In wars, wherein soldier morale can determine victory or defeat, “Never leave a man behind” is more than just a fancy phrase. It is a code of conduct that deeply integrated in the ethos of the armed forces around the world, including modern American armed forces. For soldiers, this theory ensures loyalty, collective strength and brotherhood at the time of crisis. The concept of “No Man Left Behind” originated in elite militaries for centuries but during the World War II with the development of formal Combat Search and Rescue (CSAR), it became part of military operational strategy. In cotemporary military operation, we have seen how modern militaries keeping their heads above water to sustain core tenet of “No Man Left Behind” ethos. Despite being widely branded and repeated in the US Military this is not represented in any formal military doctrine or government publication. It is a principle of the armed forces, which carries substantial risk at multiple level of operations. The question may raise here, if “no man left behind” is not part of any official military doctrines, why modern militaries, especially U.S armed force conduct such risky and irrational operations? During recent search and rescue operation in conflicted zone, the U.S armed forces paid a heavy price in terms of resources and men, the battle of Mogadishu is a prominent engagement in which a Task force helicopter taken down by terrorists in attempt to capture local warlord Farrah Aidid, during the recovery efforts eighteen U.S services men got killed and seventy-three got wounded. The loss of life and resources led to a policy change by the Clinton administration and the eventually withdrawal of U.S forces from Somalia.
In that same context, example of Captain Roger Locher during Vietnam War and use of “Hannibal Directive to support IDF campaign to recover their abdicative soldiers in 2014 from Hamas, were the operations, where U.S forces faced bashing and public criticism for use of excessive resources. Military operations are very calculated business for the people in power. In the realm of rationality, once the soldier is wounded or missing on the battle field, he or she is no longer an asset to accomplishing a mission, additionally he or she is a potential hindrance that might consume combat power and resources from ongoing mission. Even more, the decision to conduct a rescue or recovery mission can change the policy or out come of the war.
There are many examples from the recent conflicts, where modern militaries halt their recuse and recovery missions due to lack of capabilities or from the fear of losing resources on the battlefield. In 2019, during the Balakot strikes, Indian military lost a few fighter jets in autonomous region of Kashmir, during rescue and recovery missions, Indian military shot down their own helicopters in friendly fire and later on abandoned that mission due to lack of operational capabilities In that military campaign, Pakistan captured an Indian pilot from their side of the border and later on handover to India by diplomatic efforts.
All over the world, militaries really want to endorse “No Man left Behind” ethos in their military practice to escape from humiliation in the hand of enemy forces but lack of strategic depth, operational capabilities and political environment influence their decision making process.
On the other hand, Elite militaries like the U.S have all the possible framework to conduct these missions to hold their might prestige in the international arena. As per Global Firepower Index, The U.S has spent an estimated $5.9 trillion on foreign military campaigns in last two decades, including substantial funds for the Department of Defense (DoD) Operations, with rescue capabilities embedded in overseas Contingency Operations (OCO). In term of Special Operations Support that is responsible for rescue missions, the Department of Defense has been spending $10 billion annually in recent years. These rescue missions are often quoted as vital to military moral and the “No Man left Behind” unwritten doctrine, in the face of high economic and personal cost.
In an ongoing war with Iran, the U.S military has conducted a rescued but costly mission. As per Al Jazeera report, United States president Donald Trump has stated the “U.S military has rescued a missing American fighter jet crew member in Iran”. The U.S military two servicemen went missing in a remote part of Iran during the heat of Operation Epic Furry. It was also reported that a tense firefight took place in Kohgiluyeh and Boyer-Ahmad province between Iranian forces and US Task force before the rescue mission. These kinds of operations are seldom because too much was at stake for U.S. it was not about the ‘man or the equipment’, it was clearly motivated by the prestige of U.S as military might. It was not acceptable for the White House to give any bargain chip or leverage to Iran to humiliate them on International Media and Diplomatic stages. On the other hand Iran’s IRGC claimed on Sunday, that Iran had also destroyed U.S two C-130 aircraft and two Black Hawk helicopters were sent to rescue the U.S airman in Isfahan province. In the last decade, it is the most expensive rescue operation ever conducted by the U.S military. U.S Journalist Micheal Weiss stated that, U.S Military official told him the Operation estimated cost $US 436 millions in loss of Military equipment. For American taxpayers the so-called “No Man left Behind” ethos came with a $U.S 500 million price tag.
Coming to the conclusion, U.S military de-facto “No Man left Behind” ethos might be practicable against third world countries and non-state actors but in big boys circle it might be left with irreversible damage to U.S military might. It might expose U.S military operational capabilities in the time of crisis, as it has shown recent events against Iran. In the fog of war, there are multiple considerations for the states to pursue their political objects under International law and international institutions. International institutions and treaties such as International Humanitarian Law also known as laws of war, Hague Regulations 1907, Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and International committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) were established to protect and wellbeing of Prisoner of wars in conflicted Zone. All states should respect and obey the international framework during the time of crisis and save their taxpayers money against Unjustified, hefty and irrational Operation in the name of National Security.
By: Zeshan Nawaz
