By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Ukraine’s Armed Forces have intensified their operations in Russian-occupied territories, successfully striking key military assets. In Crimea, two Project 22460 Hunter patrol ships and two Be-12 Chayka anti-submarine aircraft were targeted near Sevastopol and Yevpatoria, respectively. These strikes contribute to Ukraine’s strategy of systematically degrading the aggressor’s combat capabilities. Additionally, in Zaporizhzhia Oblast, a Tornado-S multiple launch rocket system, analogous to HIMARS, was destroyed.
Read the original article here
Ukraine has been demonstrating remarkable strategic prowess, recently executing significant strikes against Russian forces in occupied territories, most notably in Crimea. The effectiveness of these operations, particularly the targeting of Russian aircraft and naval assets, signals a critical shift in the dynamics of the conflict, showcasing Ukraine’s advanced capabilities and innovative approaches to warfare. This ongoing pressure on Russian infrastructure and military hardware underscores a broader transformation in modern combat.
The landscape of warfare is undeniably being redefined by the conflict in Ukraine. It’s almost as if history will be cleaved into two distinct eras: the “pre-Ukraine war” and the “post-Ukraine war,” at least in terms of military strategy. Ukraine has adeptly integrated lessons learned from past conflicts, such as those observed in Afghanistan and the tactics employed by groups like ISIS. This includes a keen understanding of the importance of disrupting supply lines – attacking the trucks that feed an army – and striking at the rear of enemy formations rather than engaging solely in head-on confrontations.
Drones, in particular, have emerged as a game-changing element. Their increasing sophistication and effectiveness are becoming a central feature of any battle plan, especially when facing an invading force. The current era is characterized by the rapid evolution of drone technology, with anti-drone countermeasures struggling to keep pace. While this technological advantage is currently in Ukraine’s favor, it’s a situation that is unlikely to remain static. In the coming decade or so, we can anticipate further advancements in drone capabilities and, crucially, in the technologies designed to counter them, leading to yet another evolutionary leap in warfare.
Reflecting on the early stages of the full-scale invasion, it was striking to witness Ukraine’s fight against a Russia that initially held significant advantages and was capable of making territorial gains. What unfolded was, in essence, a high-tech insurgency. Ukrainian forces combined the guerrilla-style tactics of groups like the Taliban – employing Stingers, drones, and modern communication systems – with a remarkably effective approach that dismantled Russia’s formidable, yet largely obsolete, tank army with surprising speed.
This was the very army that, during the Cold War, NATO perceived as a threat so immense that it might necessitate the use of nuclear weapons to contain. Yet, this force was halted and systematically picked apart just a few dozen miles from the Russian border, achieved by defenders who did not possess air superiority. This outcome was a stark testament to the adaptability and ingenuity of Ukraine’s defense.
Furthermore, Ukraine has developed and implemented modern, cost-effective technical solutions to counter Russia’s overwhelming artillery bombardments, and they have continued to innovate from that foundation. In contrast, Russia’s military logistics have visibly degraded, resorting to rudimentary transportation methods like donkeys, golf carts, and dirt bikes for assaults. Meanwhile, Ukrainian forces are constantly devising novel strategies that are being closely studied by military analysts worldwide, demonstrating a significant gap in innovation and adaptation.
The overall picture is one of impressive resilience and strategic advancement. While acknowledging the impressive nature of these developments, there’s also a shared sentiment of apprehension regarding the potential evolution of warfare. The possibility of advanced drone technology falling into the wrong hands after the conflict is a genuine concern, and the idea of warfare becoming increasingly automated and detached raises troubling questions about its future trajectory.
There’s a pragmatic, albeit grim, pathway for advanced military technology to proliferate. Corrupt elements within Russian command structures could very well lead to the sale of drones on the black market, a scenario that would inevitably accelerate their accessibility to non-state actors. Insurgents have already been utilizing basic quadcopter-bombs for years, and integrating fiber-optic controls into such devices is a relatively straightforward technological progression.
The implications of widespread access to such technology are significant. If, for instance, a nation like Hamas had access to sufficient 3D printing capabilities and open ports for components, it’s plausible that similar drone technology could have been deployed during past escalations. This highlights the urgent need for vigilance and a realistic assessment of the evolving threat landscape.
Ultimately, the current situation underscores a fundamental truth: strength provides options, while weakness limits them. In a world where advanced military technologies are becoming increasingly accessible, maintaining a position of strength, both militarily and strategically, is not merely an advantage, but a necessity for self-preservation. Ukraine’s recent successes serve as a powerful illustration of what can be achieved through innovation, adaptation, and unwavering resolve in the face of overwhelming odds.