In response to the proliferation of unmanned aerial systems, the Army should aim for proximal dominance of the air-ground littoral, according to the author of a new paper published by the Association of the U.S. Army.

“Operations in the air-ground littoral are increasingly becoming the prime currency in warfare,” writes retired Lt. Col. Amos Fox. “The deceptive interplay among [small-unmanned aerial systems] and [counter-unmanned aerial systems] capabilities … [is] a game of wits for decisiveness in the air-ground littoral; it transcends any single combatant, any theater of war, and is thus an idea of universal relevance.”

In “Army Aviation and Decisiveness in the Air-Ground Littoral,” Fox, a fellow with Arizona State University’s Security Initiative and a lecturer in politics and international relations at the University of Houston, contends that the Army needs to develop a framework to effectively lead in the air-ground space.

On Sept. 4, AUSA is hosting a Hot Topic on Army aviation. The theme for the day’s speakers and panels is “Decisive in the Air-Ground-Littoral.” Click here for more information.

The air-ground littoral is “the airspace from the ground to a few thousand feet above it,” according to a definition Fox cites in his paper.

Instead of pursuing total dominance, which is resource intensive, the Army should pursue proximal dominance in that space, Fox writes. “Dominance of the air-ground littoral is conditional and should not be pursued everywhere, but only in areas that best support achieving military objectives,” he writes. “The Army would better position itself in the reality of the air-ground littoral if it instead sought to dominate the zone of relevance but otherwise seek economies of force across the spectrum of Army forces arrayed on the battlefield.”

As soldiers pursue proximal dominance on the move, they must work quickly, or they risk a “stalemate in the sky.” This stalemate could “unravel planned operations,” “cause Army force objectives to remain unfulfilled” and “prevent Army forces from dominating the air-ground littoral in subsequent operations,” Fox writes.

To prevent this, “the zone of proximal dominance for air-ground littoral supremacy while on the move must be highly planned, tightly regulated and managed … to support the broader Army and joint force objectives,” he writes.

On the line, where Army forces, any separation space and adversary forces converge on the battlefield, “air-ground littoral activities … consist of the operations that tactical Army forces can accomplish with their organic capabilities, or those that their higher headquarters have provided,” including protective action, terrain-oriented reconnaissance and screening and deception operations, Fox writes.

To lead the air-ground littoral, the Army will need to create a framework for success, Fox writes.

“The Army’s aviation branch, perhaps with a newly minted drone corps, provides the critical link between synchronized land and air operations that the Army needs to achieve decisiveness in the air-ground littoral,” he writes. “To … achieve decisiveness in the air-ground littoral, Army forces need to commit to developing a full set of concepts, forces, and equipment, along with an associated doctrine, to fight and win in this space."

Read the full paper here.