777: SIEGE VS STING – CHINA’S CABBAGE VIS-À-VIS TAIWAN’S PORCUPINE STRATEGY

 

The intensifying geopolitical rivalry across East Asia has transformed the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea into the world’s most scrutinised maritime flashpoints, where national strategy, maritime coercion, and asymmetric defence doctrines converge in a tense and unpredictable theatre. At the centre of this emerging contest are two contrasting strategic frameworks. These strategies encapsulate the broader tussle between a rising power (seeking territorial unification) and a smaller democratic state (fighting for autonomy and survival). On one side, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) is employing the “Cabbage Strategy”. This strategy aims to establish a de facto quarantine to strangle Taiwan slowly. Countering this systematic encroachment is Taiwan’s “Porcupine Strategy”. This strategy aims to significantly raise the cost of invasion.  This article examines how these concepts operate in theory and practice, and how these may define the future balance of power, regional stability, and the fate of cross-strait relations.

 

China’s “Cabbage Strategy”: Layered Encroachment

The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) employs a sophisticated grey-zone tactic known as the “cabbage strategy” to assert control over disputed islands and reefs. It is a vivid metaphor coined in 2013 by PLA Navy Rear Admiral Zhang Zhaozhong.  It was used to describe a tactic of enveloping a target island in successive layers of maritime forces to seize control without firing a single shot. This strategy aims to isolate the island, establish de facto control, and gradually escalate pressure.

The Anatomy of the Blockade. The core philosophy of the strategy is simple: surround a disputed island or reef, cut off all logistics and support, and wait for the defending force to surrender due to starvation or a lack of supplies. To achieve this, China deploys three distinct “leaves” or layers that wrap tightly around the target.

The Inner Layer (The Maritime Militia). The innermost layer, closest to the island, consists of hundreds of fishing boats crewed by the maritime militia.  However, these are not ordinary civilians; they are members of the People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia. These civilian vessels are state-subsidised, trained by the PLA, and equipped with reinforced hulls, water cannons, and satellite navigation. They act as a “human shield,” harassing adversary vessels and preventing access, knowing that foreign navies are hesitant to fire upon what appear to be civilian ships.

The Middle Layer (China Coast Guard).  Just behind the fishing boats, patrolling, are the ships of the China Coast Guard (CCG). These ships are often larger and better armed than many regional navies. They are the primary enforcers. They utilise water cannons, high-intensity lasers, and blocking manoeuvres to physically stop resupply missions.

The Outer Layer (PLA Navy).  Looming in the distance, “over the horizon,” are the warships of the PLA Navy. They rarely engage directly but serve as a menacing deterrent. Their presence signals that any attempt by a foreign military to break the inner blockade with force will be met with overwhelming conventional military power.

Winning without Fighting. The Cabbage Strategy is a prime example of “Grey Zone” warfare. The tri-layered formation effectively blocks access, prevents resupply, and creates a fait accompli situation. The strategy is characterised by its ambiguity, deniability, and control over escalation.  This makes it difficult for opponents to justify a military response without appearing to be the aggressor. The cumulative effect is a gradual salami-slicing of maritime space until control becomes irreversible.

Previous Applications. The most successful employment of this strategy was at Scarborough Shoal in 2012. Following a standoff with the Philippines, Chinese vessels swarmed the area. The layers tightened, forcing the Philippines to withdraw.  China established permanent control, effectively seizing the territory. Chinese forces have also used this approach at Whitsun Reef (2021), Sabina Shoal (2024), and Sandy Cay, where Chinese vessels have repeatedly surrounded Philippine-claimed features.

 

Slow Strangulation of Taiwan

The “cabbage strategy” offers a blueprint for China’s non-military pressure on Taiwan. It translates into a mechanism for establishing de facto control and compelling unification. Instead of an invasion, the strategy would manifest as a suffocating blockade of Taiwan.  It would isolate the island and crush its economy. The goal will not be a rapid conquest but prolonged exhaustion and acceptance of the Chinese presence. Each day the cabbage layers remain in place, the fait accompli would harden. By avoiding military escalation, Beijing would attempt to portray the situation as an internal matter rather than an interstate conflict. This would complicate the international mobilisation in support of Taiwan. Additionally, the blockade would test Taipei’s crisis-management capacity and morale. The aim would be to prove that Taipei is isolated and that the U.S. is unable to help. In turn, indicating that “peaceful reunification” is the only possible solution.

 

Porcupine Strategy: Taiwan’s Asymmetric Deterrence

“You can’t stop the predator from attacking —, but you can make it regret trying.”

In an era defined by great-power rivalry, the “Porcupine Strategy” has emerged as a viable defence doctrine for smaller states facing existential threats from larger adversaries. William S. Murray of the U.S. Naval War College coined the concept in 2008. It postulates that a defender need not defeat an aggressor outright. Instead, they must make an invasion so costly, protracted, and painful that the predator is deterred from attacking in the first place. For Taiwan, a democratic island facing the immense military capabilities of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), this strategy represents a shift from conventional parity to asymmetric denial.

Core Philosophy: Deterrence by Denial. The strategy acknowledges that Taiwan cannot match China’s military spending or sheer volume of ships and aircraft. Instead, Taiwan focuses on deterrence by denial, i.e. preventing the enemy from securing objectives rather than seeking a decisive battlefield victory. The goal is to transform the island into a “porcupine”: a target that is difficult to swallow and impossible to digest.

Tactical Implementation: The “Quills”. To implement this, analysts urge Taiwan to pivot away from high-value, “prestige” platforms—such as large battleships or advanced fighter jets, which are easily targeted by Chinese missiles—toward resilient, low-cost, and distributed systems. Key Asymmetric Capabilities include:-

    • Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD). This makes it difficult for PLA forces to reach, land on, and operate from Taiwan. Utilising vast numbers of mobile coastal defence cruise missiles (such as the indigenous Hsiung Feng and US-made Harpoon systems) to target amphibious landing fleets.
    • Mobile Air Defence. Deploying portable systems like Stingers and Sky Sword units to deny air superiority without relying on vulnerable airfields.
    • Drone Swarms & Mines. Using unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and naval mines to complicate the crossing of the Taiwan Strait.
    • Decentralisation. Moving away from centralised command structures that a first strike can decapitate. Small, autonomous units ensure resistance continues even if communication with headquarters is severed.
    • Whole-of-Society Defence. A crucial pillar of the Porcupine Strategy is Civil-Military Integration. As seen in comparative examples like Ukraine and Finland, military hardware alone is insufficient.
    • Resilience. Hardening infrastructure, stockpiling ammunition, and creating redundant logistics networks.
    • Civilian Mobilisation. Integrating the population into national defence through reserve forces, cyber defence volunteers, and urban warfare preparation. This signals that even if a landing succeeds, the occupation will face a hostile, mobilised citizenry capable of prolonged guerrilla resistance.

The Porcupine Strategy effectively turns Taiwan into a strategic death-trap for the PRC. Taiwan aims to convince Beijing that the economic, military, and political costs of any misadventure would be unacceptably high. The Porcupine Strategy seeks four outcomes. It aims to persuade China that victory is uncertain and costly, to delay and grind any invasion force, to ensure continued Taiwanese resistance, and to shape global perceptions to mobilise international support.

 

Conclusion

The “Cabbage” and the “Porcupine” strategy epitomise the essence of 21st-century conflict. The Cabbage Strategy essentially employs the grey-zone tactics. On the other hand, the Porcupine Strategy tests the ability of small countries to resist overwhelming powers. In the contest between seize and the sting, success isn’t just about firepower, but about persistence.

In the Taiwan Strait, the outcome will depend upon the efficiency with which China and Taiwan implement their respective strategies. The future of the Taiwan Strait depends on three critical factors. Firstly, China’s capability to sustain pressure without inciting international intervention. Secondly, Taiwan’s ability to maintain internal unity and credibility in its resistance. Lastly, the international community’s response.

 

Please Add Value to the write-up with your views on the subject.

1957
Default rating

Please give a thumbs up if you  like The Post?

 

For regular updates, please register your email here:-

Subscribe

 

 

References and credits

To all the online sites and channels.

Pics Courtesy: Internet

Disclaimer:

Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from reliable and accurate sources. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.

 

References:-

  1. Zhang Zhaozhong, CCTV Military Commentary, 2013.
  1. Erickson, Andrew S., & Kennedy, Conor M, “China’s Maritime Militia.” Naval War College Review, Vol. 69, No. 1 (2016).
  1. Erickson, Andrew S, “China’s Maritime Grey Zone Operations”, U.S. Naval War College, 2019.
  1. Hayton, Bill, “The South China Sea: The Struggle for Power in Asia”, Yale University Press, 2014.
  1. Shattuck, Thomas J A Chinese Blockade of Taiwan.” Orbis, Vol. 64, No. 2 (2020).
  1. Murray, William S, Revisiting Taiwan’s Defence Strategy.” Naval War College Review, Vol. 61, No. 3 (2008).
  1. Sullivan, Jake, & Green, Michael J, Taiwan’s Defence Reform.” Foreign Affairs, 2019.

775: Podcast with Anmol

 

Had a very lively chat with Anmol. We talked about a variety of topics, ranging from personal life to life in the air force. The chat included aspects related to motivation, stress management, decision making, air power, deterrence, new domains of war, Info warfare and a whole lot of other issues.  One of the best podcasts.

 

 

Link to the podcast:-

 

Comments, views and suggestions are most welcome.

 

1957
Default rating

Please give a thumbs up if you  like The Post?

 

For regular updates, please register your email here:-

Subscribe

 

 

References and credits

To all the online sites and channels.

Pics Courtesy: Internet

Disclaimer:

Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from reliable and accurate sources. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.

 

774:INTEGRATION OF DIRECTED ENERGY WEAPONS ONTO MILITARY PLATFORMS

 

Article published in the CLAWS Yearbook 2025.

 

Directed Energy Weapons (DEWs), including high-energy lasers (HELs), high-power microwaves (HPMs), and particle beams, represent a transformative leap in military technology. Offering precision, speed, and cost-effectiveness compared to kinetic systems, DEWs engage targets at the speed of light with minimal collateral damage. As global militaries face evolving threats like drone swarms and hypersonic missiles, the strategic importance of integrating DEWs into naval, ground, air, and space platforms cannot be overstated. This article explores DEW integration’s technical, operational, strategic, and ethical dimensions, drawing on recent advancements and addressing challenges, global programs, and future implications.

Directed Energy Weapons: Technical FundamentalsDEWs emit focused energy, such as lasers, microwaves, or particle beams, to damage or disable enemy equipment, personnel, or facilities. Unlike conventional weapons, DEWs require no projectiles and engage targets at the speed of light. High-energy lasers focus photons to deliver thermal energy to burn through materials or disable sensors. High-power microwaves disrupt electronic circuits and communications by inducing currents in circuits. Though less developed, particle beams accelerate charged particles to damage targets at the molecular level. These systems are valuable against fast, low-cost, or swarm threats like drones, rockets, and small boats.[i]

Strategic Imperatives: DEW Integration. The rise of asymmetric threats—drone swarms, hypersonic missiles, and low-cost unmanned systems—drives DEW adoption. Traditional kinetic interceptors are often too slow or costly to counter these threats effectively. DEWs provide a layered defence, complementing kinetic systems to enhance resilience and flexibility. For example, lasers can neutralise drones while missiles engage larger threats, optimising resource allocation. Additionally, DEWs enhance deterrence by offering rapid, precise responses, reducing logistical burdens in sustained conflicts.

Technical Challenges of Integration. Integrating DEWs into platforms designed for kinetic munitions presents significant hurdles. These challenges vary by platform but share common themes, addressed through innovations like solid-state lasers, modular power kits, and AI-driven targeting.

    • Power and Thermal Management. The primary technical challenge is power generation. DEWs demand significant electrical energy, often in tens to hundreds of kilowatts for lasers and megawatts for microwaves, far beyond what existing vehicles or vessels were designed to provide. For instance, a 100 kW-class laser needs power and cooling infrastructure that challenges small air or ground platform integration.[ii] The platforms must have upgraded power generation systems, thermal management modules, hybrid power units or capacitor-based energy storage.
    • Beam Control and Targeting. Precision targeting is crucial for DEWs to be effective. Beam control is another critical factor. DEWs must maintain precision across long distances, compensating for atmospheric distortion, vibration, and platform movement. Atmospheric disturbances (for lasers) or electromagnetic interference (for HPMs) can degrade performance. Beam control systems must adapt dynamically, especially on mobile platforms or in contested electromagnetic environments.[iii] Advanced fire control radars, electro-optical/infrared sensors, and machine learning-based tracking algorithms are being developed to enhance the targeting and engagement cycles.
    • Size, Weight and Vibration Constraints. Airborne platforms present special problems due to vibration and limited space. Aircraft like fighter jets or UAVs must host compact DEW systems that can function reliably under dynamic conditions.

 

Platform Integration.

Integration into Naval Platforms. Naval vessels, such as destroyers and aircraft carriers, are prime candidates for DEW integration due to their robust power generation and deck space. Lasers enhance defence against anti-ship missiles, small boats, and drones, offering near-infinite shots compared to finite missile magazines. The U.S. Navy’s High Energy Laser with Integrated Optical-Dazzler and Surveillance (HELIOS, 60 kW) on destroyers exemplifies this, countering aerial and surface threats. India is exploring laser systems for warships to secure the Indian Ocean trade corridor. Challenges include retrofitting electrical grids, managing heat dissipation, and ensuring compact designs for smaller vessels.

Integration into Ground Platforms. On land, DEWs counter drones and loitering munitions, critical in asymmetric warfare seen in conflicts like Ukraine. The U.S. Army’s Directed Energy-Manoeuvre Short-Range Air Defence (DE-MSHORAD) mounts 50 kW lasers on Stryker vehicles, while India’s Mk-II(A) 30 kW laser, tested in April 2025, neutralised drone swarms at 5 km. Integration requires compatibility with networked systems, ruggedised optics for dust or extreme temperatures, and modular power solutions to maintain mobility.

Integration into Air Platforms. Airborne DEWs, designed for fighter jets or UAVs, counter incoming missiles at standoff distances. The U.S. Air Force’s Self-Protect High Energy Laser Demonstrator (SHiELD) equips jets with laser pods, while India envisions lasers on aircraft to counter regional missile threats. Challenges include limited onboard power (e.g., F-35’s 400 kW engine splits power across systems), heat dissipation without drag, and beam stability amid turbulence. With solar or hybrid power, UAVs may become ideal DEW platforms for long-endurance missions.

Integration into Space Platforms. Space-based DEWs, still nascent, hold potential for missile defence and satellite protection. Lasers could disable enemy satellites or intercept ballistic missiles during the boost phase. The U.S. Space Force explores megawatt-class Space-Based Lasers (SBL) powered by solar arrays. India’s satellite-mounted laser concepts aim to safeguard space assets. Challenges include power generation in compact designs, radiative cooling in vacuums, and targeting across long ranges. Legal concerns under the Outer Space Treaty, which prohibits weapons of mass destruction, limit deployment, though non-lethal applications like sensor dazzling may be permitted.[iv]

 

Global DEW Projects

Numerous countries are researching and developing these weapons, each with unique projects and strategic goals.[v] DEW development is a global race, with key players advancing unique projects:

United States. The US is a leader in DEW development. Besides Leonidas, the Department of Defence (DOD) and agencies like DARPA, the Air Force Research Laboratory, and the Naval Research Laboratory are researching DEWs to counter ballistic missiles and hypersonic cruise missiles.  The U.S. Navy has been a frontrunner in DEW integration. The Laser Weapon System (LaWS) was deployed on the USS Ponce in 2014.[vi] Subsequently, the U.S. Navy’s High Energy Laser with Integrated Optical Dazzler and Surveillance (HELIOS) system was tested on the USS Preble in 2022.  Its integration into the Aegis Combat System demonstrates the feasibility of combining DEWs with existing sensor suites.[vii] The U.S. Army’s Directed Energy-Manoeuvre Short-Range Air Defence (DE-MSHORAD) program aims to mount 50-kilowatt lasers on Stryker vehicles, but integration requires overcoming power and weight limitations.[viii] The US Army is exploring modular power kits, which combine batteries and compact turbines, to meet DEW demands without sacrificing mobility.  The U.S. Air Force’s Airborne High Energy Laser (AHEL) program seeks to equip platforms like the AC-130 gunship and F-35 fighter with lasers for precision strikes and missile defence. Tests in 2024 showed progress, with a 20-kilowatt laser successfully integrated onto a testbed aircraft.[ix] For special operations, lasers on AC-130s could provide silent, precise strikes, reducing reliance on munitions.[x]

China. China is making rapid strides in DEW development, focusing on high-energy lasers and microwave systems. State media and manufacturers have released images of handheld and vehicle-mounted laser systems, including the LW-30, a 30kW road-mobile high-energy laser (HEL). Their efforts extend to counter-space applications, with ground-based DEWs potentially targeting satellites. China’s military also solicits would-be suppliers for a new airborne laser weapon. Airborne laser pods are expected to be mounted on Chinese warplanes such as the Shenyang J-15 “Flying Shark” carrier-based fighter.

Russia. Russia has been developing DEWs for decades, with the Peresvet laser weapon system entering experimental combat duty in 2018 and claiming operational use during the 2022 invasion of Ukraine. A more advanced version, “Zadira,” can incinerate targets up to three miles away within five seconds. Russia is also working on EMP cannons and microwave guns for anti-drone applications.

Ukraine. [xi]Ukraine has unveiled a new laser weapon called “Tryzub” (Ukrainian for “trident”), which can shoot down aircraft over a mile away. During a defence conference, Colonel Vadym Sukharevskyi, Ukraine’s Unmanned Systems Forces commander, announced the weapon’s capabilities.

United Kingdom. The UK’s Ministry of Defence (MOD) is investing heavily in DEWs, with projects like DragonFire, a laser-directed energy weapon (LDEW) that achieved its first high-power firing against aerial targets in January 2024 at the Hebrides Range.  DragonFire is expected to be deployable by 2027. Additionally, the Radio Frequency Directed Energy Weapon (RFDEW) is nearing service by 2026, focusing on countering unmanned systems.

France and Germany. France and Germany are key players in European DEW development, often through multinational collaborations. France is involved in projects like the TALOS-TWO, involving 21 partners across eight EU nations. Germany is focusing on integrating DEWs into defence platforms. These efforts aim for operational deployment by 2030, emphasising cost-effective counter-drone and missile defence systems.

Israel. Israel is advancing the Iron Beam laser-based DEW, designed to complement its Iron Dome system. A contract signed in October 2024 for operational service within a year reflects its cost-effectiveness. The US has allocated $1.2 billion for Iron Beam procurement.

Iran and Turkey. Iran and Turkey claim DEWs in active service, adding controversy to global assessments. Iran has announced developments in laser air defence systems, while Turkey claims the ALKA DEW was used in combat in Libya in 2019. However, specifics and verification are scarce, with claims often met with scepticism due to limited transparency.

South Korea, Japan, and Australia. South Korea and Japan possess advanced technological capabilities, with South Korea developing laser-based systems for counter-drone applications, though not as prominently as major powers. Japan emphasises nuclear and space technologies, featuring limited public DEW projects. Australia is also investing in DEW technology, particularly for countering drones, which was highlighted by a £13 million deal with QinetiQ for a prototype defensive laser.

 

India’s DEW Programs.

India’s Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) is actively pursuing DEWs, with projects like the Directionally Unrestricted Ray-Gun Array (DURGA II), a 100-kilowatt lightweight DEW set for integration with land, sea, and air platforms. Other initiatives include the KALI (Kilo Ampere Linear Injector), a particle accelerator and a 1 kW laser weapon for counter-IED operations, with plans for 25 kW and 100 kW systems.

DURGA Program. [xii]The DURGA initiative, spearheaded by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), is dedicated to creating laser-based directed energy weapons (DEWs) to bolster India’s multi-tiered defence framework. This program focuses on developing laser systems to intercept and neutralise enemy missiles at various flight phases, enhancing India’s Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD) capabilities. Additionally, it aims to counter unmanned aerial systems (UAS) by deploying tactical laser weapons to disable drones threatening critical infrastructure and military assets. These weapons are designed for integration across land, air, and sea platforms, providing operational versatility in diverse environments. Public reports indicate that prototype laser-based DEWs under the DURGA program are currently being tested, with power levels ranging from 10 to 100 kilowatts, suitable for tactical and strategic purposes.

KALI Program. [xiii]Initially launched by the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) with DRDO support, the KALI program began as a research effort into high-energy particle acceleration but has since evolved into a defence project focused on electronic warfare and non-lethal weaponry. The KALI system produces powerful electromagnetic pulses (EMPs) to disable enemy electronic systems, including radar, communication, and missile guidance systems. It also explores particle beam technology to neutralise targets without explosives, with potential applications such as disabling enemy satellites. The system’s scalability allows it to be used in both tactical operations and strategic deterrence, enabling non-lethal incapacitation of enemy equipment while preserving physical structures.

On April 13, 2025, [xiv] India successfully tested its first high-energy laser weapon, the Mk-II(A) Laser-Directed Energy Weapon (DEW), at the National Open Air Range in Kurnool, Andhra Pradesh. Developed by DRDO, this 30-kilowatt laser system demonstrated precise neutralisation of fixed-wing aircraft, drone swarms, and surveillance sensors at ranges up to 5 kilometers. Operating at the speed of light, the laser causes structural damage or destroys warheads, offering a cost-effective alternative to conventional munitions with minimal collateral impact. This achievement positions India alongside nations like the US, China, and Russia in advanced laser weaponry. DRDO aims to deploy the land-based system within two years, with plans for enhanced versions offering greater range and integration on ships, aircraft, and satellites. A 300-kilowatt “Surya” laser, capable of targeting high-speed missiles and drones up to 20 kilometers away, is also in development.

 

Strategic Operational and Doctrinal Implications

Integrating DEWs is a technical and doctrinal challenge that will reshape operational doctrines and force structures. Military planners must consider new rules of engagement, escalation risks, and interoperability with allied forces. Doctrinally, militaries are evolving from a kinetic-dominant mindset to one in which DEWs play complementary and sometimes primary roles, especially in contested and electronically dense environments.

Their low cost per shot and scalability enable sustained engagements, reducing logistical burdens. DEWs also enhance deterrence by providing rapid, precise responses to emerging threats like hypersonic missiles. However, DEWs introduce strategic risks. Adversaries may develop countermeasures, such as reflective coatings or electronic hardening, reducing their effectiveness. Proliferation of DEW technology could also destabilise conflicts, as non-state actors gain access to low-cost, high-impact weapons.[xv]

Operationally, DEWs require new training and tactics. Operators must understand beam propagation, power management, energy thresholds, atmospheric effects, engagement timelines and protocols, which differ from kinetic systems.

Moreover, AI and autonomous systems are increasingly paired with DEWs to handle target acquisition and prioritisation in real-time, particularly in drone swarm scenarios. Cybersecurity is also critical, as DEWs rely on networked sensors and software, making them vulnerable to hacking or electronic warfare.[xvi]

DEWs, especially dazzlers and HPMs, exist in a grey area of international law. The Protocol on Blinding Laser Weapons (Protocol IV) of the UN’s Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW) prohibits lasers specifically designed to cause permanent blindness.[xvii] However, systems designed for sensor blinding or equipment disablement are permitted.

Future of DEW-Enabled Battlefield

Future advancements will focus on scaling power output, improving efficiency, and reducing size. Solid-state lasers, which are more compact than chemical lasers, are driving this trend. Research into hybrid DEW-kinetic systems, where lasers complement missiles, could bridge capability gaps. Artificial intelligence will also play a role in optimising beam control and target prioritisation in complex environments. Looking ahead, several trends will define the future of DEW integration:

    • Hybrid Platforms. Future platforms will likely feature integrated DEW and kinetic options, with AI-driven decision-support systems guiding engagement choices.
    • Miniaturisation and Modularity. Advances in solid-state lasers, cooling, and power systems will allow smaller, modular DEW units suitable for a broader array of platforms.
    • Network-Centric Operations. DEWs will be part of larger sensor-to-shooter networks, leveraging battlefield data to optimise energy weapon use in multi-domain operations.
    • Export and Proliferation Risks. As DEW technologies become more widely available, concerns about proliferation and their use by non-state actors or rogue states will increase, requiring robust export control and countermeasure policies.

Conclusion

Directed Energy Weapons mark a paradigm shift in warfare, offering precision, cost-effectiveness, and scalability. Their integration on military platforms (naval, ground, air, and space) poses unique challenges. India should focus on incorporating Directed Energy Weapons (DEWs) into its military systems to strengthen its defence capabilities. This involves expediting the deployment of DURGA II (100 kW) across naval, air, and ground platforms, enhancing power and cooling systems on warships and aircraft such as the Tejas, developing AI-based targeting for accuracy in challenging environments, and integrating DEWs with existing integrated air defence systems. Partnering with allies on solid-state laser technology will ensure operational effectiveness.

 

Please Add Value to the write-up with your views on the subject.

 

1957
Default rating

Please give a thumbs up if you  like The Post?

 

For regular updates, please register your email here:-

Subscribe

 

 

References and credits

To all the online sites and channels.

Pics Courtesy: Internet

Disclaimer:

Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from reliable and accurate sources. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.

 

 

References:-

[i]  J. R. Wilson, “Directed-Energy Weapons: Technologies, Applications and Implications,” Military & Aerospace Electronics, August 2021.

[ii] John Keller, “Power and Cooling Are Key Challenges in Directed-Energy Weapons,” Military & Aerospace Electronics, March 2023, 14-18.

[iii] Philip Ewing, “The Pentagon’s New Laser Weapon Blinds and Burns,” NPR, July 3, 2020.

[iv] Joan Johnson-Freese, Space Warfare in the 21st Century: Arming the Heavens (London: Routledge, 2016), 112-115.

[v] Khosla Anil, “LEONIDAS BY EPIRUS_ STAR TREK STYLE SHIELD OF DIRECTED ENERGY WEAPON”, The EurasianTimes, 29 Mar 25.

[vi] Sam LaGrone, “Navy Deploys Laser Weapon Prototype USS Ponce,” USNI News, December 10, 2014.

[vii] U.S. Navy, “HELIOS System Successfully Tested on USS Preble,” Naval News, August 2022, https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2022/08/helios-system-successfully-tested-on-uss-preble/.

[viii] Jen Judson, “Army’s DE-MSHORAD Prototype Zaps Drones in Latest Test,” Defense News, October 2023, https://www.defensenews.com/land/2023/10/05/armys-de-mshorad-prototype-zaps-drones-in-latest-test/.

[ix] Valerie Insinna, “Air Force Tests Airborne Laser on Testbed Aircraft,” Air Force Magazine, February 2024, https://www.airforcemag.com/air-force-tests-airborne-laser-testbed-aircraft/.

[x] Brian W. Everstine, “Lasers on AC-130s Could Redefine Special Operations,” Aviation Week, March 2023, 34-36.

[xi] Khosla Anil. “UKRAINE UNVEILS TRYZUB_ A GAME-CHANGING DIRECTED ENERGY WEAPON”, Air Marshal’s Perspective, 17 Feb 25.

[xii] Khosla Anil, “Edit Post “DURGA AND KALI_ INDIA’S DIRECTED ENERGY WEAPONS PROGRAM”, Air Marshal’s Perspective, 29 Apr 25.

[xiii] Ibid

[xiv] Khosla Anil, “INDIA ENTERS THE LASER AGE_ MK-II(A) DEW USHERS IN A NEW ERA OF DEFENCE TECHNOLOGY”,  Air Marshal’s Perspective, 16 Apr 25.

[xv] Paul Scharre, Army of None: Autonomous Weapons and the Future of War (New York: W.W. Norton, 2018), 201-205.

[xvi] Freedberg, “Lasers, Microwaves, and Particle Beams.”

[xvii] United Nations, “Protocol IV on Blinding Laser Weapons,” Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, 1995.

English हिंदी