Tanks are still needed to enable infantry to act

sir – It is a common mistake (Letters, August 28) to imagine the next war will again see massed battles on broad fronts against a like-for-like enemy, with ground-attack aircraft picking off armoured units at will.

It is far more likely that we will be sucked into yet another humanitarian crisis caused by fanaticism, sending in troops to drive out people whose primary weapon is targeted atrocity.

Tanks have been indispensable in recent conflicts long after the main shooting stopped. During the attempts to make Al Amarah in Iraq safe for its population in 2004, Challenger 2s were needed to advance ahead of lightly armoured or soft-skinned relief convoys to clear and hold urban intersections against gunmen armed with rocket-propelled grenades. Without the tanks, such moves would have been costly or impossible.

This may be directly contrasted with President Bill Clinton’s refusal (against advice) to send heavy armour to Mogadishu in 1993, which led to many more American soldiers coming home in body bags (and, perhaps, many more Somalis dead) than need have been the case. Again, the rocket-propelled grenade in an urban environment was at the root of their trouble, making American dominance in the air useless.

Drones and aircraft cannot escort convoys, hold ground, bandage wounds, feed the starving, stop the enslavers and beheaders, or drive out the terrorists who use hospitals as cover. Only squaddies backed up by heavy metal can do this.

Victor Launert

Matlock Bath, Derbyshire