Drones Are The Predominant Weapon On The Future Battlefield

 A Ukrainian soldier launches a drone during battles in Bakhmut. (Reuters)
A Ukrainian soldier launches a drone during battles in Bakhmut. (Reuters)
TT
20

Drones Are The Predominant Weapon On The Future Battlefield

 A Ukrainian soldier launches a drone during battles in Bakhmut. (Reuters)
A Ukrainian soldier launches a drone during battles in Bakhmut. (Reuters)

Over the years, major wars have been characterized by the introduction of new doctrines, new tactics, and new technology. In 1453, the walls of Constantinople were breached by a gigantic cannon used by Sultan Mehmed II. Napoleon brought innovative new infantry tactics. In World War I, mustard gas and machine guns changed the battlefield. In World War II, it was aircraft carriers, blitzkrieg tactics and nuclear weapons.
Today, it is the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV), commonly known as the drone. In Afghanistan, Iraq, Ukraine, Azerbaijan and Gaza, drones have become an essential tool of modern warfare and whether used for surveillance, reconnaissance or attack, the skies over Kiev, Gaza, the Red Sea, the Persian Gulf, and the Taiwan Straits are filled with these small, deadly sentinels.
Drones are the dream of every combatant, whether major armies or non-state actors, and three attributes stand out. First, they are cheap... and plentiful. A small observation drone can be purchased from Amazon for less than $100 and delivered overnight. While it might not kill tanks, it can provide real-time video of the enemy trench line across the field, a rooftop sniper position, or an ambush site around the corner.
More advanced drones can fly higher, farther and stay in the air longer, and this is the bane of the support troops. While wars are fought on the front line with infantry, tanks and aircraft, wars cannot be won without keeping those front lines fed, fueled, and resupplied. It requires massive supply chains of ammunition dumps, fuel depots, repair facilities along with fleets of trucks and thousands of support troops to replenish the millions of tons needed daily to keep a small army fighting.
Most of that supply chain is well away from the front lines and before the proliferation of drones, it could only be observed intermittently and without sufficient accuracy for an enemy to target with artillery or missiles. Now, the entire area of operations is a battlefield and there is nowhere to hide. Drones can patrol above roads, reconnoiter locations with likely logistics stockpiles and zoom over to an infrared heat signal at night to discover a hidden artillery unit or a moving tank column. The power of drones to see throughout the depths of the combat zone, effectively creating a transparent battlefield, is unprecedented.
Drones can not only see targets throughout the combat zone, but they can also attack those targets. In military parlance, the goal is to establish a “sensor-to-shooter link” that can find a target in time and accurately and destroy the target precisely. Drones can solve the “sensor” part of the equation by providing real-time and GPS-accurate information. But until recently, even if the drone sensor is timely and accurate, the tools to attack that target have been relatively blunt. Conventional artillery and rockets are notoriously imprecise and often require hundreds of rounds to destroy a target. As but one example, in Ukraine over 65,000 rounds are fired each day, double the number of shells the US can produce per month.
Drones help solve the “shooter” problem as well. With the advent of laser designated and GPS guided precision weapons, an individual or aircraft with the proper equipment can guide a round onto a target with sufficient accuracy as to achieve a one-round kill. Yet individuals and aircraft are limited by flight conditions, aircraft availability, ground conditions, limited field of view and a host of other challenges that impair the ability to see or engage a target. Drones are not only far better at seeing targets but can also engage a target in several ways. They can provide a video downlink with precise targeting data, provide laser designation to guide a precision round onto a target, carry and fire missiles in its own payload or perform as a “suicide drone” to attack a target directly.
To many, drones are changing the nature of war and will be the predominant weapon on the future battlefield. In an extreme, theorists picture a battlefield filled with technology but devoid of humans. Self-driving tanks will be guided by operators far from the battlefield, drones and autonomous aircraft will be guided by artificial intelligence and ChatGPT and victory will be defined by who has any machines left over at the end of the battle.
That may be one day, but it is not today. Nor will it be soon. For now, drones are seen as invulnerable and revolutionary, but as is so often, radical new technology is quickly overtaken by a better technology which either leaps ahead or neutralizes that new technology. In the case of current drone technology, armies have been exploiting its advantage, but counter drone technology is racing to take away those advantages. Drones are not invulnerable – they can be shot down, they need to be guided, they need data links to pass information to operators and they need clear pictures of the target. Those elements can be interrupted or negated, particularly the critical radio links which can be jammed, spoofed, or blocked.
Despite their vulnerabilities, drones are having a significant impact on every battlefield, whether the high-intensity war in Ukraine, the attacks on international shipping off the coast of Yemen or counterterrorism operations worldwide. Drones have proven to be versatile, inexpensive, and extraordinarily effective, particularly deep targets such as command posts and artillery positions, and high-value targets such as terrorists. Inevitably, counter drone tactics and technology will somewhat reduce their overall effectiveness, but even if their capabilities are diminished, drones will retain an important and permanent role on the modern battlefield.



As Trump Seeks to Be a Peacemaker, Netanyahu Leaves Washington without Breakthrough on Gaza Deal

 Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, left, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, right, arrive for a meeting at the Pentagon, Wednesday, July 9, 2025, in Washington. (AP)
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, left, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, right, arrive for a meeting at the Pentagon, Wednesday, July 9, 2025, in Washington. (AP)
TT
20

As Trump Seeks to Be a Peacemaker, Netanyahu Leaves Washington without Breakthrough on Gaza Deal

 Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, left, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, right, arrive for a meeting at the Pentagon, Wednesday, July 9, 2025, in Washington. (AP)
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, left, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, right, arrive for a meeting at the Pentagon, Wednesday, July 9, 2025, in Washington. (AP)

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s trip to Washington this week netted President Donald Trump another nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize he covets, but the ceasefire the US leader sought for the war in Gaza didn't emerge.

Despite Trump throwing his weight behind a push for a 60-day truce between Israel and Hamas, no breakthrough was announced during Netanyahu's visit, a disappointment for a president who wants to be known as a peacemaker and has hinged his reputation on being a dealmaker.

“He prides himself or being able to make deals, so this is another test case,” said Rachel Brandenburg, the Israel Policy Forum's Washington managing director and senior fellow.

Trump’s ability to strike a ceasefire deal in the 21-month war will reveal the boundaries of his influence with Netanyahu, especially after their recent joint strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities that both leaders touted at the White House this week.

Beyond the back-to-back meetings Trump and Netanyahu had at the White House this week, there was little public evidence of progress at a time when the Republican US president is pushing to end the fighting.

‘Closer than we’ve been,’ but challenges remain

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Thursday that when it comes to a ceasefire in Gaza, “we’re closer than we’ve been in quite a while and we’re hopeful, but we also recognize there’s still some challenges in the way.”

Rubio, who spoke to reporters while traveling in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, also said that Trump “wants to see a ceasefire and we’ve invested a lot of time and energy.”

Beyond ending the bloodshed, ending the war in Gaza would give Trump more leeway to strike some of the broader agreements he seeks in the Middle East, such as expanding the Abraham Accords that started in his first term and normalizing relations with Syria’s new government.

“He wants to be the one who gets hostages home and see the war in Gaza end so he can move on to some of these bigger deals,” Brandenburg said.

Even if a truce is reached, Netanyahu has promised fighting will continue if necessary until Hamas is destroyed. The group, meanwhile, has conditioned the release of the remaining hostages on Israel's withdrawal from Gaza, a stipulation Israel has been unwilling to accept.

Trump-Netanyahu relationship sees a rebound

It’s unclear how much pressure Trump put on Netanyahu in their private talks this week. But the two leaders came into the visit seeming more aligned than ever — at least for now — fresh off the president having twice come to the Israeli leader’s assistance.

Trump made the risky move to join Israel’s attacks on Iran last month, delivering pivotal US firepower while alarming world leaders and some of Trump’s “America first” supporters. Trump also inserted himself into Israel’s domestic affairs, calling for Netanyahu’s yearslong corruption trial to be thrown out.

That’s a marked turnaround in their relationship, which had appeared somewhat strained in recent years.

Trump shocked some of his fellow Republicans and staunch supporters of Israel by publicly criticizing Netanyahu not long after Hamas attacked Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, setting off the conflict.

He said that Netanyahu “was not prepared” for the attack from Hamas and that Netanyahu had “let us down” just before the US killed top Iranian general Qassem Soleimani in 2020.

Even during his last visit to the White House earlier this year, Netanyahu seemed caught off guard when Trump announced the US would hold talks with Iran over its nuclear deal rather than embrace Netanyahu’s push for military pressure.

With their military objectives aligning for a time on Iran, the Israeli leader has worked to foster a warmer relationship.

In a video he released after the US strikes, Netanyahu spoke — in English instead of Hebrew — of the “unshakeable alliance” between their countries while repeatedly praising Trump.

“His leadership today has created a pivot of history that can help lead the Middle East and beyond to a future of prosperity and peace,” Netanyahu said.

Netanyahu tries the charm offensive on Trump

In his visit to Washington this week, the Israeli leader also showed he knows how to praise the president in a way that matters greatly to him when he unveiled a letter in front of reporters and cameras to announce he had nominated him for a Nobel Peace Prize.

Those gestures, though, may only carry him so far as Trump pushes for a deal that Netanyahu may not be able to accept.

“I think if Netanyahu stands in the way too much for too long of the sort of loftier objectives Trump has set out for himself,” Brandenburg said, “Netanyahu will be cast aside as more of a problem than an asset.”

Netanyahu, like many Israelis, believes Trump is the greatest friend they have ever had in the White House and is deeply grateful for the US strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites last month.

But the Israeli leader is also under mounting public pressure to end the war as hostages languish in captivity and more Israeli soldiers are killed in guerrilla-style attacks.

Israel’s military success against Iran has given him some political capital, but if he ends the war while leaving Hamas intact, he will have broken his repeated promise of “total victory.”

His far-right coalition partners have threatened to bolt if he does that, sparking early elections that could end his nearly unbroken 16 years in power and leave him more vulnerable to long-standing corruption charges.

That may prove too heavy a price for delivering the kind of lasting ceasefire sought by Trump and demanded by Hamas. Instead, Netanyahu, who is seen as a masterful politician by friends and foes alike, is expected to thread the needle.

In a video statement on Thursday, Netanyahu said that he would agree to a “temporary” 60-day ceasefire in return for the release of half the hostages remaining in Gaza, many of whom are believed dead, and that he would begin negotiations on ending the war.

But he conditioned any lasting ceasefire on Hamas giving up its arms – something the fighters have refused to do as long as Israel occupies parts of Gaza.

If Hamas can be disarmed through negotiations, “so much the better,” Netanyahu said. “If it is not achieved through negotiations in 60 days, we will achieve it in other ways — by using force.”