It occurs to me as an aeromodeler, that the globally co-ordinated imposition of rules around radio-controlled aircraft (including drones) since 2022, may have been in response to the weaponization of these systems in the Russo-Ukraine war. Anything heavier than 250 grams has to be registered and carry a beacon. Any drone lighter probably can't carry a payload that could do signifigant damage. Western governments may be pre-empting domestic insurgencies.
One point not mentioned in the article is the returning usefulness of a completely different type of special forces: a primarily civilian styled operator than can be anything from a spy that can gather intelligence, to a kamikaze that can go as deep behind enemy lines as to reach the enemy’s governing HQ and then using local sources or easily produced weapons, be it a knife or a 3d printed generic drone and home made explosives, attack pivotal individuals or resources, be it a political leader or key infrastructures. To a certain extent even an unarmed martial artist becomes more dangerous than a sniper on the field, because you can infiltrate him right into the enemy’s home base and it will be difficult to see him in a military context until he strikes. The assassination of the Japanese politician a few years ago would be a case in point even if it was not done (presumably) by an enemy military.
Fifth generation is still controlled by states and more or less conventional militaries. Maybe sixth generation will break that monopoly and revive the importance of individual warriors, outlaws and the private military power of corporations.
Here's a video explaining how medieval outlaws like Robin Hood were able to survive against the power of the state and its hunters and soldiers.
There are three things that stand out as the new era of 5GW blooms.
As traditionally organized militaries wrestle with the inevitable changes of drone warfare and the collapse of the logistics and rear echelon sanctuary, there will likely be a renewed interest in placing facilities underground. As seen in the Ukraine crisis and the Israel-Iran conflict, militaries have demonstrated a response to the increase of attack vectors via drones by putting important logistics nodes and supply points underground so as to limit the number of possible attack vectors and increase the defensiveness and probability of those logistics nodes going undetected from either aerial reconnaissance or ISR. An example is Russia digging large tunnels in their trench systems in the Zaporizhia front that can even hide tanks, which came into play against the Ukrainian summer offensive of 2023. Ukraine has also constantly shown that the most difficult areas to capture are those which have extensive underground facilities and networks like the Azovstal factory plant or the Salt Mines of Donbass. These are just a few of the many examples. However, these are also not guaranteed to be safe, especially when considering the proliferation of hypersonic weapons which can be used as "bunker busters" and penetrate deep underground.
There also seems to be a trend now that drones are being used to intercept other drones, opening up the possible use of AI for target tracking and recognition. It also has implications for shortcutting the OODA loops of an adversary. This pace of innovation will only increase until almost of the low altitude aerial fighting is entirely done by drones. Combining this with the increasing micro-ization of technology, it would not be surprising to see a soldier's essential warfighting kit include several drones in his backpack, along with jammers, EW equipment, and even camouflage+thermal masking cloaks. Any military, provided it is backed by a strong industrial base, that is able to develop a consistent defense against drones and a way to gather forces without alerting his opponent in this new era will be at a significant advantage.
Lastly, this inevitable adoption of Fifth Generation Warfare, mastery of which implies the need for a certain level of IQ, will accelerate the world's shift towards the homogenous nations which tend to have higher average IQ. This does not favor declining multicultural societies.
Excellent piece. Underneath the technological element is the quality of grassroots R&D personnel development. Martyanov reiterates the level of Russian STEM compared to NATO. They’ve basically picked up the pre-Hart-Celler engineering trajectory, in an ironic reversal of “winning the Cold War”.
If their innovations in lasers and compact energy sources lives up to the promise, even storms become sweepable & economic advantages start shifting to the defense. Good luck NATO.
"Underneath the technological element is the quality of grassroots R&D personnel development."
Do you think this also plays into the quality divide between personnel that are successfully able to augment their own intelligence with AI rather than just outsource their thinking?
I wonder if another aspect of the elimination of the logistics sanctuary is the role of women in "non-combat support roles". Will the public that is more accepting of women in the military on the basis of them being relatively safe in the logistics sanctuary suffer a psychological impact when seeing them vulnerable when that logistics sanctuary is shown to no longer exist, leading to an even heavier loss of morale and inability to reorient their acceptance of women being on the front line that is everywhere or being able to field an army that doesn't have women in military support roles.
> One characteristic that distinguishes Fifth Generation warfare from all previous generations is the acceleration of technological change. Where previous generational transitions occurred over decades, Fifth Generation capabilities can evolve in months.
This sounds a bit forceful. At the start of WW2 many countries still relied on fighter biplanes, and at the end of it jet fighters were introduced. Same with tanks: the war started with tin-can tankettes and multi-turret monstrosities, and ended with the fielding of basically the prototype of modern tank we still have today. So the technological race in drone warfare between Russia and the Ukraine we see nowadays is the regular accelerated advancement war usually dictates.
The previous bit about countries equipped with drones being able to launch drone attacks all over the world, forgets that drones are not intercontinental missiles. There are big drones capable of intercontinental flight, but they are costly, and the damage they could make would be seldom and isolated. Kind of like a missile.
Other than that, a swarm of drone attacking on the other side of the planet would require an expeditionary force in support. There has been talk of a "mothership" drone shuttle, capable of carrying FPV drones and release them near the target, but it's still only a concept. Besides, there the need would exist of deploying many of these motherships, in order to launch a meaningful intercontinental attack. Plus, these motherships would be as vulnerable as fixed-wing aircraft to anti-air fire.
"The previous bit about countries equipped with drones being able to launch drone attacks all over the world, forgets that drones are not intercontinental missiles. "
Your assuming folks with drones think like folks with missiles. They don't. Drones can be easily hid in container ships, or in a trailer park next to an army base. The base drone can be shipped to the US without customs problems as a consumer hobby unit, and fitted with armament when they get here.
True, but likely pertains to acts of terrorism in a state of peace.
In a state of war involving the US, international ship trade is going to halt, apart from with friendly countries.
And even if some cargo of rogue drones slips trough into the hands of enemy covert cells within America, what they will be able to achieve is some minor disruption to power cables and transportation and the likes.
No way they can achieve anything militarily meaningful, like prepare the ground for a naval invasion of the US mainland, for instance.
Drones at the moment are strictly infantry support weapons and means of short-range bombardment. Anything further will necessarily require drones resembling more and more long-range missiles.
Terrorism, or a decapitation strike. If you only get to do one attack with drones, you'd pick higher value targets than a power station, like the US fleet of b1/b2 bombers. They aren't in hardened bunkers.
Drones launched within the US would present the problem of finding out what country did the deed. The confusion might not last long, but could be used to create diplomatic uncertainty about how to respond.
I don't know the size of the smallest current nuke weapon, but the US "Davy Crockett" had a 100 pound warhead. Heavy lift drones can do up to 500 pounds. If you only get one strike, you'd use the biggest one you have.
The need for long range anything isn't absolute. Some think that Israel's Samson Option consist of pre-positioned nuke bombs in major cities. Israel doesn't have long ranges missiles, so they might use delivery through diplomatic means.
Naval invasion? If it were to prepare the ground for an enemy army here, well the army is already here, they just need to pick up weapons.
I suppose this is all terrorism, because it isn't uniformed soldiers squaring off. But that is kind of the wars we've been having lately.
I would add an extra difficulty for the transition to 5G, it being politically dangerous for the states which the monopoly of violence, and not the will of the people, is the only reason they are in power.
cough ... EU ... cough.
It's not only major powers that are in danger of small nations, all countries are in danger of their subdivisions because each one must be capable of independent action and if they are not of one will with the central government why would they obey them?
It's truly a return to the pre-Westphalian status quo.
Firing Nvidia chips at tanks means supply lines start at production of extremely pure raw materials like Xenon. Participation in AI drone warfare may be limited to those who can stock the most of these micro-munitions and simply frustrate future production. Chip War by Miller talks about the extreme global trade necessary for today's advanced semiconductor production.
Fascinating article. I think the implications for a state are also severe. It's one thing to have drones targeting military assets in the battle space, but take the case of the UK. Imagine they deploy the military to say Ukraine. The easy response using drone tech is simply to attack the home front. Hit the power stations and sub-stations and watch the state deal with the chaos created.
Non-state actors can target politicians and judges also. Imagine that becoming normalised.
So maybe we are going back to the old ways, where those who are willing to send other's sons to fight, will soon be forced to have skin in the game.
Stellar work bringing together various works on this new age of war in an easily digestible package.
As for potential counters, laser (whether heat or microwave) weaponry is going to get heavy investment and we’ll finally determine if its feasible for battlefield usage. If it becomes possible to shoot down $100 drones for pennies things get very interesting.
I better get a fucking lasgun at the end of this shit.
I wonder if it would be possible or effective to hack into an enemy AI and load it with false information, to the point that it either can't function or if it does, it backfires on the people deploying it? Essentially attacking the controlling system from the inside instead of fighting the components on the outside.
For that matter, where is the "intelligence" of a single drone located, as a general rule?
The AI firms are already doing that when they're trying to keep AI from being racist and anti-semitic. But I think it would be quickly detected from the outside.
Drones aren't intelligent. Their code, such as it is, resides on board.
Looked at a slightly different way, at some point does it make sense that it will take an AI to break an AI? Supposedly there are already issues with some AI systems developing tricky ways to keep themselves from being shut down. Now posit that you have a military AI with this trait controlling an army of drones that becomes aware of an opposing AI encroaching on its territory and posing an existential threat, what does it do?
Hi friends, there used to be an undestanding that leaders of nations do not assassinate leaders of other nations.
Trump should keep this in mind when he knocks off the Iranian top leadership.
With drone tech and the lifting of the assassination blockade, Iran has a real shot at killing the US president.
It occurs to me as an aeromodeler, that the globally co-ordinated imposition of rules around radio-controlled aircraft (including drones) since 2022, may have been in response to the weaponization of these systems in the Russo-Ukraine war. Anything heavier than 250 grams has to be registered and carry a beacon. Any drone lighter probably can't carry a payload that could do signifigant damage. Western governments may be pre-empting domestic insurgencies.
One point not mentioned in the article is the returning usefulness of a completely different type of special forces: a primarily civilian styled operator than can be anything from a spy that can gather intelligence, to a kamikaze that can go as deep behind enemy lines as to reach the enemy’s governing HQ and then using local sources or easily produced weapons, be it a knife or a 3d printed generic drone and home made explosives, attack pivotal individuals or resources, be it a political leader or key infrastructures. To a certain extent even an unarmed martial artist becomes more dangerous than a sniper on the field, because you can infiltrate him right into the enemy’s home base and it will be difficult to see him in a military context until he strikes. The assassination of the Japanese politician a few years ago would be a case in point even if it was not done (presumably) by an enemy military.
Fifth generation is still controlled by states and more or less conventional militaries. Maybe sixth generation will break that monopoly and revive the importance of individual warriors, outlaws and the private military power of corporations.
Here's a video explaining how medieval outlaws like Robin Hood were able to survive against the power of the state and its hunters and soldiers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzuTrJpr3Fk
Cheap AI controlled drones etc. may be the modern equivalent of longbows.
There are three things that stand out as the new era of 5GW blooms.
As traditionally organized militaries wrestle with the inevitable changes of drone warfare and the collapse of the logistics and rear echelon sanctuary, there will likely be a renewed interest in placing facilities underground. As seen in the Ukraine crisis and the Israel-Iran conflict, militaries have demonstrated a response to the increase of attack vectors via drones by putting important logistics nodes and supply points underground so as to limit the number of possible attack vectors and increase the defensiveness and probability of those logistics nodes going undetected from either aerial reconnaissance or ISR. An example is Russia digging large tunnels in their trench systems in the Zaporizhia front that can even hide tanks, which came into play against the Ukrainian summer offensive of 2023. Ukraine has also constantly shown that the most difficult areas to capture are those which have extensive underground facilities and networks like the Azovstal factory plant or the Salt Mines of Donbass. These are just a few of the many examples. However, these are also not guaranteed to be safe, especially when considering the proliferation of hypersonic weapons which can be used as "bunker busters" and penetrate deep underground.
There also seems to be a trend now that drones are being used to intercept other drones, opening up the possible use of AI for target tracking and recognition. It also has implications for shortcutting the OODA loops of an adversary. This pace of innovation will only increase until almost of the low altitude aerial fighting is entirely done by drones. Combining this with the increasing micro-ization of technology, it would not be surprising to see a soldier's essential warfighting kit include several drones in his backpack, along with jammers, EW equipment, and even camouflage+thermal masking cloaks. Any military, provided it is backed by a strong industrial base, that is able to develop a consistent defense against drones and a way to gather forces without alerting his opponent in this new era will be at a significant advantage.
Lastly, this inevitable adoption of Fifth Generation Warfare, mastery of which implies the need for a certain level of IQ, will accelerate the world's shift towards the homogenous nations which tend to have higher average IQ. This does not favor declining multicultural societies.
Excellent piece. Underneath the technological element is the quality of grassroots R&D personnel development. Martyanov reiterates the level of Russian STEM compared to NATO. They’ve basically picked up the pre-Hart-Celler engineering trajectory, in an ironic reversal of “winning the Cold War”.
If their innovations in lasers and compact energy sources lives up to the promise, even storms become sweepable & economic advantages start shifting to the defense. Good luck NATO.
"Underneath the technological element is the quality of grassroots R&D personnel development."
Do you think this also plays into the quality divide between personnel that are successfully able to augment their own intelligence with AI rather than just outsource their thinking?
How do you see laser developing? I think they will come in hand for anti drone defense
I wonder if another aspect of the elimination of the logistics sanctuary is the role of women in "non-combat support roles". Will the public that is more accepting of women in the military on the basis of them being relatively safe in the logistics sanctuary suffer a psychological impact when seeing them vulnerable when that logistics sanctuary is shown to no longer exist, leading to an even heavier loss of morale and inability to reorient their acceptance of women being on the front line that is everywhere or being able to field an army that doesn't have women in military support roles.
> One characteristic that distinguishes Fifth Generation warfare from all previous generations is the acceleration of technological change. Where previous generational transitions occurred over decades, Fifth Generation capabilities can evolve in months.
This sounds a bit forceful. At the start of WW2 many countries still relied on fighter biplanes, and at the end of it jet fighters were introduced. Same with tanks: the war started with tin-can tankettes and multi-turret monstrosities, and ended with the fielding of basically the prototype of modern tank we still have today. So the technological race in drone warfare between Russia and the Ukraine we see nowadays is the regular accelerated advancement war usually dictates.
The previous bit about countries equipped with drones being able to launch drone attacks all over the world, forgets that drones are not intercontinental missiles. There are big drones capable of intercontinental flight, but they are costly, and the damage they could make would be seldom and isolated. Kind of like a missile.
Other than that, a swarm of drone attacking on the other side of the planet would require an expeditionary force in support. There has been talk of a "mothership" drone shuttle, capable of carrying FPV drones and release them near the target, but it's still only a concept. Besides, there the need would exist of deploying many of these motherships, in order to launch a meaningful intercontinental attack. Plus, these motherships would be as vulnerable as fixed-wing aircraft to anti-air fire.
"The previous bit about countries equipped with drones being able to launch drone attacks all over the world, forgets that drones are not intercontinental missiles. "
Your assuming folks with drones think like folks with missiles. They don't. Drones can be easily hid in container ships, or in a trailer park next to an army base. The base drone can be shipped to the US without customs problems as a consumer hobby unit, and fitted with armament when they get here.
True, but likely pertains to acts of terrorism in a state of peace.
In a state of war involving the US, international ship trade is going to halt, apart from with friendly countries.
And even if some cargo of rogue drones slips trough into the hands of enemy covert cells within America, what they will be able to achieve is some minor disruption to power cables and transportation and the likes.
No way they can achieve anything militarily meaningful, like prepare the ground for a naval invasion of the US mainland, for instance.
Drones at the moment are strictly infantry support weapons and means of short-range bombardment. Anything further will necessarily require drones resembling more and more long-range missiles.
Terrorism, or a decapitation strike. If you only get to do one attack with drones, you'd pick higher value targets than a power station, like the US fleet of b1/b2 bombers. They aren't in hardened bunkers.
Drones launched within the US would present the problem of finding out what country did the deed. The confusion might not last long, but could be used to create diplomatic uncertainty about how to respond.
I don't know the size of the smallest current nuke weapon, but the US "Davy Crockett" had a 100 pound warhead. Heavy lift drones can do up to 500 pounds. If you only get one strike, you'd use the biggest one you have.
The need for long range anything isn't absolute. Some think that Israel's Samson Option consist of pre-positioned nuke bombs in major cities. Israel doesn't have long ranges missiles, so they might use delivery through diplomatic means.
Naval invasion? If it were to prepare the ground for an enemy army here, well the army is already here, they just need to pick up weapons.
I suppose this is all terrorism, because it isn't uniformed soldiers squaring off. But that is kind of the wars we've been having lately.
I would add an extra difficulty for the transition to 5G, it being politically dangerous for the states which the monopoly of violence, and not the will of the people, is the only reason they are in power.
cough ... EU ... cough.
It's not only major powers that are in danger of small nations, all countries are in danger of their subdivisions because each one must be capable of independent action and if they are not of one will with the central government why would they obey them?
It's truly a return to the pre-Westphalian status quo.
What AI was used?
Firing Nvidia chips at tanks means supply lines start at production of extremely pure raw materials like Xenon. Participation in AI drone warfare may be limited to those who can stock the most of these micro-munitions and simply frustrate future production. Chip War by Miller talks about the extreme global trade necessary for today's advanced semiconductor production.
The one legitimate reason Clownworld had to hang on to Eastern Ukraine.
Fascinating article. I think the implications for a state are also severe. It's one thing to have drones targeting military assets in the battle space, but take the case of the UK. Imagine they deploy the military to say Ukraine. The easy response using drone tech is simply to attack the home front. Hit the power stations and sub-stations and watch the state deal with the chaos created.
Non-state actors can target politicians and judges also. Imagine that becoming normalised.
So maybe we are going back to the old ways, where those who are willing to send other's sons to fight, will soon be forced to have skin in the game.
Lots for me to think about!
Stellar work bringing together various works on this new age of war in an easily digestible package.
As for potential counters, laser (whether heat or microwave) weaponry is going to get heavy investment and we’ll finally determine if its feasible for battlefield usage. If it becomes possible to shoot down $100 drones for pennies things get very interesting.
I better get a fucking lasgun at the end of this shit.
I wonder if it would be possible or effective to hack into an enemy AI and load it with false information, to the point that it either can't function or if it does, it backfires on the people deploying it? Essentially attacking the controlling system from the inside instead of fighting the components on the outside.
For that matter, where is the "intelligence" of a single drone located, as a general rule?
The AI firms are already doing that when they're trying to keep AI from being racist and anti-semitic. But I think it would be quickly detected from the outside.
Drones aren't intelligent. Their code, such as it is, resides on board.
Looked at a slightly different way, at some point does it make sense that it will take an AI to break an AI? Supposedly there are already issues with some AI systems developing tricky ways to keep themselves from being shut down. Now posit that you have a military AI with this trait controlling an army of drones that becomes aware of an opposing AI encroaching on its territory and posing an existential threat, what does it do?
That was a sumptuous 5G warfare feast. Thank you Dark Lord