Airpower and Restraint in Small Wars Marine Corps Aviation in the Second Nicaraguan Campaign, 1927-33

Aerospace Power Journal, Fall, 2001 by Dr. Wray R. Johnson

It became clear to diplomats and Marine Corps commanders in Nicaragua that direct and even indirect infliction of casualties on the civilian population was not only contrary to policy, but also carried negative value. Whereas British and French aviators routinely bombed villages and strafed collections of suspicious men--as well as women, children, and animals--the corps clearly understood that this was counterproductive and modified its tactics. Major Rowell, therefore, encouraged the service's pilots to use their best judgment when attempting to tell guerrillas from civilians on the ground: "It is sometimes rather difficult to distinguish between the hostile groups and the noncombatants. No fixed rules can be laid down in such cases. The aviators must have an intimate knowledge of the characteristics of and habits of each group.... [However,] pilots will always bear in mind that innocent people will sometimes flee upon the approach of airplanes." [28] Contrast this statement with that of an RAF pilot who st ated that nine unidentifiable people in a group constituted an illegal assembly, so he dropped bombs on them. [29]

All of the above is not to say that innocent civilians did not die in Nicaragua as a result of air action. In his classic account of the Marine Corps fight with Sandino, Neill Macaulay described the service's tactics as "aerial terrorism." [30] Citing a particular mission led by Major Rowell, Macaulay noted that after observing several horses around a large house, Rowell and the pilot of another aircraft dropped bombs on the house and in the yard. Unknown persons were seen darting from the house into a nearby grove. Major Rowell strafed the grove but apparently to no effect. Macaulay, however, fails to mention the indicators that the Marine Corps recognized as pointing to probable guerrilla activity and the often extraordinary lengths to which its aviators would go to ensure that suspicious persons were indeed guerrillas.

Major Rowell instructed his pilots to fly no higher than 2,000 feet and generally 1,500 feet or lower--well within small-arms range--in order to distinguish between men and women, horses and cattle, and so forth. [31] He also stressed that pilots and their observers should become expert in the "organization, equipment, and habits of the enemy" through careful study. "Basically," he wrote, "reconnaissance consists of distinguishing between the normal and the abnormal." [32] When something on the ground seemed out of the ordinary, Marine pilots would swoop down to investigate. Towns that appeared to be abandoned were especially regarded as suspicious: "If the enemy is hiding there, some member of the party will probably decide to find a better place and make a dash for it. This may be induced by the patrol making a feint to attack. Under some circumstances, it will be possible to develop the situation by use of a few bursts from the front or rear guns. Occasionally a bomb may be expended for the same purpose." [33]

Several points of this statement are noteworthy. Major Rowell insisted that his pilots be able to distinguish between guerrillas and civilians in order to avoid harming the latter. In circumstances in which all indications pointed to guerrilla activity, attempts to flush them out were graduated (feint, then use guns, then maybe a bomb or two) and employed when civilians were unlikely to be in the way. [34] If the town were abandoned by the civilian populace, the expenditure of bombs was certainly less problematic than if the area were bustling with activity. Such restraint certainly appears to refute any accusation of aerial terrorism and seems almost magnanimous compared to the British propensity to bomb any suspicious activity.