General Giulio Douhet: Theory Of Air Power – Analysis

 

November 25, 2023 

By Hafiza Syeda Azkia Batool

Introduction

General Giulio Douhet’s advocacy for targeting civilians with a combination of high explosives, incendiary bombs, and chemical weapons calls into doubt his role as a prominent proponent of air power. To fully comprehend his beliefs and the context in which he worked, however, one must first consider the broader historical themes of nationalism and industrialization that dominated the nineteenth century, as well as the early twentieth century development of aviation technology.

World War I significantly influenced Douhet’s thinking, as he saw aviation as a solution to trench warfare and the challenges of industrialized warfare. We have evaluated his book’s second edition, “The Command of the Air,” released in 1927, to be the most developed expression of his views. In the U.S., proponents of air power resonated with Douhet’s ideas, impacting aircraft design and shaping the strategic bombing campaign during World War II.

Giulio Douhet, despite having limited experience in flying, is a standout figure in the realm of military theory for his insightful predictions about the transformative impact of airpower on modern warfare. He foresaw that the development of airplanes would make gaining “command of the air” the primary objective in any military campaign, with air superiority being the ultimate determinant of victory. 

However, what makes Douhet’s contributions particularly noteworthy is his understanding that the advent of airpower would fundamentally change the nature of war. Douhet saw that airplanes eliminated the geographical boundaries in warfare, making surface targets easily accessible for attack. Moreover, Douhet anticipated that the distinction between soldiers and civilians would blur as a result of airpower. This foresight led him to predict the beginning of total war, where the civilian population otself became a viable target.

Douhet believed that targeting civilian population through bombing could exert pressure on citizens to compel their leaders to end the war, and achieve peace. Initially met with resistance, Douhet faced a court-martial and a year of imprisonment for going against his superiors. However, he was later exonerated and went on to publish his masterpiece, “The Command of the Air,” in 1921. He released a second edition in 1927, which was even more forceful in its conclusions. Douhet’s work was eventually translated into multiple languages and became a major influence on the doctrine of Europe’s air forces, contributing to growing public concern about the prospect of aerial bombing as the specter of a new world war loomed.

Background

The desire to use aerial craft for warfare existed long before the development of powered flight. The Montgolfier brothers’ demonstration of balloon free flight in the late eighteenth century ignited speculation about its military potential. In 1794, the French government established an army balloon unit for reconnaissance purposes, the balloons first went into action during the battles of Charleroi and Fleurus later that year. Throughout the nineteenth century, various military establishments experimented with lighter-than-air ships, even attempting bombing cities. When the Wright brothers achieved powered flight in 1903, the anticipation of military aviation was already widespread. Within a decade, powered flight played a crucial role in military operations during the conflict between Italy and Turkey. The ability of airplanes and dirigibles to overcome physical barriers and provide tactical advantages stirred public imagination and controversy, prompting military leaders to consider their role in future conflicts.

Giulio Douhet, an Italian soldier and writer born in Caserta in 1869, was a prominent figure in the realm of airpower thinking during his time and beyond. His exploration of aircraft’s impact began in 1909 while serving in the Italian Army’s Artillery unit. Douhet later commanded one of the first army air units and directed the army’s Aviation Section. By 1915, as Italy entered World War I, Douhet had already developed key elements of his airpower theories.

 However, his proposal for an independent bomber force of 500 aircraft to attack Austrian cities was rejected, and he was court-martialed and imprisoned for a year after criticizing Italian military leaders in memoranda to the cabinet. In 1918, Douhet was recalled to service to head the Italian Central Aeronautical Bureau, and he was finally exonerated in 1920. He was promoted to the rank of general officer in 1921, and the same year he published “Command of the Air.” After briefly serving as the head of aviation in Mussolini’s government in 1922, Giulio Douhet dedicated much of the remainder of his life to writing and advocating for his ideas on airpower.

Giulio Douhet grew up during an era of unification, witnessing the efforts of leaders like Wilhelm Couser in German Unification and Garibaldi, a revolutionary hero who played a crucial role in the unification of Italy. Born in 1869, just a few years before Italy was unified, Douhet came of age during a time of Italian nationalism. This period fueled his determination to understand how Italy could establish itself as a leading European power. Recognizing Italy’s challenges—lack of natural resources compared to Germany, an industrial base inferior to Britain, and a manpower deficit compared to Russia—Douhet aimed to elevate Italy to a prominent position. To address these imbalances, he turned to technology, viewing it as a means to overcome these obstacles and ensure that Italy wouldn’t be relegated to a second-rate nation.

Major Assumptions

Giulio Douhet’s military theories were built upon several major assumptions that formed the core of his ideas on airpower and warfare. Central to his beliefs was the conviction that airpower stood as the preeminent factor in determining the outcomes of conflicts. Douhet introduced the concept of strategic bombing, intricately tied to the notion of total war, wherein the targeting of civilian populations and logistical centers behind enemy lines became a transformative element. Douhet’s conviction in the offensive capabilities of aircraft was resolute; he argued that no other domain of warfare could match the offensive prowess of airborne attacks. He asserted that there was no effective defense against air assaults, providing airpower with a distinct strategic advantage. Douhet further contended that strategic bombing held the power to break civilian morale and dismantle the enemy’s logistical capacity, thereby reshaping the dynamics of warfare. Envisaging a defensive posture for ground troops due to military mechanization, Douhet underscored the dominance of bombers over other aircraft types. These assumptions, articulated in his seminal work “The Command of The Air,” underscored Douhet’s belief in the transformative and superior nature of airpower, positioning airplanes as unparalleled offensive weapons capable of redefining the very essence of warfare.

Explanation

In “The Command of The Air,” Douhet emphasizes the paramount significance of air power in modern warfare. According to Douhet, a nation’s ability to secure itself hinges on its ability to control the air, which he defined as being able to prevent the enemy from flying while retaining the ability to fly oneself. Douhet and his contemporaries used this concept to argue for the creation of an independent air force. Douhet believed that the command of the air was necessary for conducting and protecting a nation from aerial attacks, and that without it, national security could not be ensured. He believed that airpower held the key to victory, and that a nation’s offensive should be carried out through the air rather than through ground forces. Douhet’s ideas about the importance of the air domain have been debated by airpower theorists, who question whether airpower alone can achieve victory over other domains of warfare.

In his book “The Command of The Air,” Douhet initially proposed a balanced allocation of “aerial means used by the army and navy.” However, he later changed hisassumption, believing that auxiliary aviation was “worthless, superfluous and harmful.” This idea created inter-service rivalry between armies, navies, and independent air forces worldwide. Douhet’s assumptions about total war and strategic bombing are heavily debated. He stated that the choice of bombing targets would depend on material, moral, and psychological circumstances, making it impossible to lay down hard and fast rules. However, many theorists believe that Douhet believed in targeting a nation’s industrial capacity and the enemy’s air force as the primary targets of bombing missions, followed by strategic targets such as railroads, ports, and population centers. Douhet summarized his concept of total war as inflicting heavier damage upon the enemy while being resigned to the damage they may inflict upon us.

Furthermore, Douhet argued that ground forces should be assigned defensive responsibilities due to the destructive stalemate of the First World War. He observed that advancements in firearms and defense systems favored the defensive, making victory in ground warfare difficult. However, Douhet acknowledged the importance of offensive action in achieving victory and criticized the failure of combatants in the First World War to strike a decisive blow. He believed that airplanes were the key offensive weapon and that they were not utilized effectively in the First World War. Douhet’s goal was to change war strategies to avoid a repeat of the disastrous outcome of the First World War.

Douhet’s final assumption in “The Command of The Air” is that bombers are superior to fighter aircraft. He believed that strategic bombardment was the most effective way to attack the enemy, and he did not value the interdiction efforts of defending fighter aircraft. According to Douhet, the “battle plane,” which can deliver a large payload of destructive bombs and gas munitions, was the only type of plane necessary for an Independent Air Force to conduct aerial warfare. Douhet also believed that nothing on the ground could interfere with a plane in flight. His battle plane concept was controversial and led to his court-martial, but it was still influential. The fear that “the bomber will always get through” became a reality before World War II, as acknowledged by British Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin in 1932.

Thus, he held the belief that the primary objective of air forces was to gain control of the air, which meant rendering the enemy unable to fly while maintaining the ability to do so oneself. To accomplish this, Douhet advocated for attacking the enemy air force while it was on the ground. In his view, aircraft were only useful as offensive instruments, and defeating the enemy could be achieved by bombing cities and factories, thereby shattering the civilian will to resist. Douhet argued that the nature of airplanes – their speed and maneuverability – and the vastness of airspace would make it impossible for the defense to stop a determined bombing campaign. However, for air forces to be able to conduct such operations, and because they had little use as auxiliaries to armies or navies, they needed to be independent of ground and naval forces. Douhet’s conclusion was that there should be no air defense, and that the only effective way to defend one’s own territory against an air offensive was to quickly destroy the enemy’s air power, even at the risk of suffering similar losses.

Concept of Strategic Bombing and WWII

During World War II, Nazi Germany conducted an intense bombing comaping against the United Kingdom known as the Blitz. This compaign lasted for a period of eight month during which Luftwaffe dropped bombs on London and other strategic cities across Britain. Despite heavy civilian casualties resulting  from the Blitz, the British people refrained from retaliating or urging their government to pursue peace negotiations with Germany. This can be explained by a range of factors, including resilience of British morale and the effectiveness of the government’s propaganda campaign. Moreover, it is plausible that the German bombings may have actually strengthened the British resolve and willingness to fight, rather than undermining it. So, given the historical context of the Blitz, it is pertinent to examine the applicability of Giulio Douhet’s assumption of strategic bombing, which posits that the bombing of enemy cities and industrial centers would result in a swift victory

Criticism

Giulio Douhet’s “air power theory” argued that airpower alone could win wars. However, his theory has been criticized on several fronts. Firstly, his theory overemphasized on strategic bombing. Douhet believed that bombing enemy cities and industrial centers would lead to a quick victory. However, this strategy proved less effective than expected, as civilian populations proved resilient and could continue to support their war effort even after suffering significant damage. Moreover, the use of strategic bombing in World War II, particularly the bombing of civilian populations in Germany and Japan, resulted in significant ethical and moral concerns. Secondly, Douhet’s theory underestimated the importance of ground forces. He saw airpower as the decisive factor in warfare, while underestimating the importance of ground forces. In practice, successful military campaigns have required a combination of air, ground, and naval forces. Thirdly, Douhet wrote during a time when the technology of aviation was in its infancy, and some of his assumptions, such as the ability of bombers to penetrate enemy air defenses, proved overly optimistic. In reality, air defenses have evolved to become increasingly sophisticated and effective. Lastly, Douhet’s theory failed to consider political and economic factors that often determine the outcome of a conflict. He focused primarily on the military aspects of war, while neglecting the political and economic factors. For example, a country’s ability to sustain a war effort over time can depend on factors such as access to resources and political stability. In conclusion, while Giulio Douhet’s “air power theory” had some valuable insights, it also had significant limitations. The theory’s overemphasis on strategic bombing, underestimation of the importance of ground forces, technological limitations, and failure to consider political and economic factors have been criticized. Nevertheless, Douhet’s theory remains an important contribution to military thinking and continues to influence strategic thinking in the modern era.

Case Studies

Now, we will analyze the accuracy of Giulio Dauhet’s predictions in light of the experiences of modern conflict, and identify the areas where his predictions were validated and where they were refuted.

The Six-Day War

The Six-Day War, which took place in June 1967, was a conflict between Israel and the Arab states of Egypt, Syria, and Jordan. The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) launched a preemptive strike on Egypt, citing expected aggression. In a single day, the Israeli air force decimated nearly the entire Egyptian air force, thereby securing air supremacy. Israel went on to use its air power to devastating effect against Egyptian and Syrian land forces, using tactical air strikes and combined arms air-land warfare. The Six-Day War serves as a prime example of the decisive role that air power can play in modern warfare. The Israeli pre-emptive strike on Egypt’s air force was a critical component of the IDF’s strategy. By achieving air supremacy, Israel was able to control the skies and launch devastating attacks on enemy forces on the ground. The use of air power also allowed the IDF to conduct rapid troop movements and exploit gaps in the enemy’s defense. The Six-Day War was a wake-up call for the Arab states involved in the conflict, prompting them to reform and restructure their military forces. The success of the Israeli air force highlighted the importance of modernizing military structures and investing in advanced weaponry, particularly air power.

Vietnam War:

During the Vietnam War, the United States (US) military possessed a significant advantage in air power, as evidenced by their command of the air over the region. The US Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps collectively controlled the skies and had the capability to deliver precise, laser-guided bombs with a high success rate. In fact, out of the 21,000 laser-guided bombs dropped during the conflict, approximately 17,000 hit their intended targets, resulting in an impressive 80-percent success rate for this innovative weapon. Furthermore, the US military had a substantial volume of aerial firepower present in Vietnam, with virtually every spot in South Vietnam accessible within a short fifteen-minute flight by aircraft. Multiple jet bases were also available for deployment and provided the US military with a strategic advantage in the region. Despite their clear military superiority, the US did not ultimately achieve victory in the Vietnam War.  The failure to win the war can be attributed, in part, to the erosion of public support for the conflict in the US. As the war dragged on and the death toll rose, the American public grew increasingly disillusioned with the conflict, leading to protests and calls for the withdrawal of US troops. The loss of public support eventually forced the US to withdraw from the region, contributing to the ultimate failure to achieve victory in the Vietnam War.

Conclusion

After conducting research on the modern conflict, it has been determined that Giulio Douhet’s principles and objectives for strategic bombing were utilized during World War II, thus proving his theory to be valid. However, his belief in the overwhelming psychological impact on targeted populations was overestimated, and he did not anticipate the diverse range of uses for airpower in contemporary warfare. Douhet correctly predicted the evolving nature of warfare and the importance of airpower in achieving victory. Nevertheless, the effectiveness of airpower is dependent on the prevailing conditions and circumstances, and dominance in the skies does not always equate to success. As mentioned above, while the US military had a clear advantage in air power during the Vietnam War, this was not enough to secure a victory. The erosion of public support for the conflict ultimately proved to be a significant factor in the failure to achieve victory in the region.

File photo of Israeli Air Force McDonnell Douglas F-15I Ra'am. Photo by Tech. Sgt. Kevin Gruenwald, USAF.

Hafiza Syeda Azkia Batool is a student of International Relations at National Defense University (NDU).

Robert Reich: What’s The Real Frankenstein Monster Of AI? – OpEd

November 25, 2023 
By Robert Reich

The chaotic news this week about OpenAI offers a foothold onto this larger question.

Artificial Intelligence has huge potential social benefits, such as devising new life-saving drugs or finding new ways to teach children.

But it also has even larger potential social costs. If we’re not careful, AI could be a Frankenstein monster: It might eliminate nearly all jobs. It could lead to autonomous warfare.

Even such a mundane goal as making as many paper clips as possible could push an all-powerful AI to end all life on Earth in pursuit of more clips.

So, how would you build an enterprise designed to gain as many of the benefits of AI as possible while avoiding these Frankenstein monster horrors?

You might start with a nonprofit board stacked with ethicists and specialists in the potential downsides of AI.

That nonprofit would need vast amounts of expensive computing power to test its models, so the nonprofit board would need to oversee a for-profit commercial arm that attracted investors.

How to prevent investors from taking over the enterprise?

You’d have to limit how much profit could flow to the investors (through a so-called “capped profit” structure) and you wouldn’t put investors on the board.

But how would you prevent greed from corrupting the enterprise, as board members and employees are lured by the prospect of making billions?

Well, you can’t. Which is the flaw in the whole idea of private enterprise developing AI.

The nonprofit I described was the governing structure that Open AI began with in 2015, when it was formed as a research-oriented nonprofit to build safe AI technology.

But ever since OpenAI’s ChatGPT looked to be on its way to achieving the holy grail of tech — an at-scale consumer platform that would generate billions of dollars in profits — its nonprofit safety mission has been endangered by big money.

Now, big money is on the way to devouring safety.

In 2019, OpenAI shifted to a capped profit structure so it could attract investors to pay for computing power and AI talent.

OpenAI’s biggest outside investor is Microsoft, which obviously wants to make as much as possible for its executives and shareholders regardless of safety. Since 2019, Microsoft has invested $13 billion in OpenAI, with the expectation of making a huge return on that investment.

But OpenAI’s capped profit structure and nonprofit board limited how much Microsoft could make. What to do?

Sam Altman, OpenAI’s CEO, apparently tried to have it both ways — giving Microsoft some of what it wanted without abandoning the humanitarian goals and safeguards of the nonprofit.

It didn’t work. Last week, OpenAI’s nonprofit board pushed Altman out, presumably over fears that he was bending too far toward Microsoft’s goal of making money, while giving inadequate attention to the threats posed by AI.

Where did Altman go after being fired? To Microsoft, of course.

And what of OpenAI’s more than 700 employees — its precious talent pool?

Even if we assume they’re concerned about safety, they own stock in the company and will make a boatload of money if OpenAI prioritizes growth over safety. It’s estimated that OpenAI could be worth between $80 billion to $90 billion in a tender offer — making it one of the world’s most valuable tech start-ups of all time.

So it came as no surprise that almost all of OpenAIs employees signed a letter earlier this week, telling the board they would follow Altman to Microsoft if the board didn’t reinstate Altman as CEO.

Everyone involved — including Altman, OpenAI’s employees, and even Microsoft — will make much more money if OpenAI survives and they can sell their shares in the tender offer.

Presto! On Tuesday, OpenAI’s board reinstated Altman as chief executive and agreed to overhaul itself — jettisoning board members who had opposed him and adding two who seem happy to do Microsoft’s bidding (Bret Taylor, an early Facebook officer and former co-chief executive of Salesforce, and Larry Summers, the former Treasury secretary).

Said Satya Nadella, Microsoft’s chief executive, “we are encouraged by the changes to OpenAI board,” calling it a “first essential step on a path to more stable, well-informed, and effective governance.”

Effective governance? For making gobs of money.

The business press — for which “success” is automatically defined as making as much money as possible — is delighted.

It had repeatedly described the nonprofit board as a “convoluted” governance structure that prevented Altman from moving “even faster,” and predicted that if OpenAI fell apart over the contest between growth and safety, “people will blame the board for … destroying billions of dollars in shareholder value.”

Which all goes to show that the real Frankenstein monster of AI is human greed.

Private enterprise, motivated by the lure of ever-greater profits, cannot be relied on to police itself against the horrors of an unfettered AI.

This past week’s frantic battle over OpenAI shows that not even a nonprofit board with a capped profit structure for investors can match the power of Big Tech and Wall Street.

Money triumphs in the end.

The question for the future is whether the government — also susceptible to the corruption of big money — can do a better job weighing the potential benefits of AI against its potential horrors, and regulate the monster.

As we approach our ten-week Friday discussion of the common good and capitalism, it’s an important question to ponder.

This article was published at Robert Reich’s Substack

Robert B. Reich is Chancellor's Professor of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley and Senior Fellow at the Blum Center for Developing Economies, and writes at robertreich.substack.com. Reich served as Secretary of Labor in the Clinton administration, for which Time Magazine named him one of the ten most effective cabinet secretaries of the twentieth century. He has written fifteen books, including the best sellers "Aftershock", "The Work of Nations," and"Beyond Outrage," and, his most recent, "The Common Good," which is available in bookstores now. He is also a founding editor of the American Prospect magazine, chairman of Common Cause, a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and co-creator of the award-winning documentary, "Inequality For All." He's co-creator of the Netflix original documentary "Saving Capitalism," which is streaming now.

 

Rise Of China And Its Effects On US Hegemony – OpEd

 November 25, 2023 

By Sughra Jan Muhammad

Following the implementation of economic reforms in the late 1970s, China’s growth raised and it became a major player in the world economy.

China’s economy has been growing for some time now. Due to investments in globalization, industrialization, and infrastructure, it has become the world’s second-largest economy.Over 800 million people have been pulled out of poverty and GDP growth has averaged over 9% annually since China started to open up and reform its economy in 1978. During the same time period, there have also been major improvements in access to other services, including health and education.

Commercial associate of the US. China ranks third in terms of US export markets, is the country’s largest import source, and is the country with which the US trades the most goods. Additionally, China holds the most shares in US Treasury securities among all foreign investors, which supports the country’s debt and reduces interest rates.

Through a number of high-profile initiatives, such as “Made in China 2025,” a plan announced in 2015 to upgrade and modernize China’s manufacturing in 10 key sectors through extensive government assistance in order to make China a major global player in these sectors, the Chinese government has made innovation a top priority in its economic planning. These actions have, however, heightened worries that China plans to employ industrial strategies to reduce its reliance on foreign technology (including by barring foreign companies from operating in China) and eventually take control of the world’s markets.

China’s innovation and intellectual property policies were the subject of a Section 301 inquiry by the Trump Administration in 2017 because it was believed to be unfavorable to American economic interests. Subsequently, it increased tariffs by 25% on $250 billion worth of Chinese goods, while China boosted taxes on $110 billion worth of US imports, ranging from 5% to 25%. In 2019, these measures lead to a significant decline in bilateral commerce. President Trump declared on May 10, 2019, that he would consider increasing tariffs on almost all of the Chinese imports that were still in stock. A prolonged trade dispute between the United States and China that could be threatening to the economy of China.

Congress is very interested in China’s expanding economic strength on the world stage along with the trade and economic policies it upholds, since they have a big impact on the US. Despite being a sizable and expanding market for American businesses, China’s ongoing shift to a free-market economy has led to the adoption of economic policies that are considered unfavorable to American interests, such as industrial regulations and the illegal use of intellectual property.

It is essential to take into account China’s rise within the larger framework of international relations, which has been shaped by both the collapse of the West and China’s rising. And the world is heading for a trade conflict.

During its rise, China has produced several remarkable inventions. In fields like technology, e-commerce, and renewable energy, they have been raising the standard. Businesses like Tencent, Alibaba, and Huawei have had a big impact on the tech sector. In addition to making significant investments in green technologies, China is now the global leader in solar energy production. Seeing their developments and the global effect they’re creating is exciting.

Sughra Jan Muhammad graduated from the University of Balochistan, Quetta, in the Department of International Relations.

World's largest iceberg — 3 times the size of New York City — "on the move" for the first time in 37 years


BY STEPHEN SMITH
NOVEMBER 24, 2023 / CBS NEWS

The world's biggest iceberg — which is roughly three times the size of New York City — is "on the move" after being stuck to the ocean floor for 37 years, scientists confirmed Friday.

Recent satellite images show the iceberg, called A23a, is now moving past the northern tip of the Antarctic Peninsula and headed toward the Southern Ocean, according to the British Antarctic Survey.

The iceberg, which spans almost 4,000 square kilometers (or 1,500 square miles) in area, split from the Antarctic coastline in 1986, but then became grounded in the Weddell Sea, the BBC reported.

The British Antarctic Survey on Friday posted a time-lapse of satellite imagery, showing the iceberg's movement.

"Here's its journey out of the Weddell Sea after being grounded on the sea floor after calving in August 1986," the survey wrote.



Before its calving in 1986, the colossal iceberg hosted a Soviet research station. It's unclear why the iceberg is suddenly on the move again after 37 years.

"I asked a couple of colleagues about this, wondering if there was any possible change in shelf water temperatures that might have provoked it, but the consensus is the time had just come," Dr. Andrew Fleming, a remote sensing expert from the British Antarctic Survey, told the BBC. "It was grounded since 1986 but eventually it was going to decrease (in size) sufficiently to lose grip and start moving."

A23a will likely be ejected into what's called the Antarctic Circumpolar Current, which will put it on a path that has become known as "iceberg alley," the BBC reports. That is the same current of water that famed explorer Ernest Shackleton used in 1916 to make his storied escape from Antarctica after losing his ship, the Endurance. The legendary shipwreck was discovered off the coast of Antarctica just last year.

A satellite imagery of the world's largest iceberg, named A23a, seen in Antarctica, November 15, 2023. 

 COURTESY OF EUROPEAN UNION/COPERNICUS SENTINEL-3/HANDOUT VIA REUTERS

A23a's movement comes about 10 months after a massive piece of Antarctica's Brunt Ice Shelf — a chunk about the size of two New York Cities — broke free. The Brunt Ice Shelf lies across the Weddell Sea from the site of the Larsen C ice shelf on the Antarctic Peninsula. Last year, the Larsen C ice shelf — which was roughly the size of New York City and was long considered to be stable — collapsed into the sea.

'Adopt an axolotl' campaign launches in Mexico to save iconic species from pollution and trout

Academics in Mexico City are asking for donations to protect axolotls, an iconic fish-like type of salamander

Over its six year term the administration of President Andrés Manuel López Obrador will have given 35% less money to the country's environment department than its predecessor, according to an analysis of Mexico's 2024 budget.

ByDANIEL SHAILER Associated Press

November 24, 2023, 

FILE - A canal in Xochimilco Lake, the original natural habitat of the endangered Axolotl, in Mexico City, Oct. 8, 2008. Ecologists from Mexico's National Autonomous University relaunched a fundraising campaign Friday.

The Associated Press

MEXICO CITY -- Ecologists from Mexico's National Autonomous university on Friday relaunched a fundraising campaign to bolster conservation efforts for axolotls, an iconic, endangered fish-like type of salamander.

The campaign, called "Adoptaxolotl,” asks people for as little as 600 pesos (about $35) to virtually adopt one of the tiny “water monsters.” Virtual adoption comes with live updates on your axolotl’s health. For less, donors can buy one of the creatures a virtual dinner.

In their main habitat the population density of Mexican axolotls (ah-ho-LOH'-tulz) has plummeted 99.5% in under two decades, according to scientists behind the fundraiser.

Last year’s Adoptaxolotl campaign raised just over 450,000 pesos ($26,300) towards an experimental captive breeding program and efforts to restore habitat in the ancient Aztec canals of Xochimilco, a southern borough of Mexico City.

Still, there are not enough resources for thorough research, said Alejandro Calzada, an ecologist surveying less well-known species of axolotls for the government's environment department.

“We lack big monitoring of all the streams in Mexico City,” let alone the whole country, said Calzada, who leads a team of nine researchers. “For this large area it is not enough.”

Despite the creature’s recent rise to popularity, almost all 18 species of axolotl in Mexico remain critically endangered, threatened by encroaching water pollution, a deadly amphibian fungus and non-native rainbow trout.

While scientists could once find 6,000 axolotls on average per square kilometer in Mexico, there are now only 36, according to the National Autonomous university’s latest census. A more recent international study found less than a thousand Mexican axolotls left in the wild.

Luis Zambrano González, one of the university's scientists announcing the fundraiser, told The Associated Press he hopes to begin a new census (the first since 2014) in March.

“There is no more time for Xochimilco,” said Zambrano. “The invasion" of pollution "is very strong: soccer fields, floating dens. It is very sad.”

Without data on the number and distribution of different axolotl species in Mexico, it is hard to know how long the creatures have left, and where to prioritize what resources are available.

“What I know is that we have to work urgently,” said Calzada.

Axolotls have grown into a cultural icon in Mexico for their unique, admittedly slimy, appearance and uncanny ability to regrow limbs. In labs around the world, scientists think this healing power could hold the secret to tissue repair and even cancer recovery.

In the past, government conservation programs have largely focused on the most popular species: the Mexican axolotl, found in Xochimilco. But other species can be found across the country, from tiny streams in the valley of Mexico to the northern Sonora desert.

Mexico City's expanding urbanization has damaged the water quality of the canals, while in lakes around the capital rainbow trout which escape from farms can displace axolotls and eat their food.

Calzada said his team is increasingly finding axolotls dead from chrytid fungus, a skin-eating disease causing catastrophic amphibian die offs from Europe to Australia.

While academics rely on donations and Calzada's team turns to a corps of volunteers, the Mexican government recently approved an 11% funding cut for its environment department.

Over its six year term the administration of President Andrés Manuel López Obrador will have given 35% less money to the country's environment department than its predecessor, according to an analysis of Mexico's 2024 budget.

ABOUT

Shrouded in mystery, and defying typical biological laws like metamorphosis, the axolotl (pronounced AX-oh-lot-ul), a type of salamander, keeps its webbed feet firmly placed in infancy throughout its life.

Unlike other salamanders, axolotls are neotenic, meaning they keep juvenile characteristics into adulthood. The axolotl remains aquatic (like larvae) their entire life. Though it develops functional lungs, it uses its fancy, feathery gills to breathe underwater. Like youngsters, they retain external gills, a tail, and a body fin, and lack moveable eyelids.