Ukraine: Military Lessons Thus Far

Over the last few days Volodomyr Zelenskyy has asked repeatedly for the establishment of a no-fly zone over Ukraine. Poland has asked the US to take their aging MiG-29s, remove the NATO electronics, and transfer them to Ukraine–in exchange for receiving new fixed-wing fighter aircraft. Vladimir Putin has countered that either of these decisions would be explicit declarations of war against Russia. Recent lessons from the conflict indicate that the US should not attempt to transfer older MiGs, and especially not use NATO human-crewed fighters to establish a no-fly zone as it was understood in the 1990s over Iraq. Newer, alternative strategies may work better.

Putin has not raised the same level of objections over the transfer of armed and surveillance UAVs (“drones”), nor the transfer of Stinger anti-aircraft missiles. Perhaps, in the masculinist thinking of Putin, these do not seem as threatening. However in practice, the presence of Stingers among the Ukrainian military means that the Russian military is reluctant to use air power. Artillery and missiles are far less expensive (and unfortunately far less discriminate) ways of attacking cities; the loss of crewed aircraft is expensive in many ways. An increase in Ukrainian mobile surface-to-air systems may achieve the no-fly zone without provoking Putin to go intercontinentally ballistic. Flight suppression has already been partially achieved.

Meanwhile, Ukrainians have been successfully using relatively cheap Turkish “Bayraktar” UAVs, which have many advantages. At about USD$2 million, these are much less expensive than any fixed-wing, crewed aircraft. They fly below Russian radar-tracking and therefore are not denied from Ukrainian airspace. If they are shot down, the operator is not killed. Not only does this save Ukrainian lives, but it also preserves operator flying-skills. Since the First World War, loss of pilots has been a recurrent strategic problem. And using remote-controlled vehicles against Russia does not seem to threaten Putin’s sense of manliness, which is a major factor in how this war is being waged.

Clausewitz argued that “War is the continuation of policy with other means.” Zelenskyy understands this, and is fighting back successfully in many dimensions of this conflict. One of the political dimensions is the technology of combat itself. Probably the most effective way to defeat Putin is if elderly women are trained to operate the UAVs to defeat Russian heavy armor and spot camouflaged positions. Putin has staked his entire regime on his manly reputation as a bully and an aggressor. Undermining his credibility means thinking about how to symbolically emasculate him.

Supplying Ukrainians with quieter UAVs that are harder to jam and harder to hack seems most important now. They may even need the option of line-of-sight infrared control, which would put operators at more risk. My impression is that many grannies would be OK with that option if it means protecting their children and grandchildren. Also, the optics are really bad if Russians are taking little old ladies as prisoners at gunpoint. Has a sort of early-1940s look.

Unfortunately, when powerful brats like Putin realize that they cannot coerce others to obey their will, they do tend to lash out with extreme destructiveness. I think the likelihood of Putin using tactical nuclear weapons within the next few weeks is over 50% at this point. The highest priority is to figure out a face-saving way for Putin to withdraw from this invasion. Maybe Arnold Schwartzenegger and Dwayne Johnson could make videos in which they praise Putin’s manly restraint. Time to follow Zelenskyy’s example and get creative!

March 17 post-script: it looks like President Biden and the government of Slovakia have agreed to send S-300 surface-to-air missiles to Ukraine, which will intensify the de-facto no-fly zone status of Ukraine airspace. And Arnold Schwartzenegger has sought a path to gently appeal to the Russian people. Unfortunately the bombing of the theater in Mariupol–clearly marked as a shelter containing children–may make a negotiated peace more difficult. Yikes.

Scroll to Top