Umaima Ali-UAV-Rus-War-Oped thumbnail-Dec-2024-AP

‘He who can handle the quickest rate of change survives.’ John Boyd’s OODA Loop — Observe, Orient, Decide, Act — reminds us that victory belongs to those who can adapt faster than their opponents. For its survival, underdogs like Ukraine must withstand the stronger side’s push for a quick victory. When Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, majority of military analysts anticipated that Moscow would take control of the airspace due to its air superiority. However, Ukrainian defences were able to put up reasonable resistance against Russia with its innovative, low-cost and effective employment of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs).

The use of UAVs has been pivotal in Ukraine’s efforts to counter Russian air superiority. Recognising the strategic importance of drones, Ukraine integrated them as a critical military capability. Russia’s initial shortcomings in air defence and electronic warfare (EW) left gaps in its control over the electromagnetic spectrum, allowing Ukraine to exploit this vulnerability. For instance, Ukraine deployed larger UAVs like the Turkish TB2 Bayraktar, which played a significant role in notable operations, such as sinking the Russian flagship Moskva.

As Russia adapted to these tactics, detecting and neutralising larger drones became more feasible. In response, Ukraine shifted to employing smaller drones to maintain operational effectiveness. Similarly, Russia has also utilised UAVs to achieve key objectives. In November 2024, for example, it launched a large-scale attack involving 120 missiles and 90 drones targeting Ukraine’s power infrastructure ahead of winter. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy claimed that Ukrainian defences intercepted 140 air targets, however, the attack caused civilian casualties and damaged power plants, highlighting the devastating potential of UAV operations.

The Russia-Ukraine war has become an ongoing ‘innovation race,’ with both sides continuously adapting to each other’s successes and developing sophisticated strategies to counter enemy drones. This cycle of innovation, adoption, and counter-innovation creates a dynamic feedback loop. For example, in October 2023, Ukrainian forces leveraged First Person View (FPV) drones operating on standard hobby frequencies to advance several hundred meters near Avdiivka with minimal casualties. These hobby frequencies, commonly used for transmitting commands and receiving video feeds from drones, initially provided a tactical advantage. However, by January 2024, Russian anti-UAV systems began exploiting these same frequencies to disrupt and down Ukrainian drones, forcing a tactical shift. In response, Ukrainian forces adapted by switching to custom-made frequencies for their UAVs by February 2024. This innovation allowed Ukraine to deploy swarms of small drones operating on non-standard frequencies, enabling them to surveil and disrupt Russian defences near the Kursk border. The resulting action not only paralysed Russian communications for days but also diminished the effectiveness of Russian Lancet drones in the area.

Ultimately, the strategic advantage in this conflict rests with the side that can outpace the other in adapting to technological and tactical shifts.

Startups in Ukraine are developing AI-enabled drones capable of operating in swarms to disrupt Russia’s energy industry. On the other hand, Russia plans to integrate Artificial Intelligence (AI) into Iranian Shahed-136 kamikaze drones, introducing a new challenge for the advanced air defence systems of Ukraine. At the NATO-Ukraine Defence Innovators Forum held in Poland in June 2024, participants warned that Russia possesses the capability to replicate straightforward innovations. As a result, Ukrainian operators must proactively anticipate and develop countermeasures against their systems before deploying them on the battlefield. In this regard, Ukraine has been leveraging its commercial industry, fully supported by the West during the war,  to maximise the potential of its private sector. From within its tech industry, a startup-style drone manufacturing industry has emerged. However, the industry is still underutilised due to limited government funding. Russia’s military-industrial complex has also been hindered by domestic capability shortfalls and technological restrictions imposed by global sanctions. In response, Moscow has initiated long-term indigenous efforts to reinforce production, improve its training programmes as well undertaken international partnerships to acquire necessary components and technology for drone development.

The Russia-Ukraine war highlights the dual role of drone technology as both a force multiplier and a disruptive equaliser. While drones have assisted the underdog in the Russia-Ukraine war, their limitations and counter-innovations demand a balanced integration of human adaptability and technological innovation to maintain strategic advantages. Future wars will depend on the integration of advanced systems that are refined and resilient to endure both obsolescence and enemy’s countermeasures. Future wars will be won by the sophistication of one’s intellect, creativity and engineering precision.

Umaima Ali is a Research Assistant at the Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies (CASS), Islamabad. She 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 »