Ananta Insights
Defence Insight Newsletter
Multiple ongoing conflicts across the world have become the cradle of battlefield innovation. Ananta’s Defence Insight Newsletter brings you in-depth analysis of security- and defence-centric developments shaping warfare amid mounting geopolitical tensions.
In this edition we cover the fall of Bashar Al Assad’s regime, Syria’s influence on modern warfare, the hybrid Russia-Ukraine war that blends traditional trench warfare with high-tech methods, how Israel’s operations – suspended in the first phase of a tentative peace deal — against Hamas have parallels to the 1973 Yom Kippur War, and why India needs a pragmatic approach to solve its airpower dilemma.
Maiden flight trial of India’s long-range hypersonic missile
How Syria Shaped Modern Warfare
The collapse of Bashar Al Assad’s regime in Syria marks a watershed moment in one of 21st century’s most devastating conflicts, one that rewrote the rules of modern warfare and reshaped great power dynamics in the Middle East. The 13-year civil war, which according to a March 2024 estimate by Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) claimed over 617,910 lives and displaced millions, also became a testing ground for military innovations and proxy warfare that continue to influence conflicts worldwide.
Frugal innovation | Perhaps the most lasting legacy of the Syrian conflict is its demonstration of how relatively simple and low cost technological innovations can reshape modern warfare. Widespread use of improvised armored vehicles and unmanned aerial vehicles(UAVs) – often constructed in makeshift workshops – as well as commercially available first person view (FPV) drones modified for military use created a new paradigm of ‘frugal warfare’.
What began with Kurdish forces and ISIS insurgents welding steel plates to civilian vehicles, evolved into sophisticated workshops producing custom military vehicles at a fraction of the cost of traditional armored personnel carriers. Similarly, the adaptation of commercial drones for both surveillance and attack missions presaged their now-ubiquitous role in modern conflicts.
Moscow’s Syrian gambit | Russia’s 2015 intervention in Syria represented Moscow’s most significant projection of power beyond former Soviet borders since the USSR’s collapse. The deployment demonstrated Russia’s renewed military capabilities and willingness to defend its interests far from home.
Two facilities in Syria, the Hmeimim air base and the Naval replenishment facility at Tartus (often mistakenly called a base) became symbols of Russia’s new frugal brand of expeditionary operations especially when compared to the bloated endeavours US-led forces faced in Afghanistan and Iraq. Further, Russian military’s performance in Syria – including the first major deployment of its modernised air force (notably the SU-57 5th Generation Fighter Aircraft) offered crucial lessons that would go on to influence its strategic thinking.
But Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine since 2022 drained its military resources such that not only did Russia virtually sit out of the fight as Assad’s regime fell, but as evident from satellite imagery is also pulling out equipment and troops from Tartus and Hmeimim.
Proxies & private military companies | The Syrian conflict accelerated the proliferation of private military companies (PMCs) and proxy forces, creating a new and more chaotic model for modern warfare, where several rival factions at times share a common adversary in battles. Iranian-backed militias, Turkish-supported rebels, and Russian PMCs like the Wagner Group transformed Syria into a laboratory for hybrid warfare.
Chemical weapons | The Assad regime’s use of chemical weapons, particularly the devastating 2013 Ghouta attack that killed over 1,400 civilians, marked a dark chapter in modern warfare. Despite international condemnation and challenging the global non-proliferation regime, additional attacks continued with the last verified instance in 2018 according to a report by OPCW.
India’s relationship with Assad | The power vacuum left by Assad’s ouster has heightened uncertainty as Islamist groups led by al-Qaida-linked Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) have taken control in Damascus. Concerns persist over internal rivalries and external interference from powers like Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Iran and the US that could fuel further unrest. New Delhi faces geopolitical challenges — Assad was steadfast in his backing New Delhi on the Kashmir issue against Pakistan. However, HTS’s ties to Turkey, Pakistan’s close ally, could see the new government pivot toward Islamabad.
Russia-Ukraine’s Hybrid Warfare
Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 also redefined modern warfare, combining cutting-edge technology with strategies more reminiscent of World War I. Despite widespread use of high-tech weapons, electronic warfare (EW), and networked intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) systems, the conflict has devolved into a grinding war of attrition dominated by trenches and heavy artillery.
Old tactics meet new tech | From the opening salvos, Russia’s invasion was expected to showcase modern military dominance, relying on advanced missiles, drones, and cyberwarfare. Instead, it has stalled into a protracted battle marked by static frontlines and entrenched defences.
Satellite images of eastern Ukraine reveal kilometres of trenches stretching across Donbas region, conjuring scenes more familiar to the battlefields of Verdun in WW1 than the 21st century. Both sides have turned to artillery duels and infantry assaults to gain metres of ground, underscoring the enduring relevance of traditional tactics.
Tech in the trenches | Russia has fired hypersonic missiles such as the Kinzhal, designed to evade interception, while Ukraine has used US-supplied HIMARS rocket systems to deliver precision strikes. Electronic warfare has shaped the battle, with Russia deploying systems to jam communications and disable GPS signals. Ukraine, meanwhile, has leveraged drones, including Turkish-made Bayraktar TB2s, to gather intelligence and attack enemy positions.
ISR capabilities have kept Ukrainian forces agile. SpaceX’s Starlink satellite internet allowed Ukrainian troops to communicate securely and coordinate strikes even in contested zones. Russian have also unofficially used Starlink services by acquiring unsanctioned smuggled terminals. It remains unclear if Moscow’s reliance on its GPS analogue GLONASS system shielded it sufficiently from Kyiv’s reciprocal jamming efforts.
Still, these technologies didn’t prevent the war from reverting to a brutal meat-grinder reminiscent of wars from a much more primitive age. Artillery remains the decisive factor, with Russia launching massed barrages and Ukraine responding with targeted strikes.
Urban centres, drone battles | Urban combat in cities such as Mariupol and Bakhmut has highlighted limitations of high-tech arsenals in environments dominated by rubble and narrow streets. Ukrainian forces have adapted by modifying commercial drones for reconnaissance and even carrying out kamikaze-style attacks. Russia, too, has turned to drones, including Iranian supplied Shahed models, which have terrorised Ukrainian cities and tested air defence systems. Yet, despite the proliferation, drone warfare has complemented, rather than replace, traditional tactics.
Limited cyber impact | Cyberattacks feature prominently, with Russia targeting Ukraine’s infrastructure from power grids to banking systems. However, Kyiv’s cyber defences bolstered by Western intelligence agencies and private sector partnerships have largely held firm. Cyber operations have disrupted but have been unable to secure battlefield victories, reinforcing the centrality of physical combat and territorial control.
Mounting casualties & costs | Both sides have suffered heavy losses. Ukrainian cities such as Mariupol have been reduced to ruins, while Russian forces have sustained losses in drawn-out battles for territory. The high casualty rates reflect the challenges of breaching fortified defences and reliance on artillery bombardments. The war’s been defined by grinding offensives and static lines, with incremental gains measured in metres rather than kilometres.
In Europe, shifting military planning | NATO and other Western militaries have been forced to rethink defence strategies. After years focused on counterterrorism and hybrid warfare, European nations are returning to Cold War-era doctrines centred on high-intensity conflicts and territorial defence. Germany, for example, has pledged to increase military spending, while Finland and Sweden have joined NATO, citing fears of Russian aggression. Poland is investing over $23 billion to modernise its forces, including purchases of tanks and missile systems.
Recalibrating reliance on tech | The war has exposed gaps in military planning, particularly assumptions about the dominance of technology. While drones, satellites, and hypersonic missiles have been effective, the conflicts underscore the continued importance of conventional firepower, logistical strength, and adaptability. Three major points stand apart as prolific and likely to persist as learning for combined arms warfare.
-
Hybrid tactics: The integration of cyberattacks, disinformation, and drone warfare with traditional ground operations highlights the complexity of modern battlefields.
-
Logistics & supply chains: The war has shown how fragile supply lines can determine success or failure. Both Russia and Ukraine have faced logistical challenges in sustaining prolonged offensives.
-
Adaptation in combat: Ukraine’s use of improvised weapons, including drones and 3D-printed components, highlights the value of innovation under pressure.
Israel’s Actions & Parallels to Yom Kippur War
Israel’s 15 month long military operations in Gaza and West Bank following Hamas’s deadly assault on October 7, 2023, have prompted historical comparisons to 1973’s Yom Kippur War. While the geopolitical landscape and military technologies have evolved significantly over the past 50 years, echoes of vulnerability, strategic recalibration, and regional instability remain strikingly familiar.
Surprise & response | Hamas’s unprecedented October 7 attack killed over 1,200 while scores were taken hostage. This marked Israel’s most devastating single-day loss since the 1973 Yom Kippur War, when Egypt and Syria caught Israeli forces off guard on Judaism’s holiest day. Both conflicts exposed gaps in Israel’s intelligence apparatus, forcing rapid mobilisation and shifts in military strategy.
Then, as now, Israel relied heavily on its reservist system to bolster active-duty forces. Israel called up more than 360,000 reservists, reflecting mobilisation levels seen in 1973. However, where the Yom Kippur War concluded within three weeks of intense fighting, the current campaign dragged into its second year, highlighting the complexities of modern asymmetrical warfare against non-state actors in urban landscapes.
Strategic objectives & limitations | Israel’s stated objective — neutralising Hamas’ military capabilities — contrasts with the territorial contestation that defined the 1973 war. In the earlier conflict, Israel faced conventional armies and aimed to defend its borders while securing buffer zones. Today, it contends with guerrilla tactics, underground tunnels, and a densely populated civilian environment, raising ethical questions.
The Israeli military has emphasised precision strikes and targeted incursions but has faced mounting criticism over civilian casualties, with estimates exceeding 45,000 deaths in Gaza. This threatens to erode international support, echoing the diplomatic isolation Israel faced during the Yom Kippur War when the Arab oil embargo strained relations with Western allies.
Regional & global repercussions | The 1973 war redrew Middle Eastern alliances and accelerated US intervention, culminating in shuttle diplomacy led by then-Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. In 2025, almost 15 months after Israel’s military operations aimed at Hamas started, a tentative peace deal has taken effect on January 19 2025 and is similarly an outcome of a similar hustle by Israel’s principal ally, the US, Egypt and Qatar.
In the run-up to the peace deal, Arab nations, while condemning Hamas’s tactics, have also been vocal about the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Unlike in 1973, when the Cold War framed superpower involvement, today’s multipolar world sees Russia and China aligning with Iran, amplifying tensions in UNSC and limiting diplomatic options.
Uriel Schachter compiled a thread on X capturing some excellent observations on the October 7 attacks, the regional implications and balance of power by Mossad Intelligence Directorate’s former head Zohar Palti during a podcast appearance.
Tech & and tactic shifts | Israel’s technological edge has evolved dramatically since the Yom Kippur War. Its Iron Dome missile defence system, drones and cyber capabilities have mitigated Hamas’s rocket threats. However, reliance on advanced weaponry has not eliminated vulnerabilities, particularly in hostage rescue operations and tunnel warfare.
In contrast to the large-scale tank battles of 1973, operations in this war involved precision airstrikes, urban raids, and intelligence driven targeting — especially the remotely triggered pager and walkie-talkie explosions that eliminated scores of Hezbollah cadres in September 2024.
How India Stacks Up
India’s air power dilemma | India’s defence establishment is at a strategic crossroads as China accelerates development of its fifth- and sixth-generation fighter aircraft. Deployment of China’s J-20 stealth jets and progress in sixth-generation prototypes highlight a widening technological gap in the region. New Delhi’s decision whether to invest heavily in advanced stealth fighters or focus on a larger fleet of modernised 4.5-generation jets will have profound implications for its defence posture and budget priorities.
China’s rapid modernisation | China’s military build-up has shifted the balance of air power in Asia. Its Chengdu J-20 fighters designed for stealth, long-range engagement, and electronic warfare already patrol sensitive regions. Reports of sixth-generation fighter prototypes undergoing trials add urgency to India’s need for countermeasures. These advances signal Beijing’s intent to dominate contested airspace, from the Taiwan Strait to the Himalayas.
India, by comparison, continues to rely primarily on fourth-generation aircraft, with French origin Rafale serving as its most advanced platform. While efforts to develop the indigenous Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA) are underway, progress is slow, pushing India to evaluate short-term procurement strategies.
Economics of stealth fighter acquisition | Stealth aircraft, such as the American F-35, promise cutting-edge capabilities but cost exorbitant amounts. Beyond high procurement prices, their operational expenses and maintenance requirements are costly. India’s indigenous AMCA programme faces similar challenges, with projected timelines extending into the next decade and uncertain development costs.
Investing in a small fleet of fifth or sixth generation aircraft could provide symbolic deterrence, but it risks diverting resources from broader modernisation efforts. Maintaining elite squadrons with limited numbers may lack operational flexibility, especially during prolonged engagements where attrition plays a decisive role.
A case for 4.5-generation fighters | India’s air defence strategy may benefit more from expanding its fleet of advanced 4.5-generation fighters than focusing on stealth jets. Aircraft like the Rafale and upgraded Su-30MKI offer advanced avionics, electronic warfare systems and extended-range weapons without the prohibitive costs of stealth designs.
Upgrading the Su-30MKI fleet with active electronically scanned array (AESA) radars and electronic countermeasures can significantly enhance air combat capabilities. These jets can also integrate stand-off weapons, such as the BrahMos cruise missile, providing India with strategic strike options that offset numerical disadvantages. Rafale fighters complement this approach. Their acquisition in sufficient numbers ensures readiness for both defensive and offensive operations.
Operational realities demand a balanced force | China’s numerical superiority in fighter aircraft, estimated at nearly double India’s fleet, highlights the need for scalability in any response strategy. Stealth fighters are not easily replaced in wartime scenarios due to their high costs and complex production cycles.
In contrast, 4.5-generation jets are more readily available and compatible with existing infrastructure. They can be deployed in greater numbers, ensuring sustained operations in high-intensity conflicts. Network-centric warfare, combining these jets with drones and surveillance systems, further strengthens India’s defensive grid.
Indigenous vs immediate procurement | India’s long-term vision for air dominance hinges on the success of the AMCA programme. However, delays in research, testing, and production timelines pose challenges to its timely deployment. This gap necessitates interim solutions, including acquiring more Rafale units and enhancing capabilities of existing platforms.
IAF has also focused on integrating indigenous solutions, such as the Tejas Light Combat Aircraft. While these efforts boost self-reliance, their limited deployment so far underscores need for imported platforms to maintain combat readiness.
Pragmatism over prestige | By focusing on a layered defence network combining modernised 4.5-generation jets, drones, and missile systems – India can effectively counter China’s technological edge and maintain financial sustainability. Such pragmatism ensures India’s air power remains resilient and ready for challenges in an increasingly contested airspace where resource asymmetry is a harsh reality.
Developments In Focus From 2024
a) India’s surveillance satellite: In October 2024 India approved a project for 52 surveillance satellites to enhance space-based monitoring capabilities. These will be used to provide real-time intelligence and reconnaissance support across land, air and maritime domains.
b) US and India’s hypersonic weapon tests: The US successfully tested its hypersonic missile system in December 2024, showcasing advances in high-speed weaponry. India also carried out the first flight trial of its long range hypersonic weapon system in November 2024.
c) India’s second nuclear submarine: In August 2024, India commissioned its second nuclear submarine, INS Arighaat, enhancing availability of the nascent third leg of its nuclear triad.
d) China operates all three of its aircraft carriers: China is close to commissioning its third aircraft carrier, the Fujian, which according to a December 2024 report by state-owned Global Times, was engaged in exercises involving China’s other two carriers Liaoning and Shandong.
Check these out:
-
A Nikkei Asia feature visualising Japan’s interception of Chinese and Russian military assets near its territory
-
France plans low-orbit demonstrator that can target other satellites – DefenceNews
-
Why Did Iran Allow Bashar al-Assad’s Downfall? – CEIP Commentary
-
Technology, the Battlefield, and Beyond in Ukraine – War on the Rocks
-
Smuggled Starlink devices allegedly used to defy India’s internet shutdowns – The Guardian
-
California Connection: How A Chinese Factory's Electronics Are Fueling Russia's War RFE/RL
Thank you for reading Ananta’s Defence Insight newsletter. Stay tuned for our next edition.