AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka In July 2022, five months after Russia invaded Ukraine, we warned that we were likely witnessing a revolution in military affairs. Two weeks later, we got heavy pushback urging us to “stop saying war has changed.”
But it has changed. Ukraine is now using drones for deep-strikes and to envelop Russian forces in 10 to 20 mile kill zones on the frontlines. Likewise, Iran’s use of drones is proving effective against fixed U.S. military frontline positions and bases in the Persian Gulf region.
Retired U.S. Army Gen. David Petraeus has now argued that Ukraine’s use of unmanned aerial vehicles represents “a whole new concept of warfare.” Equally significant, the former commander and CIA director noted that “the real genius is how they’re pulling it all together” on the battlefield, melding its surveillance, targeting and strike capabilities into a unified platform. Given the advent of artificial intelligence, Petraeus foresees “algorithmically piloted drones that you can’t jam” further revolutionizing how modern warfare is fought on the frontlines.
Petraeus also warned that, “In some Western countries right now, they think that innovativeness is giving 50 drones to an armored battalion.” His opinion? “No. What we should do is scrap the armored battalions and replace them with a drone battalion.”
There is still a need for armored battalions in the U.S. Army, but that is still revolutionary thinking.
There are three key elements to a true revolution in military affairs: technological change, doctrinal change, and organizational change. The conduct of the conflict in Ukraine easily meets all three. As Petraeus noted, Kyiv’s use of sea and aerial drone technology is transformative. Ukraine has even set up a separate command — the Unmanned Systems Force — responsible for conducting the devastating deep-strike precision attacks against Russia’s oil and gas infrastructure and WildBerries distribution hubs.
Yet any good offense owes itself in part to a poor defense. Russia is supplying that right now, as successful strikes in and near Moscow and Saint Petersburg demonstrate. In that vein, Petraeus is rightly worried about the U.S. military’s capacity to defend against drones — especially algorithmic “drone swarms” controlled by AI. He called these autonomous systems “very, very worrisome.”
Iranian drones are already creating headaches for Admiral Brad Cooper, the commander of U.S. Central Command. Although he is capable of materially managing the risk, the U.S. is expending interceptors at a high rate.
On Monday, the Center for Strategic and International Studies released a report estimating that the U.S. has burned through upwards of 66 percent of its prewar stockpiles of Patriot interceptors and 62 percent of its THAAD interceptors since the war in Iran started on Feb. 28.
These systems are used to protect U.S. forces, facilities, munitions, and stores throughout the Middle East. Nonetheless, at higher altitude, there is considerable consternation on Capitol Hill. that these critical defensive systems — chiefly the interceptors — are being depleted too quickly. Many believe — rightly, in our view — that this is creating a strategic U.S. vulnerability in the Indo-Pacific, especially with regard to China and its designs on Taiwan.
The China hawks, led by Vice President JD Vance and Undersecretary of State Elbridge Colby, are signaling, likely through leaks, that the U.S. cannot fight a war with Iran and prevent Beijing from breaking out past Taipei and the first island chain of defense that has defined the core of the U.S. defense policy since the 1950s.
We strongly disagree with this, however. The U.S. must do both — especially since it is the same fight against the same Axis of Evil.
Existential threats are not an either-or option. China is the larger strategic threat, but a nuclear Iran controlling of the Strait of Hormuz and thus 20 percent of the world’s oil supply is also unacceptable.
And war is changing for China too. Plus, the U.S. has powerful naval assets, including submarines, that still give Beijing pause over its cost calculus to militarily seize Taiwan if it comes to that in the near future.
That all buys time for the U.S. But how will Washington spend it and what sense of urgency will be needed on Capitol Hill to use it wisely to eliminate two converging threats: AI-driven drone warfare and the need for more defensive assets to defend U.S. fixed positions against them.
None of this will be easy. The manufacturing bottleneck is real. It is not just a question of funding — that is the easy part. It is the scaling up that will take time and sustained effort on an accelerated basis. Plus, Washington cannot sleep on underwater and space-based drones. The future is nearly here.
National willpower is what is needed. Harnessing and unleashing it may require President Trump and Congress to start treating it as a national emergency. The U.S. is at war, and the nature of the war will soon get away from us if we don’t adapt quickly.
Mark Toth writes on national security and foreign policy. Col. (Ret.) Jonathan Sweet served 30 years as a military intelligence officer and led the U.S. European Command Intelligence Engagement Division from 2012 to 2014. They are the cofounders of INTREP360 and the INTREP360 Intelligence Report on Substack.
Add as preferred source on Google Tags David PetraeusCopyright 2026 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Comments: Link copiedMore Opinions - National Security News
See All
Opinions - National Security Will John Healey fund the UK defense increases he previously demanded? by Dov Zakheim, opinion contributor 6 days ago Opinions - National Security / 6 days ago 
