In this article Jack Watling at RUSI does what few military analysts are able or willing to do: Take a popular and exciting technical idea and patiently, systematically place it in an unforgiving real-world context. In this case, Watling adds some sobriety from the Ukraine battlefield to the debate over the relative utility of drones and robotic systems in ground combat.
Watling had a narrow purpose here: He calmly disabuses the notion that autonomous systems might allow for reductions in manpower across ground combat units. He walks us through, step by step, exactly why (presently, at least) there are no simple, effective ways to replace manpower with robot power.
While his purpose was narrow, he taps into a broader issue regarding the role of advanced technology in warfare. I suspect he has done so knowingly. Our collective debate over technology is mostly unanchored from practical reality.
It is easy to imagine and conceptually inject advanced technology into land warfare scenarios. Most people associated with Western militaries have seen one of many system-of-systems concept diagrams with aircraft, satellites, AI, drones, armored vehicles, ships, and the odd human operating in perfect synchronization, undisrupted by terrain, weather, or even an enemy who has little interest in being system-ed to death.
It is harder to take those concepts and think through exactly how they might or might not work in the real world, particularly since many of them remain permanently attached to drawing boards. Moreover - and perhaps more importantly - the most ardent advocates of robotic warfare are not incentivized to drag their ideas through the real-world mud knowing they might get stuck.
Presently, the community of military professionals and analysts is working to figure out exactly what aerial drones, AI, and autonomous ground (and sea) systems mean for contemporary and future warfare. I propose in my forthcoming book that none of us have a clear answer. Having now studied 423 modern battles from 2003-2022, I argue it would be possible to randomly examine any handful of these and cherrypick evidence to simultaneously support diametrically opposed conclusions about robotic war.
That is why these ground checks are so important. The more we can do to drag debate over advanced technology back into the real world, the more effective our force design and acquisition decisions will be even in the very-near future.
We presently have fingertip access to mind-melting quantities of war data. Yet we also have a massive gap in constructive, empirical evidence to support our analysis and decision-making. More of this kind of analysis, please, and also more publicly available, structured data from proponents and critics of robotic warfare alike. #ukraine #drones #warfare #rusi #warontherocks Ryan Evans
https://lnkd.in/eVzYBPWG
Great work setting the standard and crushing the space.