atlantic treaty organization was successful in hitting the Yugoslavia war-related industries. For instance, it destroyed approximately 40% of Yugoslavia's capability to repair their armored vehicles, at least half of its capability to produce war explosives and approximately 65% of the countries capability to produce gun ammunitions (Webber, 2009). NATO accuracy and proper planning on where to conduct the airstrike enabled them to take a shorter time to end the war. For instance, NATO forces only took seventy-five days to stop the attack (Gow, 2009). They also attacked transformer stations, thus disrupting power throughout Yugoslavia. Power also went down in Novi Sad and Belgrade for extended periods thus hindering both the Siberian and Yugoslavia military attack efforts in Kosovo. Attack on these key facilities left the two countries military forces with no other option other than to stand down and sign a peace treaty that was to be upheld by all parties.

The NATO Forces Incurred Less Casualties and Aircraft Damages

Despite the incomplete preparation and planning, bad weather and the restrictive rules and regulations of engagement, the northern Atlantic treaty organization managed to conduct impressive airstrikes. The organization attained its supremacy both in the high and middle altitudes while still avoiding the low-level airstrike defenses. NATO was able to conduct the attack effectively with minimal aircraft damages or loses as a result of the counter-attack by the Siberian and Yugoslavian forces. Through the air campaign in Kosovo, the northern Atlantic treaty organization only lost two aircraft to the wars hostile fire, but they managed to rescuer both pilots. Despite the limited expectations they intended to achieve, NATO war systems performed extremely well in the battlefield, thus proving that the operational readiness of the organization was generally high. NATO was also able to expand over 20000 military weapons with minimal errors and also caused little collateral damage without withstanding the high profile expectation (Webber, 2009). The success was particularly due to the United States air forces that were able to flay approximately two-thirds of all the aircraft and made an extreme contribution in the war reconnaissance, all-weather precision strike and the air defense suppressions (Webber, 2009). This airstrike can, therefore, be considered to be effective since they were able to carry out all the attack that lead to the end of the war and ended up with minimal aircrafts damages and minimal casualties.

The Air Campaigns Achieve All the Intended Objectives

The NATO forces were able to achieve the objective that they had set for the attack. One of the main objective was to show that NATO was in support of peace and against aggression. They were able to achieve this objective by taking part in the air campaign against the Siberia and Yugoslavia forces despite the objection of some countries such as Russia (Gow, 2009). NATO had the determination to prove though the other nations that they had the capability to end the war even without their support. They were also able to destroy Yugoslavia capability to impose war on Kosovo in the near feature. This objective was achieved after NATO managed to destroy Yugoslavian key war facilities such as communica...