The Russian-Ukraine war has given a wrong idea of future wars. Arguably, a distinction has to be made between two ‘Militarily Equal’ belligerents and ‘Militarily Unequal’ opponents. Imagine, if Ukraine had nuclear weapons, would Russia have dared to invade Ukraine? It is a scenario of militarily unequal opponents. Though the USA and the West support Ukraine they cannot actively intervene because of the fear of the Russian weapons of mass destruction (WsMD).
Take the case of Kargil-99. Neither India nor Pakistan dared to cross the LoC (Line of Control) due to the fear of escalation of the war into a nuclear exchange. The same is the case for China and Taiwan, which is under the close protection of the USA. China’s Eastern Ladakh misadventure in 2020 could not go beyond border skirmishes because of India’s nuclear arsenal. North Korea often dares the USA but the USA cannot antagonise it with any military action. Therefore, the very doctrine and methodology of war-making are shifting to ‘sub conventional’ methods, what some describe as the ‘non-kinetic’ methods.
MAD Doctrine
Weapons of aggression such as tanks, fighters and field artillery have outlived their utility. It is an age of WsMD, supported by BVR (Beyond Visual Range) systems and A2/AD mechanisms
During the heydays of the US-USSR cold war in the last century, the doctrine of MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction) kept the two superpowers away from physical confrontation. The Cuban missile crisis of October 1962 had almost brought the two superpowers to the verge of a nuclear exchange. The crisis had started with the failure of the ‘Bay of Pigs’ invasion by the USA to topple Cuba’s Fidel Castro government. After the failure, the Soviet Union had reached a secret agreement with Cuba to deploy nuclear missiles in Cuba, in order to prevent a future invasion. However, the US intelligence agencies learnt about it and the crisis developed. Good sense prevailed and the Soviet Union backed out. MAD had worked.
It was almost similar to what has led to the Russian act in Ukraine? The fear of MAD is disallowing the USA to intervene. This is what happens when two ‘Militarily Equals’
Non-kinetic domains
Farzana Shah, a Peshawar-based journalist, writing in Pakistan Military’s Green Book-2020, a strategy document published every year, had called for ‘taking the war into non-kinetic domains’ — information/cyber warfare, electronic warfare (EW). The Green Book lays out the outline of Pakistan’s road map on Kashmir.
Farzana had contended that a single video clip or picture can change the perception of India, which it has built so painstakingly over the years. She goes on to add that Pakistan needs to keep the world’s attention on Indian Kashmir, and in order to do so, communication links inside the valley must be established. In short, she wanted a ‘misinformation campaign’ on India in the world along with ‘indigenised militancy’ in the Kashmir valley by the locals’.
Looking at the recent spurt in terrorist acts by LeT/Hizbul Muzahideen in Kashmir along with fake Twitter handles in the Middle East, particularly the UAE and Saudi Arabia, a narrative is emerging of a two-pronged offensive by Pakistan. Daily tweets of Pakistan’s former prime minister Imran Khan were aimed at building an anti-India narrative on ‘Islamophobia’ in India. Such a narrative is part of the ‘Fifth Generation Warfare’, which Pakistan has launched.
Hybrid Wars
It flows from above that the wars (nations at conflict) in the 21st century won’t be won by direct or indirect methods of using physical ‘brute force’ but by invisible methods and without firing a bullet. Welcome to the ‘Designer Wars’ of the 21st Century! They are also referred sometimes to as ‘Hybrid Wars’. It is time we understand as to how this modus operandi of waging wars has evolved over the centuries.
The objective of future wars is total destruction of the adversary by cyber warfare, information warfare, economic warfare and sponsored violence.
It is important to understand that warfare from the days of Clausewitz has undergone tremendous change. He had rightly observed that war in every period had its own doctrine and strategies. From spears, swords, bows and arrows to gunpowder, tanks and fighter aircraft, the weapon systems have now entered a phase where they can be used effectively to destroy targets far away from the scene of the battle.
Deadly lethality, enhanced ranges and computerised accuracy of the weapon systems have obliterated ‘Fronts’ and ‘
Big lesson
One of the big lessons from the Ukraine invasion by Russia is that the modern weapon systems impose severe restrictions on the aggressor. Drones and missiles can pick up moving targets at longer distances and the defender can play havoc with them. Besides Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) systems can add to the aggressor’s miseries. I have been saying for many years that weapons of aggression such as tanks, fighters and field artillery have outlived their utility. It is an age of WsMD, supported by BVR (Beyond Visual Range) systems and A2/AD mechanisms.
Drones, missiles, Swarm Systems, Laser Killers, EMP Guns (Kali-5000), A-SAT killers and, of course, A2/AD systems like Iron Dome or S-400/S-500 will dominate the battlefield of tomorrow
Land warfare has given way to SAS (Space & Seas) battle zones. ‘SAS Denial’ is of significance in any future war. India must not waste resources on SAS Domination. Focus on WOM (war by other means) or what I also call Designer Wars of the future. The objective of such wars is not the annexation of territory but total destruction of the adversary. Cyberwarfare, Information warfare, economic warfare and sponsored violence would play a key role in subjugating your adversary.
Days of monkey dance across borders by soldiers, tanks and field artillery are long over — they need to be consigned to military history museums. Drones, missiles (hypersonic, ballistic & cruise), Swarm Systems, Laser Killers, EMP Guns (Kali-5000), A-SAT killers and of course A2/AD systems like Iron Dome or S-400/S-500 will dominate the battlefield of tomorrow. Good old Infantry would have to reorient itself to CI job or as a border security force.
Emerging strategy
Good old Infantry will have to reorient itself to CI job or as a border security force
The emerging strategy seems to ‘contain adversary and implode’ it from within. Sponsoring insurgency, communal violence and political agitations in an enemy nation is the conjoined twin of the main strategy. It is a policy of shaking hands with one hand and stabbing with the other. A smiling face is no guarantee of friendship. It is in this context that one has to understand the role of WsMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction).
The evolution of weapon systems is termed RMA (Revolutions in Military Affairs). As the new weapon systems came on the scene, the strategies or doctrines of war underwent a massive shift. This paradigm shift from time to time in war-making is called ‘Generations of Warfare’. In fact, as Alvin Toffler observes in his book ‘War and Anti-War’, it was actually a transition from ‘Brute Force Wars’ to ‘Brain Force Wars’. One can further divide the evolvin
g shapes of war as ‘Hybrid’, ‘Non-contact’, or even ‘WOM’ (War by Other Means). It is therefore essential to understand how ‘Generations of Warfare’ have evolved. It will be analysed in Part 2 of this essay.
-An ex-NDA and Wellington Staff College graduate, Col Rajinder Singh is a renowned author and security analyst. He has authored four books, two individually and two in collaboration. His best-selling books are Kashmir – A Different Perspective and The ULFA Insurgency. The views expressed are of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Raksha Anirveda
-An ex-NDA and Wellington Staff College graduate, Col Rajinder Singh is a renowned author and security analyst. He has authored four books, two individually and two in collaboration. His best-selling books are Kashmir – A Different Perspective and The ULFA Insurgency. The views expressed are of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Raksha Anirveda
