Lessons from the Russia-Ukraine frontline: Autonomous vehicles, AI-driven logistics, and quantum-enhanced defense security are recalibrating military strategy.
By Chris Morton & Bianca Nobilo
Chris Morton is the Global Industry Director for Aerospace & Defense at IFS. A retired attack helicopter pilot with 21 years of military and aviation experience, his career ranged from leading combat units in operational theatres to shaping strategic planning at the Pentagon. He now advises A&D clients on transformation while driving industry strategy within IFS.
Bianca Nobilo leads AI ethics, government relations, and thought leadership on the Executive Board at IFS. She spent a decade at CNN as an anchor and correspondent, covering major global events and conflicts, and previously worked across Aerospace & Defense in the UK Parliament.
The War That Shattered Assumption
Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, now entering its third year, continues to expose persistent vulnerabilities in Western military readiness — from munitions stockpiles to supply chain resilience and procurement agility. What was initially predicted by Moscow to be a swift campaign has evolved into a grinding, high-intensity war that is reshaping global assumptions about force structure, deterrence, and the future of military power.
The conflict has demonstrated the battlefield potency of blending low-cost asymmetric technologies with traditional kinetic operations. Ukrainian drone swarms have disrupted Russian armor formations; long-range artillery such as 155mm howitzers remains decisive, yet Western production capacity has struggled to meet ongoing demand. Wars of attrition, once thought relics of the 20th century, have returned to center stage.
As the war continues, nations are recalibrating their force posture and defense planning — not just to support Ukraine but to prepare for the new contours of prolonged, multi-domain conflict. The next chapter of military evolution will be shaped by AI, quantum computing, and automation — technologies that are already altering not only tactical outcomes but the deeper question of which nations can sustain war over time.
Defensive Industrial Base: Built for Peacetime, Unprepared for Protracted War
Ukraine’s artillery consumption outstripped NATO’s production capacity within months, underscoring a fundamental issue: Western defense industries had become structured for peacetime efficiency rather than wartime urgency. For decades, spending priorities reflected counterinsurgency operations rather than large-scale conventional warfare. Defense manufacturers followed slow, bureaucratic procurement cycles, building to long-term program specifications rather than operational needs. This model is no longer tenable.
A key lesson from the Ukraine conflict is the critical link between battlefield endurance and industrial adaptability. Russia’s defense industrial base was not built for a prolonged war and has struggled to pivot under pressure. In contrast, Ukraine’s ability to draw on external support networks has created a more resilient long-term position, underscoring the strategic value of a flexible, modernized defense industrial base (DIB).
AI-driven logistics and quantum-enhanced simulations will determine which militaries can sustain modern war. Predictive logistics, already in use in Ukraine, anticipates battlefield demands, ensuring supplies are replenished before critical shortages occur. Indeed, in the context of contested logistics at the strategic level, variables that include a dynamic, quickly changing threat environment require analysis at the speed of AI. At the operational and tactical levels, commanders on the battlefield who have access to sophisticated pattern analysis that incorporates political, military, social, and physical environments, among others, can sustain combat operations in theater and force the enemy to consider multiple, complex dilemmas.
AI-driven supply optimization will analyze real-time battlefield conditions to dynamically adjust production and distribution. Nations that fail to integrate AI into logistics, manufacturing, and deployment will be less responsive and fall behind their competitors.
The Defense Industry’s AI-Powered Reboot
Mass production of high-tech weaponry has failed under wartime conditions. The U.S. Replicator Initiative is attempting to reverse this inefficiency by integrating AI-driven automation into defense production. This shift mirrors World War II when industries like Ford, Hershey, and Singer Sewing Machines pivoted to war manufacturing. The difference now is that software-defined warfare demands companies capable of real-time iteration, rapid scaling, and autonomous system integration.
Ukraine is already deploying AI-driven drone manufacturing, battlefield analytics, and intelligent munitions at a pace that outstrips traditional defense manufacturers. At the Munich Security Conference, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen warned: “We have a problem, friends, if a country at war can produce faster than the rest of us.” The future of defense production will favor firms that leverage AI to shorten the OODA loop (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act), accelerating design, testing, and manufacturing cycles.
AI-Driven Asymmetric Warfare: Cost vs. Complexity
Low-cost, high-impact technologies are undermining traditional military platforms. A $500 drone can turn off a $10 million tank. Ukrainian drones have neutralized one-third of the Russian Black Sea Fleet. AI-powered swarm warfare—networked, autonomous loitering munitions—has compelled militaries to reassess large, centralized command nodes, which are now vulnerable targets. Ukraine’s success in AI-assisted reconnaissance, drone coordination, and battlefield analytics has compelled Russia to adopt similar tactics, signaling the rapid evolution of AI in modern conflict.
Speed and scale now outweigh cost and complexity. Monolithic, exorbitant, and slow-moving weapons programs—designed for decades-long procurement cycles—are being reconsidered in an asymmetric context where AI is already embedded in ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance), autonomous drone targeting, and automated force coordination. In previous conflicts, nations without the resources to repel a larger, wealthier adversary were at a significant disadvantage. Whereas Ukraine has demonstrated that through the precise application of low-cost asymmetric capabilities, they can effectively even the stakes against a much larger foe. Many smaller nations will likely take note and adopt this same acquisition strategy as a hedge against potential aggression. Larger, wealthier nations cannot ignore this trend – they will not only need to counter this asymmetric threat, but they will need to develop these capabilities to work alongside major weapon systems. Power projections and global deterrence still require the employment of “majestic” type weapon systems on a global scale; however, low-cost AI-driven asymmetric capabilities allow a military to present multiple dilemmas to a potential adversary. A great example is CCA’s – collaborative combat aircraft – autonomous, uncrewed aircraft that are developed in concert as part of traditional fighter development.
AI in Command and Control: Will Humans Always Be in Charge?
Lethal Autonomous Weapons (LAWs) are no longer theoretical. AI-assisted targeting is already operational, with Ukraine leveraging AI-enhanced intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) to predict enemy movements. The debate is no longer about whether AI will be used in battlefield decision-making but rather how to ensure its use remains ethically constrained, legally accountable, and aligned with international human rights norms.
The key ethical and legal distinction now lies between human-in-the-loop (oversight required), human-on-the-loop (oversight optional), and human-out-of-the-loop (fully autonomous lethal decision-making). A shift toward removing human oversight in lethal engagements risks violating the fundamental principles of proportionality, accountability, and distinction in warfare. If AI decision loops become too fast for meaningful human intervention, we risk ceding moral and legal responsibility to algorithms, diminishing the very accountability that underpins the laws of war.
A nation that first entrusts real-time combat decisions to AI would not just redefine military power but could also fundamentally alter the rules of engagement, setting a dangerous precedent for warfare devoid of human ethical judgment. This shift would mark the most profound military transformation since the advent of nuclear weapons. Still, unlike nuclear deterrence—where human deliberation remains central—fully autonomous weapons could remove the last safeguard between war and unchecked machine-driven violence. Strict legal frameworks and international oversight must bind any integration of AI in lethal force to prevent an irreversible slide toward algorithmic warfare without moral restraint — a step closer to the cliff edge of dehumanized conflict.
Quantum Computing: The Coming Cyber Arms Race
Quantum computing’s military potential remains largely theoretical, but its long-term implications are existential. The most immediate concern is encryption: current cryptographic systems will be obsolete the moment quantum decryption achieves practical deployment. NATO, China, and Russia are already racing to develop quantum-resistant security protocols. The winner of this race will have a significant advantage in the future of digital warfare.
Technology is not just reshaping the theatre of war but also the preparation and context. Quantum-enhanced simulations could transform military planning, allowing strategists to model complex, multi-variable conflicts with greater precision. Not to mention, AI-driven cyber warfare is already escalating — deepfake disinformation campaigns, as part of a broader psychological operation, automated hacking, and AI-enhanced cyberattacks are becoming standard tools of statecraft.
Who is Leading the AI-powered arms race?
The AI-powered arms race is unfolding on multiple fronts. Traditional defense firms are struggling to match the speed and adaptability of AI-driven warfare, while AI-native companies, ranging from agile startups to tech giants, are rapidly entering the defense sector. China and Russia have embedded AI into military doctrine at a strategic level, ensuring tight integration across defense, intelligence, and cyber warfare. However, the U.S., the UK, Israel, and key European nations are also integrating AI into military operations through private-sector partnerships, autonomous weapons programs, and AI-enhanced command and control systems. The outcome of this race will determine who dictates the future of military power in the 21st century—not just through AI adoption but through the ability to scale, iterate, and operationalize AI-driven capabilities faster than their adversaries.
As the war in Ukraine continues, it has become a live testing ground for the future of conflict—one where asymmetric tactics, real-time decision systems, and digital capabilities are recalibrating how power is projected and sustained. The states that will shape the 21st-century security order are not simply those that integrate AI first but those that can scale it fastest—across defense, logistics, manufacturing, and industrial resilience.
Just as nuclear weapons redefined deterrence in the 20th century, AI and quantum technologies are redefining the conditions for strategic endurance in the 21st century. The future of warfare is not about which nation fields the most advanced fighter jets or missile systems; it is about who fuses intelligence, autonomy, and agility across the entire defense ecosystem.
Beyond its direct military applications, AI’s economic leverage is equally decisive, as nations that harness AI for industrial productivity, financial systems, and technological innovation will generate the economic surplus necessary to fund sustained defense efforts. A nation’s ability to sustain a war economy is inextricably tied to its domestic AI capacity, as AI-driven efficiencies in manufacturing, energy, and resource management form the productive base that underwrites long-term military power. In an AI-dominated era, economic resilience and defense capability will be inseparable, reinforcing the idea that technological supremacy is not just a battlefield advantage—it is the foundation of strategic endurance.