09. Syed Ahmed Ali-Tac-UAV-War-Oped thumbnail-April-2025-AP

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), commonly known as drones, have come a long way from being deployed as a tactical reconnaissance platform during the Bosnian conflict, to becoming a staple in modern warfare. Drones gained prominence, particularly during the War on Terror, where the United States utilised the MQ-9 Predator as its preferred tactical strike platform.  Modern drones have been increasingly fitted with deadly munitions and sophisticated technology to conduct more complex tactical operations. As a result of technological advancements, drones can conduct diverse operations such as precision strikes, disruption of enemy communication, and logistical support. The low cost and scalability of drone production means that drones can now be deployed in mass numbers. This has driven a trend in contemporary conflict, where the tactical role of drones has expanded, often overlapping the combat roles of conventional platforms like aircraft and artillery.

The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict marked the first instance in which drones were deployed at scale and employed as primary front-line assets. Azerbaijani forces notably utilised Turkish Bayraktar TB2 UAVs and Israeli-manufactured loitering munitions in their operations. During the conflict, drones carried out effective strikes against Armenian T-72 main battle tanks and S-300 air defence systems, demonstrating their tactical value in neutralising high-value targets. The Russo-Ukrainian conflict is another example where mass deployment of drones has been observed. However, unlike the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, both Russia and Ukraine possess advanced drone and counter-drone capabilities. This has contributed to a protracted war of attrition, in which traditional manoeuvre warfare has become largely unfeasible. Surveillance drones provide real-time targeting data, exposing any massed troop movements to immediate artillery strikes. Consequently, both sides rely on entrenched positions, inflicting sustained losses through long-range artillery and first-person view (FPV) drone attacks. The conflict is characterised by indirect fire, dispersed unit formations, limited mobility, and incremental territorial gains.

Mass mobilisation and sophistication of drone technology have led to the expansion of unmanned platforms which may tactically displace conventional platforms. For example, the role of reconnaissance which has traditionally been played by observation helicopters (OH) and aircraft, is now being exclusively done through UAVs. The United States (US) has even tasked a specialised Marine Corps Attack Drone Team (MCADT), which will serve as a centre for expertise in FPV drone operations. Russia has introduced innovative fibre-optic drones that are resistant to jamming and capable of navigating confined spaces and buildings. These drones serve as effective alternatives to artillery when there is no direct line of sight and targets are fortified behind concrete or other hard materials. They can bypass such defences and deliver payloads with precision, maximising damage. These advancements have increased demand for drones, whose expanding tactical role increasingly mirrors that of conventional military units.

State and non-state actors prefer to use UAVs over conventional units as they provide several key advantages. First, drones reduce the risk of losing human pilots; which is crucial when there are limited trained personnel.  Second, drones are relatively easy to maintain and manufacture. For state actors, this allows scalability. For non-state actors, it can lower the threshold of acquiring a rudimentary air force, which was previously limited by infrastructure and sophisticated technical equipment.  Third, UAVs offer an asymmetric capability, enabling the destruction of high-value targets at a fraction of the cost of conventional systems.

However, the low-cost of drones comes at the expense of capabilities which restricts them from conducting technically sophisticated operations. Most combat drones have limited payload capacity, inferior sensors, sensitivity to bad weather, slower speed, and noisy engines. This greatly exposes these drones to enemy air defences and limits their operational performance.  For example, a report indicates that 60 to 80 percent of Ukrainian FPV drones failed to reach their target and were more effective against infantry than armoured vehicles. This statistic changes drastically, however, when FPV drones are paired with artillery which can immobilise or destroy armoured targets like tanks.  To increase the firepower of drones, more technically superior drones are required like the Bayraktar TB2. But, these types of drones while capable of engaging armoured targets, are more vulnerable to enemy air defence systems than FPV drones, due to their larger size and smaller numbers.

While evaluating the strengths and limitations of drone warfare, it becomes evident that UAVs cannot fully replace conventional combat units. Although FPV drones may offer greater accuracy, they lack the firepower and sustained impact of traditional artillery. Similarly, despite their cost-efficiency, UAVs are unable to operate effectively in highly contested airspace in the same manner as conventional aircraft. This leads to two key conclusions regarding drone technology. First, drones have not supplanted conventional platforms; rather, their role on the modern battlefield has evolved into a more specialised function. Second, drones serve as force multipliers, enhancing the effectiveness of conventional tactical platforms by improving situational awareness, line of sight, and target precision. These insights underscore that contemporary warfare increasingly relies on a synergistic combination of asymmetric and conventional capabilities to address evolving complexities of the battlefield. Therefore, it is likely that middle powers like Pakistan may deploy drones to enhance their asymmetrical capabilities against larger adversaries. Looking ahead, the integration of autonomous systems and AI-driven targeting may further redefine the tactical balance in regional theatres.

Syed Ahmed Ali is a Research Assistant at the Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies (CASS), in Islamabad, Pakistan. He can be reached at [email protected]


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

The US-Israel War on Iran: Objectives, Strategy, and Escalation Management

Zahra Niazi
‘States tend to overestimate themselves or the benefits and swiftness of war, and to underestimate their opponents’ capabilities, intentions, or the costs and duration of war.’ If anything, the 2026 war initiated by the United States and Israel against Iran shall be remembered in the annals of warfare among the most visible manifestations of this dynamic.
The war, immediately preceded by the January mass protests in Iran, did not represent a sudden rupture but rather the continuation of a 47-year-long confrontation and a more intense phase of the June 2025 war.
The US Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, defined the war’s objectives as being laser-focused: to destroy Iran’s missile capabilities and its security infrastructure, while ensuring that it could never develop nuclear weapons. Beyond these stated objectives, among the priorities on the continuum also lay the objective of regime change, with both President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu explicitly calling on the Iranian population to take over the government at the outset of the war.

Read More »

Marka-e-Haq to the Peace Talks: Pakistan’s Middle Power Status

On 7th May 2025, Pakistan’s military forces took the international security community by surprise when it demonstrated operational superiority against its larger belligerent adversary India with its rapid and coordinated response. The Four-Day conflict proved to be a watershed moment for Pakistan, marking its rapid emergence as an important player in the region. In recent years, amidst the ongoing global competition between the United States and China, Islamabad has adopted a position of ’Strategic Balancing,’ where it maintains ties of cooperation with both Beijing and Washington. Deft diplomacy, emphasis on geo-economics, and credible conventional and strategic deterrence have remained the foundational pillars for Pakistan’s ambition as a rising middle power

Read More »

Debunking the S-400 Shield: Lessons from the India-Pakistan Conflict

Air defense has always been a central aspect of warfare. In South Asia, the phenomenon carries immense significance due to compressed reaction times. In this context, one of the most-hyped systems is the Russian-made S-400, touted by New Delhi as a one-stop solution to counter aerial threats from both Pakistan and China.
The 2025 conflict between India and Pakistan marked an important chapter in testing the S-400 technology. The conflict began on May 7, when India attacked what it alleged were terrorist targets in both Pakistani-held Kashmir and Pakistan proper, using drone and missile strikes. The conflict lasted for four days, culminating in a U.S-facilitated ceasefire. However, the brief conflict debunked a lot of the myths regarding the S-400 technology.
First, India claimed that the mobile S-400 would be able to control Pakistan’s airspace. In contrast, Pakistani aircraft continued to operate freely, according to official briefings by the Pakistani military. Although the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) aircraft were in their own airspace, they were still within the air defense range.

Read More »