THE latest war in Middle East shows that the nature of war is changing. The concept of ‘boots on the ground’ indicating actually physical invasion of a land by soldiers is very much in vogue, but in a slow but sure manner, its acceptance will possibly be on the wane as countries turn to technology in their attempt to modernise the military. Operation Sindoor by India about a year ago demonstrated what changing war could mean. In the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, a more or less similar approach appears to have been taken by the two warring sides. Last week, the United States and Israel, too, followed their own style of precision attacks on Iran killing its top leadership in concentrated strikes, the world saw the system of warfare getting dramatically changed. In this consideration, technology appears to have become a greatest weapon in everybody’s hands.

 

Naturally, the old-style of warfare is giving way to the new, fully technology-based warfare where the ‘boots on the ground’ idea would be used only as a second choice -- strictly on strategic reasons, on a need-basis, and also upon political convenience. Of course, this is not an entire new mode. For several years, countries have been using technology almost as a sole driver of their military action. When the terror organisation Hamas attacked Israel with more than 5,000 drones and missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles, and Israel’s Iron Dome concept kept most projectiles at bay, the new mode of warfare was in evidence. And this is going to be the global method of waging war -- with the help of technology. But technology is seen at work only after a whole range of human effort has gone into the decision about strike points. Intelligence available from space, from traditional human channels acts as the basis of the use of technology as strike force. In addition, every country that launches war also keeps its ‘boots’ ready to be used at any time with the shortest notice possible.

 

Thus, the operating mode of war appears to have changed, but the traditional mode, too, is kept ready for use in split-second. What is most remarkable is the massive human effort to collect Intelligence on the enemy -- so precise that an enemy leader sitting in a war room can get hit through vent in the air-conditioning system. That was what India achieved during Operation Sindoor when its BrahMos missile is said to have been thrust into the greatly fortified underground nuclear facility at the Noor Khan Air Base through a 45-sq-inch vent. The future of warfare, thus, is promising to be altogether different -- without any discount on human component. That would certainly mean that the loss of human life and limb may be less at least in the initial stages of war. Later on, ‘boots on the ground’ would come into operations to achieve further military and political objectives.

 

That is what United States President Mr. Donald Trump appears to be threatening to do as the current conflict with Iran gets to advanced stages. But until the human component gets thrust into war, technology will keep demolishing not just the enemy and his assets but also the old belief of how wars happen. Of course, it is obvious that there may not be loss of human life and limb of soldiers as such, but innocent civilian population would often be the target of every enemy attack. The dictum that good armies do not involve civilian lives and assets in war, carries no meaning in actual warfare. Thus, even in changing face of war, the civilians will keep getting affected in big numbers. To that extent, the devastation of even new war would not spare them. It is clear that technology will keep upgrading itself faster than humans can imagine. By that token, the nature of warfare, too, will keep changing very rapidly, with every succeeding conflict coming up with a newer form of attack. Geopolitical futurologists may have already worked out different scenarios of the war of the future.