Update on the Ukraine-Russia Conflict
Implications and Lessons for Defense Technology
Good morning,
Last week, we witnessed the beginning of the long-awaited Ukrainian counter-offensive.
The path to territorial restoration will be long and bloody, but this marks a significant shift in the campaigns and battles there.
It also got me thinking about some of the lessons we can be drawing for the development of Defense Technology moving forward.
Background
The ongoing conflict between Ukraine and Russia has reached a critical juncture, with both sides heavily invested in the outcome. Despite initial setbacks, Ukraine has managed to fend off a full-scale invasion, forcing the world’s second strongest army to culminate far before reaching their objective (Kyiv).
After fighting Russia to a stalemate, seeing a limited counteroffensive in 2022 that reclaimed some territory, and spending the winter consolidating and reorganizing (including new foreign aid), Ukraine has now begun a more deliberate, methodical counteroffensive.
The conflict has not only revealed the significance of Western military support but has also highlighted the evolving dynamics of defense technology in modern warfare. In this edition, we’ll look at the current state of the war and discuss the implications and lessons learned for the defense technology ecosystem.
The Shifting Battlefronts
After Russia's failed attempt to seize Kyiv, its forces redirected their focus back towards eastern Ukraine. By connecting the occupied Donbas region with illegally annexed Crimea through Mariupol, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson, Russia aimed to consolidate its control over strategically important territories and to create a land bridge preventing the cutting off of its strategic bases in Sevastopol. However, Ukraine's tenacity and resilience have impeded Russia's progress, resulting in heavy casualties on both sides. The recent initiation of Ukraine's counteroffensive signals a turning point, but it is expected that the conflict will continue for years to come.
So far, the Ukrainian counteroffensive has seemed to focus on the south east of the country. The counteroffensive has already met with challenges as even while preparing for the counteroffensive, Ukraine had to contend with the collapse of the Kakhovka Dam near the southern city of Kherson. It seems most likely that Russian military saboteurs are behind the dam’s destruction. Of course, not everyone agrees that it was the Russians that caused the damage, although it remains the most likely explanation. Regardless, the dam’s destruction has caused both massive short-term and long-term damage and challenges.
Now, as we look forward to the summer and Ukraine’s campaign, we know that it will not be easy. The beginning campaign showed massive shortcomings in Russian operational art (an irony that any trained operational artist will appreciate). Nevertheless, the Russians have made significant changes in their command chains, supply chains, tactics, and weapons that will make Ukraine’s attempt to restore its territory a real slog. They’ve fortified their positions, they’ve accelerated the deployment of electronic warfare systems, and they’ve increased their stand-off using gliding missiles. Even the U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, GEN Mark Milley, says “this will be a back-and-forth fight for a considerable length of time.”
Western Military Support:
Ukraine has benefitted greatly through this fight from the contributions of the west (as largely characterized by NATO and the United States), which have played a pivotal role in providing military and humanitarian aid to Ukraine.
Western military equipment, including long-range fires such as HIMARs, cruise missiles, and long-range kinetic UAS (Unmanned Aerial Systems), has proven crucial to Ukraine's success. Air defense systems, such as the Patriot missile systems, have helped defeat Russian aerial attacks, while armored units equipped with British Challenger main battle tanks and German Leopards have bolstered Ukraine's ground forces. The support of autonomous systems has also significantly enhanced Ukraine's capabilities on the battlefield. And the promise of advanced multirole aircraft—specifically the F-16—will further enhance Ukraine’s efforts and hopefully tip the balance in the air fight from parity to one of superiority.
From a very pragmatic perspective, the Ukraine war offers donor countries an incredible opportunity to assess the effectiveness of major weapons systems, doctrine, tactics, and more. It also offers significant insights into the changing character of warfare, helping our defense industries to better anticipate future threats, for which we must prepare.
Unseen Aid from Unlikely Sources
While the Western world has been at the forefront of supporting Ukraine, Russia is likewise receiving aid from antagonist countries that support the vision, which Russia exports. That vision is one of autocracy, where might-makes-right. It’s a vision wherein the strong take what they want, and the weak must suffer and endure. It’s a return to a system and society-of-states that existed centuries ago, wherein wars were fought simply because a belligerent wanted more space.
These reactionary geopolitical actors are pumping money to Russia (often discounted buying oil from the sanctioned country), giving advanced weapons systems, and providing schematics and blueprints, like for the Iranian Shahed UAV. China, Iran, and North Korea are all leading the effort to keep Russia equipped and supplied. It is likely that their intentions are similar to our own: to force the other side to spend blood and treasure for a war that it will ultimately lose and to gain insights into the technological innovations and developing practices of employment.
As a result, it’s incredible important that we draw the correct lessons from our observations.
Lessons Learned for Defense Technology:
The Ukraine-Russia conflict has provided valuable insights into the evolving nature of defense technology and its impact on modern warfare. The following key lessons can be drawn:
1. The significance of long-range fires: The ability to engage targets from a distance has proven crucial in this conflict. Long-range fires, including artillery, cruise missiles, and kinetic UAS, have enabled Ukraine to close the asymmetry that Russian fires enjoyed in 2014, gaining stand-off, causing significant damage to Russian command structures and reserves, and mitigating risks to Ukrainian forces. Russia has attempted to counter this through increasing electronic warfare measures including electronic jamming, introduction of hypersonic glide missiles to increase its own stand-off, and other technologically advanced means.
The United States must continue to develop advanced capabilities such as the Extended Range Cannon Artillery system, its own hypersonic weapons, and Collaborative Combat Aircraft. At the same time, we must also be exploring solutions that are less reliant on technology and that reduce our electronic signatures. We must continue to develop the ability to fight in GNSS-denied and electronically jammed environments. And we must build in low-cost mass, so that we don’t get caught in the trap of having luxury weapons that no commander will deploy, for fear of losing a $1B weapon.
2. The importance of robust air defense: Russian airstrikes have posed a significant threat to Ukraine. The deployment of effective air defense systems, such as the Patriot missile systems, has helped provide point protection to critical infrastructure. Unfortunately, the Russians have responded by continued indiscriminate strikes in areas that are not covered by the Patriot’s umbrella of protection.
For too long, the United States has neglected our air defense capabilities, confident in the air supremacy we’ve enjoyed in Afghanistan and Iraq. We must continue to produce systems that are known to be effective (Patriots), prototype and field short-range air defense systems, and explore directed energy capabilities.
3. The role of advanced armored units: Ukraine's use of British Challenger main battle tanks and German Leopards has showcased the importance of well-equipped and modern armored units on the battlefield. These tanks have provided enhanced firepower, protection, and mobility to Ukrainian forces. And, importantly, the continued use of armor even in the face of significant anti-armored capabilities disproves the chorus we heard in 2022 that ‘the tank is dead.’
The M1A2 Abrams main battle tank remains to this day the most formidable piece of land-based military equipment. You won’t catch me riding in a mobile foxhole, but I will tip my hat to those that do. To maintain our edge over the anti-armor systems our adversaries are development, we need to update the doctrine and tactics we use, further disaggregating our fighting forces. We also need to look at increasing automation. Having networked autonomous tanks supporting a crewed tank will build in resilience / redundancy while allowing for that dispersed and disaggregated fighting.
Of course, we need to continue to invest in the critical anti-armor capabilities that have made the Javelin the patron saint of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Years ago, I remember sitting in my office in Tbilisi, Georgia thinking about how to create swarms of small, networked ground robots equipped with Javelins. We need to invest in swarming and non-swarming, autonomous, and semi-autonomous systems equipped with anti-armor capabilities. Not just aerial systems either, although clearly there’s been significant progress there. Surface systems, underwater systems, and ground systems all need to be included in these efforts too.
4. The rise of autonomous systems: This is important enough that I’m going to state it twice—once in bullet #3 above and now here. Autonomous systems, including unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and ground-based platforms, have played a significant role in surveillance, reconnaissance, and target acquisition. Ukraine's successful utilization of these systems has demonstrated their potential in enhancing situational awareness and force effectiveness.
We’ve seen tremendous progress in the reliability of autonomous systems, the ease of using them, and their effectiveness. Whether we’re talking about the developments of collaborative combat aircrafts or the swarming capabilities of DARPA’s OFFSET program, we are at a point where it’s safe to say that the future of warfare will include crewed and uncrewed systems working together to achieve tactical objectives.
5. The impact of electronic warfare: Russia's expertise in electronic warfare, jamming, and other technical weapons has been a significant challenge for Ukraine. This conflict highlights the need for robust and adaptable countermeasures to mitigate the impact of such tactics.
I touched a bit on fighting in GNSS-denied environments earlier, and the threat of electronic warfare extends beyond that. We need to be training our junior leaders in radio discipline—reducing signals signatures. We need to be developing robust cybsecurity measures for our communications satellites. We need to be thinking about how we will be sensed across the spectrum (as an example, imagine an enemy satellite that uses multiple bands to detect not just visible signatures, but other signatures as well).
6. Speed: The war between Ukraine and Russia is developing at a rate that we’ve not seen previously. The reality is that while warfare does change, it usually does so very slowly (despite what proponents of the theory of “revolutions in military affairs” might say). This war is accelerating change.
To be prepared for further acceleration we must look carefully at the bureaucratic processes—sometimes referred to as ‘business rules’ in polite company—to better anticipate the changes coming and the needs of our warfighters. We must accelerate the requirements definition and capabilities development processes. We must foster innovation within the force (like Air Force Spark Cells) and within industry (through use of small business set asides and other tools that encourage entrepreneurial innovation).
Conclusion
The Ukraine-Russia conflict remains a protracted and challenging engagement with far-reaching implications.
There is, however, good news. There are plenty of lessons for us to learn by observing this conflict that will help us to be better prepared for future wars.
This war has shown that we must adapt technologically and procedurally.
And, we must…
Keep building!
Andrew