I was privileged to be hosted at “The Brand Called You (TBCY)”. I had an interesting, thought-provoking conversation with Ashutosh Garg on the rapidly evolving landscape of air and space warfare.
The conversation explored the changing nature of warfare, lessons from recent global conflicts, emerging technologies, and the capabilities needed for a resilient and future-ready aerospace ecosystem.
Adapt Quickly to Technological Change: The future of warfare is moving beyond pilot- and platform-centric models toward integrated ecosystems involving drones, AI, networked assets, and advanced technologies. Anticipating technological shifts will be increasingly important for future preparedness.
Build Resilience and Self-Reliance: Recent conflicts have highlighted the importance of indigenous capabilities, resilient supply chains, and secure infrastructure. From satellites and aerospace systems to cyber capabilities, resilience is becoming increasingly important.
Understand Information Warfare and AI: Modern conflicts extend beyond the physical battlefield into the information and cognitive domains. AI-enabled misinformation and perception management highlight the importance of media literacy, responsible AI development, and stronger information resilience.
Please Add Value to the write-up with your views on the subject.
For regular updates, please register your email here:-
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 the respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.
Article published in the Sep 26 edition of the “Blue Print” Magazine
Air power has become a crucial instrument of national security. Possessing credible, technologically advanced air power is no longer a luxury but a strategic imperative. India occupies a unique geopolitical position. It shares borders with two nuclear-armed neighbours. Both of whom present distinct and collusive security challenges. The increasing militarisation of the Indo-Pacific region is further altering India’s security calculus. Newer technologies such as unmanned aerial systems (UAS), hypersonic missiles, cyber warfare, artificial intelligence, and space-based military capabilities have expanded the dimensions of aerial warfare.
Air power is essential to India’s security. As geopolitical tensions grow and military technology advances, India’s aerial capabilities will become a vital means of deterrence, power projection, and safeguarding national security. The extent to which the country modernises and integrates its aerial forces will significantly affect its ability to cope with the complicated geopolitical situation of the coming decades.
The Strategic Importance of Air Power. Air power constitutes a highly adaptable and lethal instrument of statecraft. It is characterised by its extensive reach, swift responsiveness, and ability to impose shock and influence through precise, non-contact means of applying force. Its effects can be activated or deactivated more easily than other instruments of national power. Although it provides a broad array of offensive capabilities, its utility extends beyond mere offensive operations. It also plays a vital role in deterrence, strategic positioning, and coercion, whether in wartime or peacetime. Unlike ground forces, air power can be deployed over great distances in just a short time and is therefore essential in times of crisis. In natural disasters, air power can provide rapid humanitarian assistance. It supports both military security and national resilience.
Geopolitical Challenges and Emerging Threats
India’s air power today sits at the centre of a far more complex security environment than at any point in the past two decades. The challenge is not only the classic two-front problem with China and Pakistan, but also the need to modernise fast enough to preserve deterrence. At the same time, air warfare is being transformed by drones, missiles, cyber, space, and networked targeting.
The China Challenge. China is India’s most significant long-term strategic challenge. The military standoff in eastern Ladakh since 2020 demonstrated that border tensions can escalate rapidly and require sustained military preparedness. The People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) has undergone extensive modernisation over the past two decades. China has also developed extensive military infrastructure in Tibet and Xinjiang. These include upgraded airbases, hardened aircraft shelters, extended runways, and logistics facilities that can support sustained air operations near the Indian border.
Pakistan and the Persistent Security Challenge. Pakistan relies on non-state actors funded and trained on its own soil to keep India in a state of unrest through disinformation, incitement and terrorism. It remains a security threat across the nuclear, conventional and sub-conventional dimensions simultaneously. The 2019 Balakot air strike and the recent Op Sindoor highlighted the growing role of air power in India’s strategy of punitive deterrence. India’s ability to conduct precision strikes deep inside hostile territory demonstrated a willingness to employ air power. However, the subsequent aerial engagement also emphasised the importance of superior situational awareness, electronic warfare, and beyond-visual-range combat capabilities.
The Rise of Drones and Autonomous Warfare. The rise of autonomous drones is one of the most significant developments in contemporary air warfare. Drones have moved from mere surveillance vehicles to versatile weapons. They can deliver precise strikes, conduct electronic warfare, and carry out reconnaissance and intelligence collection. In recent conflicts, it has been shown that relatively cheap drones can cause disproportionate damage to advanced military equipment. Swarm drone technology in particular poses considerable challenges for traditional air defence systems because it is hard to track and destroy multiple low-cost aerial targets at the same time. India is now encountering increasing drone-related threats on both its western and northern borders, and reports of drone-enabled smuggling, surveillance, and cross-border infiltration highlight the importance of having strong counter-drone capabilities.
Cyber Warfare and Electronic Warfare. Air operations now rely heavily on secure communication networks, satellite navigation, and data links. As aerial warfare platforms become more interconnected, they also become more susceptible to cyberattacks and electronic interference. Enemies could disrupt air operations by attacking communication systems, navigation networks, or mission-critical software. Electronic warfare can greatly reduce the effectiveness of the most advanced aircraft. Protection of digital infrastructure has become as important as protecting airbases. India must invest in secure communications, encrypted data links, and cyber defence capabilities.
Space as a Strategic Domain. Space has emerged as a critical component of air power. The term airpower has evolved into aerospace power, with the aerial warfare envelope expanding into the space domain. Space-based systems and applications are embedded in every aspect of aerial warfare. They are providing capabilities including navigation, targeting, communication, early warning of missile launches, and space-based surveillance. The integration of space-based systems with air assets is expected to increase further. This will create opportunities for both offensive and defensive operations. However, increasing dependence on satellite-based systems also creates vulnerabilities. Anti-satellite warfare spans kinetic weapons such as missiles as well as non-kinetic systems including jammers, laser dazzlers and spoofing equipment. Denial of space-based systems directly affects air warfare.
The Indo-Pacific and Maritime Air Power. India’s strategic interests extend beyond its borders. The Indo-Pacific area is now the centre of global economic activity and strategic competition. It is seeing rising naval deployments, disputes over maritime routes, and a growing number of military cooperation agreements. Air power plays a vital role in protecting maritime interests by enabling long-range surveillance, conducting anti-submarine warfare, conducting maritime reconnaissance, and allowing rapid force deployment. The ability to monitor key sea lanes, respond effectively to humanitarian crises, and support naval operations confirms India’s status as a major security provider in the Indian Ocean Region.
Strengthening India’s Air Power
India’s military aspirations must align with its socioeconomic condition and likely threats. The path forward for India is clear: it must enhance its deterrence capability while investing in future war-fighting technologies. With its significant offensive potential and responsiveness, air power is the most crucial arm of military action. As the nature of warfare evolves, India’s approach to air power must keep pace. The future lies in building an integrated, technology-driven, and self-reliant aerospace ecosystem that can address conventional, asymmetric, and multidomain threats. Sustained investment in modernisation, indigenous innovation, joint military operations, and human capital will be essential for maintaining India’s strategic advantage.
Capability and Capacity Balance for Credible Deterrence. Warfighting capability and the capacity to sustain operations are both essential, combining quality and quantity. While India’s air power capabilities (in terms of reach, high-altitude operations, precision, standoff, and all-weather performance) have advanced significantly, it must also increase the numerical strength of fighter aircraft, combat enablers, long-range vectors, and drones. One of the Indian Air Force’s foremost priorities is to restore its fighter squadron strength. Bridging this gap requires the timely induction of new-generation aircraft (fighters and combat support aircraft), while ensuring modernisation plans are financially sustainable.
Enhancing Indigenous Defence Manufacturing. Self-reliance has become a strategic necessity. Relying on imported defence equipment creates vulnerabilities. India should develop its own technological abilities and increase its defence manufacturing capacity. It will reduce dependence on foreign suppliers. Indigenous development of radars, electronic warfare systems, missiles, drones, and aircraft components will strengthen India’s technological base, create jobs, and boost exports. As part of the Atmanirbhar Bharat effort in defence manufacturing, the aim is to enhance self-reliance by encouraging the domestic production of these systems. The initiative has sped up domestic defence production by involving more public sector enterprises, private industries, start-ups, and research institutions. The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), academic institutions, and the private sector must work together to shorten development timelines and promote innovation.
Embracing Emerging Technologies. The adoption of emerging technologies. Technological advances are further reshaping the nature of air warfare. Precision-guided munitions, stealth technology, network-centric operations, satellite-enabled communications, artificial intelligence, and autonomous drones are all altering the battlefield. Autonomous drones and the idea of loyal wingmen are expected to transform aerial combat. India should also make investments in directed-energy weapons, advanced electronic warfare capabilities, and cyber-resilient command-and-control networks. These technologies can greatly increase operational effectiveness while reducing personnel risk. Air power assets depend heavily on technology. Turning technology into capability takes a long time. To stay ahead of the challenges, we need to invest in emerging technologies and think through their use in warfare. Impetus is also required for existing aviation-related programs such as fifth-generation fighters, Transport aircraft (for civil and military requirements), Development of gas turbines and engines, sensors and seekers, stealth, metallurgy and composites, unmanned platforms and swarms, AI-enabled autonomous systems, and long-range vectors.
Airpower Utilisation in Grey Zone Scenario. Grey zone operations occur in a contested arena between routine statecraft and open warfare. These are becoming a norm in modern-day warfare. Both of India’s adversaries resort to these operations regularly. Airpower can reinforce the nation’s course of action against grey zone warfare, with involvement in several direct and supporting roles. Besides offensive use, it can also be effectively utilised in many ways in non-conventional hostile situations categorised above. Applying airpower in these grey zone situations requires some reorientation, supported by capability enhancement in certain fields.
Conclusion
India’s air Power is at a crucial stage. Competing regional interests, technological progress, and changes in warfare have increased the strategic value of air power. As India faces challenges from both China and Pakistan and the Indo-Pacific region grows more important, it needs constant modernisation and strategic adjustment. India can ensure its air power remains capable of protecting its national interests in this increasingly uncertain and contested geopolitical environment by promoting innovation, supporting domestic research, and adopting multidomain warfare.
Please Add Value to the write-up with your views on the subject.
For regular updates, please register your email here:-
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 the respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.
References: –
Fontanellaz A, “Operation Sindoor: The India-Pakistan air war”, Centre d’Histoire et de Prospective Militaires (2026).
Jane’s, “Feature: China accelerates air combat modernisation”, Janes.com (2025, November 19).
Article published in the Sep 26 edition of “News Analytics” magazine
The character of warfare evolves alongside technological innovation. Today, another transformative revolution is reshaping global security. The integration of artificial intelligence (AI), autonomous weapons systems, and human-machine teaming into military operations is underway.
Deterrence has traditionally depended on a human adversary believing that the costs of aggression will outweigh its expected benefits. Nuclear weapons made this logic especially powerful by creating the prospect of unacceptable retaliation.
Autonomous warfare, however, is altering the speed, visibility and psychology of military competition. Artificial intelligence-enabled systems can detect, classify, track and engage targets with limited human intervention. In contrast, autonomous drones, loitering munitions, cyber tools, underwater vehicles and defensive systems may operate across several domains simultaneously. The central question is whether autonomous systems will replace conventional or nuclear deterrence or alter its dynamics.
The Transformative Effects on Deterrence
At the core of this transformation is the integration of AI across the full spectrum of military functions, including intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR), targeting, command and control, logistics, and, increasingly, the application of force. Autonomous platforms (ranging from loitering munitions and drone swarms to AI-enabled decision-support systems) operate with varying degrees of independence once activated. Human-machine teaming seeks to combine the strengths of both.
Autonomous systems are particularly suited to denial because they can support persistent sensing, distributed defence, and rapid disruption. Unmanned aerial vehicles can monitor approaches to military installations; autonomous underwater systems can observe maritime activity; ground robots can support border surveillance; and AI-enabled command systems can fuse information from multiple sensors. A networked force may complicate an adversary’s effort to achieve surprise, suppress defences or destroy high-value targets.
Autonomy can enhance capability by allowing military systems to process enormous quantities of data and act faster than human operators. An AI-enabled surveillance network may identify changes in an adversary’s deployment patterns before traditional intelligence systems do. Autonomous platforms can then maintain continuous patrols, coordinate with one another and respond to selected threats without waiting for detailed instructions. Such capabilities may strengthen deterrence by denial.
The importance of denial will increase as military forces become more dispersed. Instead of protecting a small number of vulnerable platforms, states may deploy large numbers of mobile, concealed and networked systems. An adversary would then face a difficult targeting problem: destroying some autonomous platforms would not necessarily turn off the entire force. This resilience can reduce the attractiveness of a first strike.
Autonomy can influence credibility. A state with resilient, dispersed, and relatively inexpensive autonomous systems may be able to respond to aggression even after suffering damage to its command centres, air bases, or naval facilities. Swarms and unmanned systems can generate operational effects without exposing large numbers of personnel to danger. This may make retaliation more politically acceptable and therefore more credible.
Autonomy can also impose operational costs. Defensive systems may use algorithms to detect incoming missiles, drones or aircraft and recommend or initiate responses. If these systems are reliable and their employment conditions are clearly defined, they can reduce the prospect that an adversary will achieve a quick victory. The strategic message becomes: aggression will encounter a persistent, adaptive and difficult-to-suppress defence.
Escalation Dynamics
The most serious challenge is compressed decision time. Autonomous systems can identify and respond to threats faster than human institutions can verify information, consult political leaders or establish whether an incident was deliberate. In a crisis, this may generate a “use-or-lose” mentality. Commanders may fear that delaying action will allow an adversary’s autonomous systems to destroy their own sensors, communications or retaliatory forces.
Machine-speed operations can therefore create pressure for pre-delegation. Political and military leaders may authorise automated responses in advance because human approval would be too slow. Yet pre-delegation carries significant risks. An algorithm may misinterpret a civilian aircraft, a training exercise or a cyber intrusion as an attack. A technical malfunction could trigger a chain of responses that neither side intended.
Autonomous warfare also creates the possibility of machine-to-machine interaction. One state’s defensive algorithm may classify the activation of another state’s autonomous system as hostile. The second state may then respond automatically, producing reciprocal escalation. Unlike human decision-makers, algorithms do not possess political intuition, historical memory or an inherent preference for restraint. They optimise according to programmed objectives and available data. If the data are incomplete or manipulated, the resulting decision may be technically rational but strategically disastrous.
Strategic Stability
Autonomous warfare will have its most consequential impact on strategic stability when it interacts with nuclear forces. AI-enabled systems may improve early warning, intelligence analysis and the protection of nuclear assets. They could help identify suspicious activity and strengthen command-and-control resilience. In this respect, autonomy may reduce uncertainty and support more informed decisions.
The opposite is also possible. AI-enabled surveillance and autonomous strike systems could threaten mobile missiles, submarines, command centres and communications networks. If one state believes that its nuclear deterrent is becoming vulnerable, it may adopt more aggressive readiness postures or delegate greater authority to military commanders. The combination of improved detection, persistent tracking and rapid attack could generate fears of a disarming first strike.
This danger is not limited to actual technical capability. Perception also does matter. A state may respond to what it believes an adversary can do, even if the adversary’s systems are not as effective as assumed. Strategic competition could consequently become unstable through exaggerated assessments of AI-enabled counterforce capabilities. The combination of advanced intelligence, strike systems and missile defence may challenge the traditional assumption that retaliation remains assured after a first strike.
Autonomous systems may also blur the boundary between conventional and nuclear operations. An attack on dual-use command-and-control infrastructure by conventional autonomous weapons could be interpreted as preparation for a nuclear attack. If a state cannot distinguish between an anti-conventional operation and an anti-nuclear operation, it may escalate rapidly. Maintaining clear separation between nuclear and conventional assets, preserving human decision authority and establishing crisis communication channels will therefore become increasingly important.
Implications for India and Regional Security
For India, autonomous warfare is directly relevant to a security environment characterised by contested borders, maritime competition, terrorism, cyber threats, and the possibility of simultaneous pressure from multiple directions. Autonomous systems can enhance surveillance along difficult terrain, improve maritime domain awareness and support the protection of critical infrastructure. They can also strengthen deterrence by denial by making surprise incursions, drone attacks and limited aggression more difficult to execute successfully.
However, technology alone cannot provide deterrence. India would require an integrated architecture combining sensors, secure communications, electronic warfare, cyber resilience, air defence, space-based support and trained human operators. Autonomous platforms must remain connected to a wider command-and-control system that can function even when communications are degraded, or networks are attacked.
Concluding Thoughts
The transition to algorithm-assisted autonomous warfare will not change the basic concept of strategic deterrence. It will mandate a more controlled version of it. One that accounts for machine-speed decision cycles and distributed, ambiguous chains of responsibility. It will also have to cater for an adversary whose calculations are also based on software architectures. Autonomy will create an additional layer of deterrence, one based on persistent surveillance, rapid response, distributed force structures, denial of objectives and the ability to impose costs at machine speed.
As autonomous capabilities continue to grow, policymakers will have the important task of adapting and finding balance during this transition. In autonomous warfare, deterrence will depend not just on cutting-edge technologies but also on ensuring these systems operate within clear, transparent guidelines, robust command structures, well-rounded legal frameworks, and internationally accepted norms. The goal isn’t to slow technological progress, but to ensure that humans, who are ultimately responsible for warfare, still have the power to choose peace.
Please Add Value to the write-up with your views on the subject.
For regular updates, please register your email here:-
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 the respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.
References: –
Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses. (2019). Artificial intelligence and national security: Indian perspectives. Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses.
Rajaraman, V. (2014). Robot soldiers: Artificial intelligence and the future of warfare. Resonance, 19(11), 1037–1048.
Horowitz, M. C. (2016). The ethics & morality of robotic warfare: Assessing the debate over autonomous weapons. Political Science Quarterly, 131(2), 331–351.
Boulanin, V., Saalman, L., Topychkanov, P., Su, F., & Peldán Carlsson, M. (2020). Artificial intelligence, strategic stability and nuclear risk. Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.
Su, F., Wan, W., Saalman, L., & Chernavskikh, V. (2025). Pragmatic approaches to governance at the artificial intelligence–nuclear nexus. Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.
Boulanin, V., Saalman, L., Topychkanov, P., Su, F., & Peldán Carlsson, M. (2020). Artificial intelligence, strategic stability and nuclear risk. Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.
Johnson, J. (2020). Artificial intelligence, drone swarming and deterrence. Journal of Strategic Studies, 43(5), 1–24.
Horowitz, M. C. (2019). When speed kills: Lethal autonomous weapons, deterrence, and stability. Journal of Strategic Studies, 42(5), 764–788.
