Seventh Generation Warfare Arrives

"Operation Spiderweb", drones, and the Ukrainian-Russian conflict

On the battlefield I did not see a single Ukrainian soldier. Only drones. I saw them [Ukrainian soldiers] only when I surrendered. Only drones, and there are lots and lots of them. Guys, don’t come. It’s a drone war.

— Surrendered Russian soldier

"Modern war is a confrontation of technologies for detection, jamming, and destruction at a distance, leaving to the operator only the ability to make decisions about strikes"

Ukrainian officer Ostap Flyunt, of the 67th Mechanised Brigade

Once again, the nature of warfare is rapidly changing.

World governments recently received a registered letter regarding this change, courtesy of the Ukrainian military’s “Operation Spider Web,” which destroyed approximately one-third of Russia’s strategic aircraft (long-range bombers) using a few clusters of small military drones carrying explosives. These drones were transported deep into Mother Russia from Ukraine by unsuspecting Russian drivers while having been concealed and shipped in containers disguised as modular homes. This strike is described both as “Russia’s Pearl Harbor” and as a transformational event in the history of modern warfare.

For the record, this essay is not a celebration of Ukraine or its actions, which those not caught up in war fever point out may be destabilizing from a global balance of nuclear powers point of view. This action is not in the geopolitical best interests of the United States, particularly if President Trump’s assertion that he was not informed before the action is not merely a diplomatic denial.

Instead, this piece intends to introduce and familiarize the reader to the concepts, platforms, technology, and current issues at the center of this new generation of warfare technology, strategy, and tactics. Astute readers will note that the technology deployed with “Operation Spider Web”, while tactically quite clever, required remote human operation and employed expendable (single-use) drones costing about $600 each. These drones did not rely on the advanced AI-powered semi-autonomous capabilities currently integrated and being deployed on the front battle lines in Ukraine.

Looking beyond the headlines, what really happened on June 01, 2025 was that the world was notified that decentralized, lower-cost autonomous AI-enabled warfare machines are driving rapid obsolescence of expensive, complicated large weapons platforms such as ships, long-range bombers, and advanced fixed and rotary-winged combat aircraft. The implications are deep and broad. To provide one example, the recently announced “Golden Dome” missile shield technology may already be obsolete and inadequate to address this clear and present danger.

The rise of drone/robotic/AI warfighting machine technology portends a balkanized future in which regional military dominance will be conferred on those warlords who can rapidly manufacture, train, and deploy inexpensive, artificial intelligence-augmented weaponized drones and robots. To provide one trivial example, take a moment to consider what will happen when well-capitalized Mexican Drug Cartels acquire significant drone and robot war machinery capabilities and then take the next step to develop regional manufacturing capacity. Judging by the role of the CCP in fostering the fentanyl trade, it seems almost inevitable that the necessary technology transfer will occur. The Mexican state will then be further fractured, posing an even greater Southern border threat to the United States. Now, project that scenario across the global political map.

Ukraine’s military and defense contracting infrastructure has, out of existential necessity, become both the proving ground and the global leader in this technology. Losing a war of warfighter attrition against an opponent with vastly greater human personnel resources, Ukraine has adopted a strategy and tactical combat approach in which human warfighters are physically isolated from battlefield front lines, and rely on semi-autonomous machines to do the risky work of directly engaging the enemy. All the while, the urgency of this war is driving stepwise integration of artificial intelligence into these decentralized platforms, advancing towards a time when humans will no longer be essential for the “kill loop.” What could possibly go wrong? Ask none who have watched the “Terminator” or “Matrix” movie series.

Many are now familiar with the ideas underpinning fifth-generation “PsyWar,” in which the battleground is over control of information, minds, and beliefs. Sixth-generation warfare is characterized by non-contact warfare through the use of high-accuracy gunnery and missiles; it also involves manipulating the enemy into doing what you want without them realizing they are being manipulated. This approach can be seen as building upon fifth-generation warfare, adding precisely targeted long-range kinetic weapons.

One key challenge and feature addressed by the progression of warfare generations is the tension between maintaining communication between central command and operational field battle units and the need to empower decentralized local units to operate in and adapt to changing local battlefield conditions. AI-powered drones and robots that maintain electronic command and control connectivity are a logical next step in this progression. The risk is that AI-enabled decentralized war machines may be engineered to become fully autonomous under the pressure of opposition technology designed to disrupt communication capabilities. A central tenet among those developing this technology is that humans must remain in a central role for kill loop authorization, which requires that these devices continue to communicate with a human operator. Advances in communication jamming by opponents will drive developers towards enabling fully autonomous, highly lethal machines.

We have now entered the next, “seventh-generation” of warfare, in which robotics, drone technology, high-resolution imaging and image processing, wireless communications, precise geospatial tracking, and artificial intelligence are combined to enable profoundly disruptive, decentralized war machines capable of battlefield coordination, cooperation, and swarming like bees. Driven by the pragmatic realities of the Russian-Ukrainian war, these systems are being designed with low-cost, interoperable components and computer chip brains that can be rapidly updated, allowing them to adapt to evolving opponent tactics and strategies readily.

What will the eighth-generation of warfare bring? I speculate that we will be able to recognize that the boundary to eighth-generation has been crossed when the dreams of those promoting biologically and mechanically augmented super soldiers (ergo, transhumans) are integrated into the mix together with more mature seventh-generation warfare technology and devices. This will enable Manned-Unmanned Teaming (MUM-T) via technologies like Neurolink, which will facilitate direct human wet brain and nervous system connectivity to electronic data and communication.

---

The following is an excerpt from an essay titled “Battlefield Drones and the Accelerating Autonomous Arms Race in Ukraine” published by the Modern War Institute at West Point.

Since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the war there has been impacted by attritable, cheap drones and rapidly growing roster of unmanned and robotic systems. Collectively, these technologies are redefining how military forces can wage modern warfare. With both sides in this war rushing to secure a technological advantage, the Ukrainian battlefield is transforming into a clash between conventional forces backed by a growing number of autonomous and remote-controlled systems. Both Ukraine and Russia have steadily poured more and more resources into developing this technology in a bid to stay a step ahead of the adversary.

Ukraine’s battlefield experience reflects a shift toward unmanned systems that augment or attempt to replace human operators in the most dangerous missions, and against an enemy willing to send more and more manpower into large-scale frontal assaults. After so many autonomous and robotic systems were fielded over the past three years by Kyiv’s forces, Ukrainian officials started to describe their country as a “war lab for the future”—highlighting for allies and partners that, because these technologies will have a significant impact on warfare going forward, the ongoing combat in Ukraine offers the best environment for continuous testing, evaluation, and refinement of such systems. Many companies across Europe and the United States have tested their drones and other systems in Ukraine. At this point in the conflict, these companies are striving to gain “battle-tested in Ukraine” credentials for their products.

Operation Spiderweb

For those who have not been following the giddy coverage of corporate media, here is an AI summary of this brief military campaign:

Operation Spider's Web was a covert drone attack carried out by the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) on 1 June 2025, during the Russo-Ukrainian War. The operation targeted five Russian air bases—Belaya, Dyagilevo, Ivanovo Severny, Olenya, and Ukrainka—using drones concealed in and launched from trucks on Russian territory.

According to Ukrainian officials, the operation involved 117 drones that damaged over 40 aircraft, including Tu-160, Tu-95, and Tu-22M strategic bombers and an A-50 airborne early warning and control aircraft. The drones were simple quadcopters with heavy payloads, and they were operated through the Russian mobile telephone network using the open-source software ArduPilot. The operation spanned five oblasts across five time zones, with the strike on Belaya Air Base in Eastern Siberia being particularly noteworthy, as it was 4,300 km (2,700 mi) from Ukraine.

The operation was orchestrated by SBU chief Vasyl Maliuk and was personally supervised by President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who stated that it took 18 months and 9 days from the start of planning to execution. The drones were smuggled into Russia and hidden in wooden containers resembling mobile cabins, which were then driven to locations near the airbases. The roofs of these containers were opened remotely, and the drones were flown to their targets.

Russia confirmed the attacks but claimed that they had been repelled in three of the regions, while damage was confirmed at the Olenya and Belaya air bases. The Russian Ministry of Defence referred to the operation as a "terrorist attack". Despite this, the operation was widely regarded as a significant strategic blow to Russia, demonstrating the effectiveness of low-cost, unconventional warfare tactics.

Zelenskyy emphasized that the operation was a response to Russia's refusal to accept Ukraine's calls for a ceasefire. The success of the operation has raised concerns among military experts and intelligence officials worldwide, highlighting the potential for non-state actors to challenge superpowers with innovative and cost-effective methods.

The military implications for the United States or any other country that permits hostile or competing foreign powers to acquire land near domestic military bases or other critical infrastructure are self-evident.

What are the cutting-edge issues currently being addressed by the Ukrainian/United States military-industrial complex?

Here is the link for the CSIS report highlighted in the image above, prepared by Kateryna Bondar after interviewing dozens of Ukrainian military officials and Ukrainian and U.S. defense technology manufacturers. I strongly recommend this piece for all who wish to gain a deeper understanding of the current and near term future of the state of the art.

Building on insights from these interviews and acknowledging that current technology cannot yet support fully autonomous missions, this paper describes advancements in three essential functions—intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR); automatic target recognition (ATR); and autonomous navigation—showing how these developments steer the battlefield toward greater AI-enabled autonomy.

The key findings of this study, summarized briefly below, provide a window through which the current status and near-term development objectives for this tech can be viewed.

Key Findings

1. The Ukrainian military’s objective is to remove warfighters from direct combat and replace them with autonomous unmanned systems.

2. Autonomy—defined by the U.S. military as a system’s ability to accomplish goals independently or with minimal supervision in complex and unpredictable environments - is not yet present on the battlefield in the war in Ukraine.

3. The current deployment of AI is partial in scope, enhancing certain functions and addressing some operational challenges rather than enabling full system autonomy. While such systems may operate without direct human control, they typically do not perform the entire process of finding, selecting, and engaging targets independently.

4. Ukrainian forces have widely adopted small and medium first-person-view (FPV) drones as platforms that may be quickly adapted for diverse missions through modular design and interchangeable equipment. Adding an improvised explosive device (IED), an IED release mechanism, various sensors, or signal relaying equipment to the same FPV platform can transform it into a kamikaze drone; a bomber; an intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) system; or a relay node. This modular approach, which allows for quick adaptation to diverse missions by swapping components, makes FPV drones a flexible and scalable asset on the front line.

5. Ukraine’s defense industry is developing standalone AI-driven software that can be integrated across various platforms to expand battlefield autonomy.

6. The Ukrainian defense industry is pursuing an approach of training small AI models on small datasets rather than developing large, all-encompassing models. This approach enables fast and efficient onboard processing on the limited computing power of small and inexpensive chips, which can be quickly updated, retrained, and upgraded to adapt to changing battlefield conditions. These datasets can be collected through a company’s battlefield operations or open-source data from social media. <note the integration with fifth-generation information warfare methods>

7. Delegating target recognition to AI-enabled automatic target recognition (ATR) systems onboard unmanned platforms reduces human limitations and allows locking onto targets up to 2 km away.

8. Autonomous navigation makes drone strikes three to four times more likely to succeed.

9. The adoption of drones equipped with AI-enabled autonomous navigation capabilities is driving a marked decrease in overall strike costs by minimizing both drone losses and repeated mission attempts.

10. Ukrainian engineers are increasingly leveraging open-source technologies and existing computer vision models to accelerate research and development while keeping costs low.

11. Encrypting onboard AI software enables Ukraine to preserve its technological edge by making autonomous systems difficult to reverse engineer. Although adversaries can replicate hardware designs in a matter of weeks, sophisticated encryption in AI-enabled software significantly slows down their efforts to develop equivalent systems.

12. Training to operate unmanned systems equipped with autonomous features can now be completed in as little as 30 minutes to one day, substantially broadening access to these weapons systems. What once required extensive flight hours now requires only a few hours, enabling a wider pool of soldiers to develop the necessary skills with minimal specialized expertise. As self-guided systems become more prevalent, drone training programs increasingly integrate autonomous targeting and navigation into their curricula.

13. Ukrainian authorities are expediting the formal adoption and procurement of software and modules equipped with autonomous capabilities. Key initiatives include codifying these autonomous modules in alignment with NATO standards and integrating them into official military service, which helps to scale acquisition. <Clearly, the Ukrainian/US military-industrial complex is anticipating future sales of battle-tested tech to NATO nations and their militaries. This is a business opportunity.>

14. Ukrainian military authorities increasingly require all unmanned and reconnaissance systems to integrate with situational awareness and fire-correction platforms, aiming to establish a common operating picture in real time.

15. Two major challenges lie ahead for AI-enabled autonomy: extending these capabilities to ground, sea, and undersea platforms and enabling swarming for aerial systems. <The Peoples Republic of China is believed to have the most advanced aerial swarming capabilities at this point>

16. Human oversight remains pivotal—particularly for engagement decisions—reflecting a human-in-the-loop approach that could shift toward higher-level supervision in the future while still maintaining human control of the system. <This is a forward-looking policy position to avoid a “skynet” future of AI-enabled autonomous battle drones. I am very skeptical that this hopeful position will withstand the test of time (and pressures of battle). In other words, propaganda.>

Have there been any “pure” drone and battlerobot engagements?

According to the Institute for the Study of War;

Ukrainian forces reportedly conducted their first attack solely using unmanned ground vehicles (UGVs) and first-person view (FPV) drones, highlighting Ukraine's ongoing efforts to leverage technological innovation into ground operations.

The spokesperson of a Ukrainian brigade operating in the Kharkiv direction reported on December 20 that Ukrainian forces conducted their first ground attack exclusively using robotic systems instead of infantry on an unspecified date near Lyptsi (north of Kharkiv City) and successfully destroyed unspecified Russian positions during the attack. The spokesperson stated that Ukrainian forces conducted the attack with dozens of UGVs equipped with machine guns and also used the UGVs to lay and clear mines in unspecified positions in the area. Ukrainian officials have repeatedly highlighted Ukraine's efforts to utilize technological innovations and asymmetric strike capabilities to offset Ukraine's manpower limitations in contrast with Russia's willingness to accept unsustainable casualty rates for marginal territorial gains.

What about more traditional Air Force capabilities?

Attritable (def): "attritable" refers to an aircraft that is at a low-cost price point where there is increased tolerance to lose the asset to achieve a military objective. This concept is particularly relevant in the context of unmanned combat air vehicles (UCAVs) and is part of the Low Cost Attritable Aircraft Technology (LCAAT) program. Attritable systems are designed to be produced at considerably lower costs than manned aircraft, allowing for sufficient numbers to maintain operational capability even after sustaining losses.

In essence, attritable systems are not necessarily expendable but are built to be used numerous times while being less costly to replace if lost during a mission. These systems are crucial for sustaining combat power in scenarios where attrition is expected, ensuring that the loss of individual units does not significantly impact overall mission success.

Fielding of attritable systems is not far away, as several are being actively developed now. Examples of existing programs for attritable airborne systems include the U.S. Air Force’s Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) Loyal Wingman program. For CCA, the Air Force is working under what it calls a “planning assumption” of the need for 1,000 CCA systems initially and anticipates ordering more than 100 CCAs in the next five years.

Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) are capable of collaborating with next generation crewed combat vehicles at a significantly lower cost while increasing survivability on the battlefield. XQ-58A Valkyrie unmanned combat aerial vehicle image courtesy Curtiss-Wright/Kratos.]

Manned-Unmanned Teaming (MUM-T) refers to the collaborative operation of manned and unmanned systems, typically in military or aerospace contexts, to enhance mission effectiveness. It enables human operators to control, coordinate, or supervise autonomous or semi-autonomous platforms, such as drones or robotic systems, to improve situational awareness, reduce risk, and optimize performance in complex environments.

A loyal wingman is a proposed type of unmanned combat air vehicle (UCAV) which incorporates artificial intelligence (AI) and is capable of collaborating with the next generation of crewed combat aircraft, including sixth-generation fighters and bombers such as the Northrop Grumman B-21 Raider. It is likely that, in the future, ‘loyal wingmen” may also be integrated into long-range bomber platforms, enabling them to carry and deploy their own fighter squadron when facing the risk of potential engagement with sixth-generation fighters. Also unlike the conventional UCAV, the loyal wingman is expected to be capable of surviving on the battlefield but to be significantly lower-cost than a crewed aircraft with similar capabilities. In the US, the concept is known as the collaborative combat aircraft (CCA). Unlike the conventional UCAVs, the CCA incorporates artificial intelligence (AI), denoted an "autonomy package", increasing its survivability on the battlefield. It is still expected to cost much less than a manned aircraft with similar capabilities. The US Air Force plans to spend more than $8.9 billion on its CCA programs from fiscal years 2025 to 2029, with an additional $661 million planned for fiscal year 2024. The success of the CCA program may lessen the need for additional manned squadrons.

The loyal wingman is a military drone with an onboard AI control system and the capability to carry and deliver a significant military weapons load. The AI system is envisaged as being significantly lighter and lower-cost than a human pilot with their associated life support systems, but to offer comparable capability in flying the aircraft and in mission execution.

Some concepts are based on a standardised aircraft deployed in two variants; one as a sixth-generation fighter with a human pilot and/or battle commander in the cockpit, and the other as a loyal wingman with an AI system substituted in the same location.

Another concept is to develop a shorter-range, and hence smaller and cheaper, wingman to be carried by the manned parent aircraft and air-launched when needed. The drone in turn carries its own munitions. This reduces the overall cost while maintaining protection for the crewed aircraft on the battlefield. A CCA is a military drone with an onboard AI control system and capability to carry and deliver a significant military weapons load. Its AI system is envisioned as being significantly lighter and lower-cost than a human pilot with their associated life support systems, yet offering comparable capabilities in flying the aircraft and executing missions.

The principal application is to elevate the role of human pilots to mission commanders, leaving AIs as "loyal wingmen" to operate under their tactical control as high-skill operators of relatively low-cost robotic craft.

Concluding Remarks

According to Reuters;

The vast majority of more than 800 companies in Ukraine's burgeoning defense production sector were founded after Russia's 2022 full-scale invasion that recently passed its 1,000th day.

Many were set up in response to rapidly evolving battlefield conditions, including drones - first in the skies and then also on land and at sea - as well as anti-drone technology and, increasingly, artificial intelligence.

"The Ukrainian military-industrial sector is the fastest innovating sector in the entire world right now," said Halyna Yanchenko, a Ukrainian lawmaker who has advocated for local arms manufacturers in parliament.

Both Ukraine and Russia are on track to make around 1.5 million drones this year, mostly small "first-person view" vehicles that cost a few hundred dollars apiece and can be piloted remotely to identify and attack enemy targets.

Seven officials and industry figures told Reuters automation would be the main focus of battlefield innovation in the coming year.

"The number of infantrymen deployed in trenches has decreased significantly, and combat command is possible to do online from a remote point, which reduces the risk of personnel being killed," said Ostap Flyunt, an officer in the 67th mechanised brigade.

Ukraine now has more than 160 companies building unmanned ground vehicles, according to state-backed defence accelerator Brave1. They can be used to deliver supplies, evacuate wounded or carry remotely operated machine guns.

An army colonel, callsign Hephaestus, recently left the military to start building automated machine gun systems. He said six of his products were already substituting human gunners on the front, allowing them to operate the weapons on a screen far away from danger.

Flyunt said this was increasingly common: "Modern war is a confrontation of technologies for detection, jamming, and destruction at a distance, leaving to the operator only the ability to make decisions about strikes," he said.

Arms minister Herman Smetanin also said remote warfare, including using artificial intelligence, was on the increase.

"In the near future, this will be the main direction of development, the war of robots," he told Reuters. "It's about people's lives, we need to protect them."

Ukraine hopes an innovative defence sector will provide a new foundation for an economy devastated by the invasion.

The country has poured $1.5 billion into upgrading defence manufacturing which had stagnated since Soviet times, arms minister Smetanin said, although it still relies on Western allies for shells, missiles and air defences.

Defence production capacity has grown from $1 billion in 2022 to $20 billion in 2024, but Ukraine can only afford to buy about half of that, the minister said, leaving the extra manufacturing capacity unused.

---

Although it is not explicitly stated, we can all assume that the U.S. military has had a significant role in developing this technology for the Ukrainian battlefield and has worked closely with the Ukrainian army in developing and deploying these technologies and strategies.

Seventh-generation warfare is here. These decentralized war machines capable of battlefield coordination, cooperation, and swarming like bees are just the beginning. The future will include wars involving AI-enabled war machines, and these conflicts will not be guaranteed to be confined to the battlefields. How will these technologies be enabled in domestic terror events? How will criminals deploy these cheap drones with AI capabilities? What about Assassins?

Seventh-generation warfare and beyond will change our lives forever.

---