Two Years of War in Ukraine Has Changed the Way Militaries Think

Article content

(Bloomberg) — Since Vladimir Putin launched his full-scale invasion of Ukraine, military planners, world leaders and citizens have been piecing through the devastation to draw lessons from what has turned out to be the biggest war in Europe since 1945.

“This conflict will probably revolutionize warfare more than any other since World War II,” said Ruslan Pukhov, head of the Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies, a defense think tank in Moscow. 

Article content

Article content

Here are some of the ways in which it’s already doing that.   

1. Go Small

Instead of tanks and planes, nimble drones have emerged as the conflict’s weapon of choice. They overwhelm hulking tanks, kill troops and have allowed both sides to wreak havoc behind enemy lines. Ukraine’s use of inexpensive uninhabited maritime vehicles (UMVs) to target Russia’s Black Sea Fleet has popularized remote-controlled weaponry by sea. And the primacy of drones has set off another kind of competition: the race to disable them through signal jamming.

Other countries are taking note. According to industry estimates, the global drone market is expected to reach $260 billion by 2030, growing almost tenfold from the year before Russia’s full-scale invasion.

Unmanned crafts give commanders on both sides an aerial view of the battlefield, allowing them to monitor the enemy’s movements in real time — which is part of why the conflict has turned into a war of attrition. That means that, for all this technological advancement, World War I-style trench warfare supported by barrages of artillery has prevailed along the front line. That’s required the adversaries to churn out mass quantities of ammunition — with more or less success.

Article content

Article content

2. Pick a Side

The war in Ukraine has forged a more bipolar world. It sent Sweden and Finland running into NATO’s embrace after they had for so long resisted joining the alliance out of fear of antagonizing Russia. 

That decision came to symbolize how the world that three decades ago hailed the end of history is again descending into the old divisions between West and rest. Ukraine also renewed its push to join both NATO and the European Union, after its prospects had for years been on ice.  

Not all countries have rushed to choose sides. Turkey, a NATO member which styles itself (not without reason) as a broker between warring factions, didn’t join sanctions against the Kremlin. Neither did Israel or many of the countries of the so-called Global South.

As much as war has united the US and its traditional postwar allies, it has also taught it something about the reliability of these ties. Many in Europe are beginning to doubt the steadfastness of their transatlantic ally, after months of political spectacle have held up the release of over $60 billion in military aid. The prospect of Donald Trump’s returning as US president after November’s election is compounding their unease.

Article content

3. Sanctions Aren’t a Silver Bullet

Group of Seven nations have imposed an impressive array of sanctions on Russia over the past two years, cutting off its markets for energy, essential goods and technologies. They blocked much of Moscow’s access to the international financial system, immobilized its central bank reserves and froze the assets of hundreds of individuals and entities. 

But far from imposing the “massive and severe consequences” predicted at the war’s inception, they’ve neither deterred Russia’s war nor led to the collapse of its economy. That’s partly because of the country’s ability to circumvent restrictions — or mitigate their effects. 

Over time it will become more and more difficult for Russia to sustain these efforts: it has had to divert significant resources toward military spending and has been shut out of key export markets. Its import costs have risen. Against that backdrop, G-7 nations are focused on choking the country’s attempts to dodge select sanctions, such as those on technologies and electronics used in the weapons it sources through third countries.

Article content

4. Supply-Chain Independence Is Paramount 

The war has exposed the critical importance of domestic supply chains. When Ukraine needs more military supplies it usually has to negotiate with allies; when Russia does it’s more often able to boost production at industries it controls, paying in rubles along the way.  

Though Russia faces some shortages and its products tend to be inferior to those of its opponents, it was quicker to shift to a war footing. It also put into place supply routes through third countries to get its hands on banned components.

By contrast, European nations were slow to boost military production and crack down on sanctions evasion, often getting bogged down in procedural debates. Their ability to produce and source artillery lags behind that of Russia, leaving Kyiv rationing munitions as the war enters its third year. While Russia continues to press its advantage on the battlefield, allies can’t get enough weapons to Ukraine.

Kyiv is starting to boost its own production to avoid being so heavily reliant on allies, but the transition is taking time. 

Article content

5. It Could Happen Again

In a speech shortly after the invasion began, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz referred to the moment as a Zeitenwende: a profound turning point in history. The term came to symbolize the way the conflict shattered the optimism — some might say, the denial — in which Europe had previously been cosseted; for so long believing that a war of this magnitude could never happen on its soil.

It’s arguable that this understanding has taken too long to translate into action. Only now, two years into the war, is Germany itself meeting NATO’s military spending goal of 2% of GDP. Not much more than half of the remaining 30 members will reach it this year, although that’s a big jump from before the fighting began. 

Donald Trump has alarmed Europeans by threatening to encourage Russia to invade countries that don’t spend enough on defense. But they also have their own motivations for heeding this pressure. 

Having been caught unprepared, they’re trying to move onto the front foot. Countries from Denmark to Germany are working to beef up their defenses, with varying levels of determination. They calculate that within a few years, Putin may be ready to attack a NATO country.

—With assistance from Natalia Drozdiak, Daryna Krasnolutska and Alberto Nardelli.

Article content