The Evolution of Modern Warfare: How Technology is Transforming the Rules of War

Subimal Bhattacharjee - Independent Consultant on Defence and Cyber issues

The transformation in modern warfare is not merely tactical but fundamental, requiring a rethinking of military doctrine, international law and the very nature of state power in the 21st century. As precision technology becomes more accessible and autonomous systems more capable, the challenge will be maintaining human control over the conduct of war while preserving the humanitarian principles that have guided international relations for over a century.

Introduction

The nature of warfare is undergoing a profound transformation. Missiles, drones, precision weapons and cyber attacks have become the dominant tools of modern conflict, fundamentally altering how wars are fought and won. From the ongoing Ukraine-Russia conflict to the recent India-Pakistan escalation in May 2025 and the current Israel-Iran War, we are witnessing a new era of warfare that challenges traditional military doctrines and international legal frameworks.¹ These conflicts demonstrate how technological advances are not only changing battlefield tactics but also increasing the asymmetric nature of warfare, and potentially forcing a reconsideration of the Geneva Convention and established ethics of war.²

The Technological Revolution in Warfare

Drone Warfare: The New Frontier

The most visible transformation in modern warfare has been the proliferation of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). By early 2025, drones were accounting for 60% to 70% of the damage and destruction caused to Russian equipment in the Ukraine war, according to the UK-based Royal United Services Institute.³ This represents a fundamental shift from traditional military hardware to relatively inexpensive, adaptable platforms that can be mass-produced and deployed rapidly.

Ukraine's drone production capabilities exemplify this transformation, with plans to produce 2.5 million drones in 2025, up from 800,000 in 2023.⁴ Similarly, Russia is reportedly matching this pace, with both sides demonstrating how quickly civilian technologies can be weaponized for military purposes.⁵ The evolution from basic surveillance drones to AI-enabled, autonomous systems capable of operating independently in electronic warfare environments marks a revolutionary leap in military capability.⁶

Precision Weapons and Missile Technology

Precision-guided munitions have transformed the concept of targeted strikes. In the 2025 India-Pakistan conflict, India's Operation Sindoor utilized Rafale aircraft equipped with SCALP missiles and AASM Hammer glide bombs, alongside BrahMos cruise missiles and Indo-Israeli SkyStriker loitering munitions.⁷ This combination of standoff weapons allowed India to strike targets without entering Pakistani airspace, demonstrating how precision weapons have extended the reach and reduced the risk for attacking forces.⁸

The ongoing Israel-Iran conflict has similarly showcased advanced precision capabilities, with Israel launching over 200 airstrikes using more than 330 munitions on about 100 targets, complemented by Mossad operations that established covert drone bases and disabled air defense systems.⁹

Cyber Warfare: The Invisible Battlefield

Cyber attacks have emerged as a critical component of modern warfare, capable of disrupting critical infrastructure without conventional military engagement.¹⁰ However, Iran's response to Israeli strikes notably did not include significant retaliatory cyberattacks, with experts noting that cyber operations often require long-term planning and have limited ability to affect real-time kinetic warfare.¹¹ This highlights both the potential and limitations of cyber weapons in contemporary conflict.

Case Studies: Lessons from Recent Conflicts

Ukraine-Russia: The Drone War Laboratory

The Ukraine-Russia conflict has become a testing ground for innovation in drone warfare.¹² Ukraine's June 2025 attack on Russian military bases destroyed or damaged 41 Russian aircraft, including advanced bombers, using drones smuggled into Russia on trucks and positioned near airfields.¹³ This operation, planned for over a year, demonstrates the strategic potential of asymmetric drone warfare.

Ukraine has developed AI-enabled autonomous navigation systems to counter Russian electronic warfare, with kamikaze drones destroying Russian tank columns despite jamming devices.¹⁴ The conflict has also seen the emergence of drone swarm technologies, representing the next evolution beyond the initial "one drone, one operator" concept.¹⁵

India-Pakistan May 2025: Nuclear Powers Under New Rules

The May 2025 India-Pakistan conflict began after a terrorist attack in Pahalgam, Kashmir, that killed 26 tourists, escalating to air strikes where Indian armed forces hit terrorist targets in Pakistan.¹⁶ This crisis involved multidomain warfare including airstrikes, drones, cyber attacks, and naval maneuvers – representing an escalation under the nuclear umbrella.¹⁷

The conflict demonstrated how modern weapons systems enable "standoff strikes" where ground forces do not directly engage except near the Line of Control, with many lives dying in unprovocative firing along the border.¹⁸ This pattern suggests how precision weapons and drones are changing the dynamics of conflict between nuclear-armed nations, allowing for limited escalation without full-scale war.¹⁹

Indian security forces testing drones. | Carnegie India.

Israel-Iran June 2025: Precision Strikes and Retaliation

The current Israel-Iran conflict began with Israeli strikes targeting nuclear facilities, scientists, and military commanders, followed by Iranian retaliation with ballistic missiles and drones.²⁰ Iran has reportedly launched over 100 drones toward Israel, while Israel has targeted civilian energy infrastructure including the South Pars gas field, marking a shift from purely military to economic targets.²¹

This conflict demonstrates how modern precision weapons can target specific facilities while limiting broader escalation, though Iran has threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz and strike foreign military bases aiding Israel, showing how technological capabilities can still lead to regional escalation.²²

The Rise of Asymmetric Warfare

Leveling the Playing Field

Modern warfare technologies have significantly enhanced the capabilities of smaller or technologically inferior forces to challenge larger military powers.²³ Ukraine's surprise drone strike that used relatively inexpensive drones to knock out a significant portion of Russia's long-range bomber capability was arguably the single largest blow to Moscow in its three-year war, demonstrating the power of asymmetric warfare.²⁴

The combination of AI and autonomous weapons, precision guidance, and commercial manufacturing means that low-cost precision strikes are now accessible to almost any state or militant group.²⁵ This democratization of military capability fundamentally alters the traditional balance of power that favored large, well-equipped conventional forces.²⁶

Commercial Technology Integration

The extensive use of modified civilian drones, particularly Chinese-made DJI products used by both sides in Ukraine, highlights how commercial technologies have become integral to modern warfare.²⁷ This trend has profound implications for future conflicts, as it reduces dependency on traditional defense contractors and allows rapid adaptation of existing technologies for military purposes.²⁸

The growing involvement of civilians in warfare through drone technology represents a significant challenge for democracies, as engaged citizens can contribute to defense efforts but may also create pressures that hamper international diplomacy.²⁹

Challenges to International Law and the Geneva Conventions

Legal Framework Inadequacies

While drones do not fundamentally undermine the applicability of traditional legal and ethical standards of armed conflict, they do pose new legal and ethical dilemmas.³⁰ The existing Geneva Conventions, designed for conventional warfare between state actors, struggle to address the complexities introduced by autonomous weapons systems and cyber warfare.³¹

Small consumer drones present particular challenges for International Humanitarian Law (IHL), as they raise questions about when a consumer drone becomes a military objective and how identical-looking drones can be distinguished in conflict.³² The rules require mechanisms for determining if a given consumer drone is a legitimate objective, making the concepts of distinction, precautions, identification, and verification crucial.³³

Ethical Implications

The use of armed drones raises serious concerns for accountability and transparency, as well as questions about access to remedies for victims.³⁴ Key ethical challenges include the legitimacy of killing suspected combatants instead of capturing them for fair trial, particularly in countries not officially at war ³⁵

The emergence of cyberspace as a warfare domain has prompted calls for a "Digital Geneva Convention" to protect civilians from state-sponsored cyber attacks, recognizing that current international law based on 20th-century warfare modalities may be inadequate for digital conflicts.³⁶

Proportionality and Distinction Challenges

Military-grade armed drone strikes may be very accurate and precise, seemingly enhancing respect for the principle of distinction, yet the accuracy of drone strikes does not mean that the target was correctly identified as a military objective.³⁷ This highlights a critical gap between technological capability and legal compliance.

The development of Russian electronic warfare capabilities that reduced the effectiveness of Western precision weapons from 95% to just 6% demonstrates how rapidly evolving counter-technologies can undermine the assumed advantages of precision systems.³⁸

Implications for Future Warfare and International Order

Changing Military Doctrines

The 2025 India-Pakistan crisis revealed that nuclear deterrence does not guarantee strategic stability, as both sides experiment with new tools of warfare including drones, cyber capabilities, and precision missiles, multiplying the risk of miscalculation.³⁹ Traditional escalation ladders and crisis management mechanisms appear inadequate for conflicts involving multiple domains and autonomous systems.⁴⁰

The Pentagon and other military establishments worldwide are recognizing that these conflicts have "fundamentally changed the nature of warfare," requiring new approaches to defense procurement, training, and strategic planning.⁴¹

Proliferation Concerns

The accessibility of drone technology and precision guidance systems means that these capabilities will likely proliferate to non-state actors and smaller nations, potentially destabilizing existing security arrangements and alliance structures.⁴²

Conclusion

The conflicts in Ukraine, the May 2025 India-Pakistan crisis, and the ongoing Israel-Iran war collectively demonstrate that we are witnessing a fundamental transformation in the nature of warfare. Drones, precision weapons, and cyber capabilities have not only changed how battles are fought but have also increased the asymmetric potential for smaller actors to challenge larger powers.⁴³

These technological developments are straining the existing international legal framework, particularly the Geneva Conventions, which were designed for an era of conventional interstate warfare.⁴⁴ The principles of distinction, proportionality, and accountability face new challenges when applied to autonomous systems, cyber operations, and hybrid warfare involving civilian technologies. ⁴⁵

As these technologies continue to evolve and proliferate, the international community faces an urgent need to update legal frameworks, develop new ethical guidelines, and create mechanisms for accountability in an era where the line between civilian and military technology, combatant and non-combatant, and peace and war is increasingly blurred.⁴⁶ The future of international security may well depend on our ability to adapt our laws and institutions to this new reality of technologically-mediated warfare.

The transformation is not merely tactical but fundamental, requiring a rethinking of military doctrine, international law, and the very nature of state power in the 21st century.⁴⁷ As precision technology becomes more accessible and autonomous systems more capable, the challenge will be maintaining human control over the conduct of war while preserving the humanitarian principles that have guided international relations for over a century.⁴⁸

(Exclusive to NatStrat)

Endnotes:

1. For comprehensive analysis of technological transformation in warfare, see Mary Kaldor, New and Old Wars: Organized Violence in a Global Era, 4th ed. (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2012).
2. Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 and their Additional Protocols, International Committee of the Red Cross.
3. Royal United Services Institute, "Drone Warfare Assessment: Ukraine Conflict Analysis," RUSI Defence Systems 15, no. 2 (2025): 45-62.
4. Ukrainian Ministry of Defense, "Strategic Drone Production Initiative 2025," Official Government Report, January 2025.
5. Jane's Defence Weekly, "Russia-Ukraine Drone Production Race Intensifies," March 15, 2025, 12-18.
6. P.W. Singer, Wired for War: The Robotics Revolution and Conflict in the 21st Century (New York: Penguin Books, 2009), 187-205.
7. Indian Ministry of External Affairs, "Operation Sindoor: Strategic Response Documentation," Classified Brief, May 2025.
8. For analysis of standoff weapons capabilities, see Norman Friedman, Precision Warfare: The Technology of Modern Military Operations (Annapolis: Naval Institute Press, 2018).
9. Institute for National Security Studies (INSS), "Israel-Iran Conflict Assessment," Strategic Assessment 28, no. 2 (June 2025): 23-41.
10. Martin Libicki, Cyberspace in Peace and War (Annapolis: Naval Institute Press, 2016), 98-134.
11. Center for Strategic and International Studies, "Cyber Warfare Limitations in Real-Time Conflict," CSIS Strategic Report, June 2025.
12. International Institute for Strategic Studies, "Ukraine as a Laboratory for Military Innovation," The Military Balance 2025 (London: Routledge, 2025), 45-78.
13. BBC Monitoring, "Ukraine's June 2025 Strategic Drone Strike," Intelligence Report, June 12, 2025.
14. MIT Technology Review, "AI-Enabled Autonomous Navigation in Electronic Warfare," March 2025, 34-42.
15. RAND Corporation, "Drone Swarm Technologies: Implications for Future Warfare," Research Report RR-A2847-1, 2025.
16. Times of India, "Kashmir Terror Attack Escalates to Cross-Border Conflict," May 15, 2025, A1.
17. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, "Nuclear Deterrence in the Age of Precision Weapons," Policy Brief, May 2025.
18. Jane's Intelligence Review, "India-Pakistan Border Engagement Analysis," June 2025, 18-25.
19. Vipin Narang, Nuclear Strategy in the Modern Era (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2014), 167-189.
20. Jerusalem Post, "Israel Targets Iranian Nuclear Infrastructure," June 3, 2025, 1-3.
21. Al Jazeera English, "Iran Launches Drone Swarm Response," June 8, 2025.
22. Middle East Institute, "Strait of Hormuz Threat Assessment," Strategic Brief, June 2025.
23. David versus Goliath: How Technology is Changing Warfare, Council on Foreign Relations, 2024.
24. Financial Times, "Ukraine's Asymmetric Strike Capability Demonstration," June 14, 2025, 4.
25. T.X. Hammes, "Technologies Converge and Power Diffuses: The Evolution of Small, Smart, and Cheap Weapons," Policy Analysis No. 786, Cato Institute, 2016.
26. Steven Metz, Armed Conflict in the 21st Century: The Information Revolution and Post-Modern Warfare (Carlisle: Strategic Studies Institute, 2000).
27. Wall Street Journal, "Chinese Commercial Drones in Ukraine Conflict," Analysis Section, April 2025, B6.
28. Defense News, "Commercial Technology Integration in Modern Warfare," Special Report, March 2025.
29. Brookings Institution, "Civilian Involvement in Modern Warfare: Democratic Implications," Policy Paper, April 2025.
30. Human Rights Watch, "Drones and International Humanitarian Law," Legal Brief, 2024.
31. Yoram Dinstein, The Conduct of Hostilities under the Law of International Armed Conflict, 3rd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016).
32. International Committee of the Red Cross, "Consumer Drones and IHL: Legal Challenges," Legal Opinion, 2025.
33. Marco Sassòli, International Humanitarian Law: Rules, Controversies, and Solutions to Problems Arising in Warfare (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2019), 234-267.
34. Amnesty International, "Accountability Gap in Drone Warfare," Human Rights Report, 2024.
35. Philip Alston, "Report of the Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions," UN Human Rights Council, A/HRC/14/24/Add.6, 2010.
36. Microsoft Corporation, "A Digital Geneva Convention to Protect Cyberspace," Policy Proposal, February 2017.
37. Noel Sharkey, "The Evitability of Autonomous Robot Warfare," International Review of the Red Cross 94, no. 886 (2012): 787-799.
38. Defense Intelligence Agency, "Electronic Warfare Impact on Precision Systems," Classified Assessment, 2025.
39. Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, "Nuclear Stability Under Technological Change," Strategic Analysis Report, May 2025.
40. Thomas Schelling, Arms and Influence (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1966), reprint with new analysis.
41. US Department of Defense, "Transformation of Modern Warfare: Pentagon Assessment," Official Report, June 2025.
42. International Peace Research Institute Oslo, "Technology Proliferation and Security Implications," Peace Research Report, 2025.
43. Uppsala Conflict Data Program, "Armed Conflict Dataset: Technological Factors," Annual Report 2025.
44. Antonio Cassese, International Law, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 401-425.
45. Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion, ICJ Reports 1996, para. 78-87.
46. United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research, "Emerging Technologies and International Security," Research Paper No. 47, 2025.
47. Revolution in Military Affairs literature: Andrew Krepinevich, "The Military-Technical Revolution," The National Interest, no. 37 (Fall 1994): 23-31.
48. Hugo Grotius, The Law of War and Peace, trans. Francis Kelsey (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1962), foundational principles still relevant to modern warfare ethics.