Why Soldiers Prioritize Deactivating IEDs and Landmines Over Bypassing Them

When it comes to dealing with Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) and landmines, the military often opts for the arduous task of deactivating these threats rather than simply shooting them from a safe distance. This seemingly counterintuitive approach stems from several critical factors that ensure the safety, gathering of intelligence, and preservation of mission objectives.

Why Deactivating IEDs and Landmines Over Shooting Them?

Shooting explosives from a distance may seem like the quickest and most straightforward solution, but there are several reasons why this method is less effective:

1. False Assumptions and Accuracy

Contrary to popular belief, shooting an IED or a mine doesn't always result in an explosion. It depends on the design, materials used, and the shot's angle and power. Depending on the location and the materials involved, the detonator might not be hit. Moreover, in a battlefield environment, the shooter's accuracy and the weapon's effectiveness can vary widely, leading to incomplete destruction or even unintended detonation.

2. Strategic Considerations

There are times when the military might not want a device to explode, especially if it's located near critical infrastructure, fuel points, or other sensitive areas. For instance, shooting an IED near a command center or a bridge could cause collateral damage, disrupt operations, or pose additional risks.

3. Safety for Surrounding Personnel

Shooting at an IED or mine in a densely populated or congested area presents a significant risk to nearby personnel. The blast radius of even a failed attempt to detonate a device can cause injuries, fatalities, and further chaos. Effective deactivation ensures the safety of troops, civilians, and infrastructure.

4. Lack of Useful Intelligence

Shooting a device and causing it to explode provides little to no intelligence to the military. By deactivating the device, the EOD (Explosive Ordnance Disposal) team can gather valuable information about the device's construction, enabling them to:

Target supply chains to disrupt the supply of materials used in device construction.

Enhance detection technology to better identify and locate similar threats.

Develop effective countermeasures to protect personnel from undetected devices.

Collect biometrics and forensic evidence to identify and apprehend the individuals responsible for placing the device.

5. Environmental Impact and Public Perception

Explosions, even if they fail to detonate a target, can have a significant impact on the environment and public perception. Loud detonations and explosions can create a sense of instability and insecurity among the local population, which can erode trust in the government and encourage the growth of insurgent or criminal operations. This was a key issue in Iraq and Afghanistan, where commanders had to carefully balance the need for security with the risk of damaging the already fragile local government.

6. Minefields and Larger Threats

For minefields, the approach to deactivation is often more straight forward, especially if the aim is to clear a specific path. High explosives may not be the most effective solution, as they can spread contamination and make the area even more dangerous. Instead, line clearing charges are employed to create safe passages. The minefield itself is then marked and cleared systematically, typically by hand to minimize risk.

Conclusion

Deactivating IEDs and landmines is not just a matter of physical deactivation but a strategic imperative. It allows the military to gather critical intelligence, ensure the safety of personnel, and preserve sensitive infrastructure. Whether dealing with a single device or a broader minefield, the prioritization of deactivation over shooting or bypassing is not just a technical decision but a critical part of modern warfare and peacekeeping.