Strategic Lessons From The Ukraine Conflict

Strategic lessons from the Ukraine conflict
Source: By Harsha Kakar: The Statesman
In 2017, Manohar Parrikar, as the defence minister, reduced India’s

ammunition holding from 40 to 10 days on the premise that future conflicts
would be short, intense, and swift. This was a follow up of a CAG report which
stated that Indian ammunition supplies can only sustain a war up to 10-15
days. A substantial hike in revenue expenditure in this year’s defence budget
appears to be to increase ammunition holdings beyond current levels. This was
just one of the many beliefs which have been dumped in the dustbin with the
Russia- Ukraine war completing one year with no sign of ending.
There are other lessons which merit attention. The most important is that
wars can be fought below nuclear thresholds for prolonged durations, especially
when one of the participants is a permanent member of the UNSC, employing a
veto to any insistence for a ceasefire. Calls from global bodies can be rejected or
ignored with no consequences. Further, a major power would be unwilling to stop
operations prior to achieving objectives, as it could involve loss of face, prestige
and international standing.
Global support to the weaker nation can be expected mainly to stem and
embarrass the adversary, rather than on ideology. Direct involvement by allies
or even partners would be unlikely as it could expand the conflict drawing
them in, implying proxy wars are possibly the new future. In such scenarios,
chances of early peace are unlikely. Assistance would remain below designated
redlines of the stronger adversary.
Ultimate gainers would be global armament industries, which push

governments to get involved. The war is also an opportunity to test weapon
systems for the global armament market. Loss of innocent lives can always be
justified. Sanctions remain the only tools to be employed, while ensuring they do
not impact nations imposing them. This is how future conflicts involving China
against any of its adversaries would play out.
Land has historically been the root cause of any conflict and will continue
to be so. Thus, primacy will remain with the army with other services creating
an environment for ensuring defence or capture of territory. Since land is
involved, war can rarely come as a surprise. There would be indicators especially
in this technological age where adversaries are monitored 24X7 employing
multiple means, though the warning periods may be reduced. This implies that
plans and resources to counter the adversary must be in place, especially where
borders are unsettled, and the scenario is volatile.
1|C V 8 . 0 : S y n o n y m s o f F i n a l C o n v e r t s |
To Join CV 8.0 WAT PI Course : https://azucation.com/
No single service is capable of ensuring victory or creating conditions for
victory. This is more pronounced in the Indian scenario where the land dispute
involves inhospitable terrain. While air and land power will be directly involved in
the conflict, sea power will ensure that the adversary is prevented from opening a
third front as also resources needed to prolong operations are denied to him.
With the advent of missiles, formidable air Defence systems and cheap
drones, all based on rapidly evolving technology, the role of airpower will
undergo a change. Its employment will have to be dovetailed with other aerial
weapon platforms to obtain maximum leverage. As accuracy of missiles increase,
their employment will become a new normal as infrastructure destruction
would gain precedence, intending to compel the adversary into accepting
unacceptable terms and conditions. There will always be a decision dilemma on
engaging targets by missiles or airpower. Missiles and drones would be essential
to suppress an enemy’s air defence systems prior to employment of air
power.
The days of air superiority and air dominance appear to have passed.
Simultaneously, missiles and specialized UAVs, such as loitering ammunition,
have short technological lifespans. Hence, they will need to be domestically
manufactured and at an affordable cost to ensure that they are frequently
upgraded. Technology will dominate the battlespace.
This brings forth the requirement of developing domestic armament

industries. Foreign supplies can be impacted during operations as also nations
aligned to the adversary may adopt delaying tactics in continuing supplies
during hostilities, necessitating adequate stocks being maintained. Allies and
alliances will be an advantage, especially if the adversary is a competitor. India
can expect large scale global support in any conflict with China and lesser in a
conflict with Pakistan.
Apart from a technology-dominated battlefield, informational and cyber

domains will act as force multipliers. Public morale and global perceptions can
be influenced by an organized informational campaign, while cyber-attacks can
impede the adversary in multiple ways including damaging his economy and
critical infrastructure. Both these tools must be effectively employed.
As war prolongs, the world moves on. War news will remain global
headlines for some time, subsequently relegated to back pages. Only nations
involved will remain concerned. Global bodies will regularly demand peace, but
their calls will be ignored. The aggrieved will seek regaining of its territory, while
the aggressor will continue till its objectives are met. Global concern would
remain only till nations overcome economic dependency on warring nations.
Europe appears to ignore the conflict now that it has overcome dependency on
Russian gas as well as Ukrainian wheat.
For the aggressor, military power ascendency, better economy and a
stronger industrial base is no guarantor for victory, as Russia has witnessed.
The scenario can be reversed with support from allies, will of the people, strength
and determination of its leadership. An experienced army, such as India’s, can
reverse the scenario rapidly. Training and equipping are therefore vital and
should never be ignored. Threatening employment of nuclear weapons will
remain unacceptable. A grinding war, as is currently enfolding in Ukraine,
benefits Ukraine while it is punishing on Russia.
The Russia-Ukraine war has already cost the globe in excess of USD 70
Billion, with thousands dead and millions displaced. Can we afford another one?
While wars are unnecessary, they will remain a reality for nations seeking
to change the status quo believing they possess the authority and power to do
so. Leaders secure for life, such as Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin, will attempt to
amalgamate perceived territory, hoping to go down in history as the greatest
leader the country has ever witnessed. Nations in their periphery must be
prepared for aggressive actions, not ‘if’ but ‘when’.

Strategic Lessons From The Ukraine Conflict

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Strategic Lessons From The Ukraine Conflict

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Strategic Lessons From The Ukraine Conflict

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Strategic lessons from the Ukraine conflict

Source: By Harsha Kakar: The Statesman

In 2017, Manohar Parrikar, as the defence minister, reduced India’s

Ultimate gainers would be global armament industries, which push

This brings forth the requirement of developing domestic armament

Apart from a technology-dominated battlefield, informational and cyber

You might also like