Lakmal Dharmasena
Abstract:
Despite the extraordinary technological advancements of the 21st century, recent armed conflicts suggest that humanity’s strategic and ethical evolution may not have kept pace. This paper examines the paradox of contemporary warfare: advanced powers possessing nuclear arms and artificial intelligence struggle to overpower resistance movements relying on improvised, low-tech weaponry. Drawing examples from Ukraine, Gaza, and Yemen, the analysis explores the re-emergence of primitive logic within modern conflicts. The study raises questions about whether technological progress has truly advanced civilization or merely equipped humanity with deadlier tools to repeat ancient patterns of violence.
In the modern era, technological achievement is often equated with progress. The development of artificial intelligence, space travel, high-speed communication, and advanced weaponry has redefined what it means to be a “developed” society. Yet, as global superpowers become embroiled in long-drawn, indecisive, and ethically complex wars, a disturbing question arises: has our moral and strategic evolution lagged behind our technological capabilities? This paper explores the hypothesis that despite having the most advanced tools for warfare in history, modern nations continue to engage in conflict with the same tribal, territorial, and ideological mindsets that governed ancient battles. The wars in Ukraine, Gaza, and Yemen exemplify this contradiction.
Technological Evolution and Its Expectations
The assumption that technological progress would bring about ethical and strategic maturity is not new. Enlightenment thinkers like Condorcet and Bacon believed that scientific progress would lead to societal betterment. In military theory, Clausewitz (1832/1989) envisioned war as a continuation of politics by other means, assuming that with rational leadership and technological tools, war could become a calculated, limited endeavor. However, the wars of the 20th and 21st centuries—particularly asymmetric conflicts—have shown otherwise.
The current global arsenal includes nuclear warheads, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), hypersonic missiles, cyber warfare tools, and AI-based surveillance. These tools imply precision, control, and deterrence. Yet the actual conduct of modern warfare is chaotic, decentralized, and often rooted in improvisation, as evidenced in Ukraine, Gaza, and Yemen.
Ukraine and the Improvisation of Warfare
The Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 was expected by many analysts to result in a swift victory for Moscow, given its overwhelming firepower and military resources. However, the Ukrainian resistance defied these expectations. One of the most notable features of Ukraine’s defense has been its use of improvised and commercial technologies—such as converting consumer drones into explosive-carrying UAVs.
According to Foy (2024), Ukraine used homemade drones and low-cost battlefield strategies to strike high-value targets inside Russian territory. The campaign known as “Operation Spiderweb” disrupted Russian airfields, tank formations, and command centers (McCarthy, 2024). These drones, often built with parts from civilian supply chains and guided by AI-based software, undermined the traditional notion that military superiority is tied to expensive, state-controlled technology.
This return to improvisation reflects not a lack of resources, but a strategic adaptation—relying on speed, creativity, and unpredictability. It mirrors tactics used by insurgent groups throughout history, such as the Viet Cong during the Vietnam War, but with the augmentation of modern tech.
Gaza and the Logic of Resistance
In the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the paradox of high-tech vs. low-tech warfare is similarly pronounced. Israel’s military is equipped with cutting-edge missile defense systems, cyber capabilities, and one of the most sophisticated air forces in the world. Yet, militant groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad have continually adapted using low-cost rockets, tunnels, and decentralized communication networks (Malsin, 2023).
Despite the Iron Dome intercepting many rockets, Israel has been unable to fully suppress these groups. The militants’ use of civilian infrastructure, human shields, and improvised weaponry creates complex moral and tactical dilemmas. Their resistance is rooted less in technological parity and more in asymmetric strategic culture—one that accepts casualties and seeks psychological, political, and symbolic victories.
This demonstrates that even the most powerful technologies cannot fully counter movements that are ideologically committed, culturally embedded, and decentralized. It also exposes the limits of conventional military thinking in resolving deeply rooted political and humanitarian conflicts.
Yemen: The Houthi Adaptation
The Houthi insurgency in Yemen illustrates how modern guerrilla movements adapt crude tools for strategic impact. Backed partially by Iran, the Houthis have modified commercial drones, repurposed gas cylinders into missiles, and used old naval mines to strike Saudi and Emirati targets (UN Panel of Experts, 2023). Their attacks on oil infrastructure and cargo ships show that even with minimal resources, determined actors can cause significant disruption.
These tactics echo ancient warfare strategies—ambush, sabotage, and terrain exploitation—now blended with GPS navigation and social media propaganda. The Houthis operate in a region with limited infrastructure, yet have created a hybrid warfare model that challenges some of the wealthiest states in the world.
Philosophical and Ethical Regression
The true regression lies not in tools, but in ethics and strategy. While the Geneva Conventions, the UN Charter, and numerous treaties seek to limit wartime conduct, violations remain rampant. Civilian populations continue to be the primary victims in modern conflicts, despite technological capabilities that should enable precision targeting.
Military theorist Andrew Bacevich (2016) argues that America’s wars in the Middle East reflect an addiction to military power combined with a failure to understand political complexity. This critique extends globally: nations trust their weapons more than their diplomats. Consequently, war becomes not the last resort, but a first impulse, even in highly developed societies.
This raises critical questions: Have we evolved ethically? Or are we merely recycling ancient instincts—territorialism, fear, revenge—through modern machinery?
The Feedback Loop of Violence
Modern warfare creates a feedback loop:
- Advanced weapons generate retaliation and resistance.
- Resistance groups adapt with low-cost improvisations.
- States respond with more surveillance, more precision, and more force.
- Cycles of violence continue with increasing technological sophistication but decreasing moral clarity.
This feedback loop is visible in drone warfare. Countries like the U.S., Israel, and Russia deploy drones for surveillance and assassination. Resistance groups respond with DIY drones and psychological operations. As Benjamin (2019) notes, drones have become symbols of both dominance and defiance—used by both the powerful and the powerless.
In this loop, the logic of war remains tribal, but the tools are robotic. The contradiction is unsettling.
Civilizational Maturity and the Illusion of Control
The belief that technological advancement guarantees control is a dangerous illusion. Cyber warfare, AI-based targeting, and autonomous weapons increase the complexity—and unpredictability—of conflict. Once released, these systems operate on algorithms that may not fully account for humanitarian law or diplomatic contexts.
Furthermore, the accessibility of these technologies undermines traditional power hierarchies. As Seddon (2024) notes, Ukraine’s AI-guided drones were programmed to identify and prioritize targets using machine learning. But such tools can easily be replicated or reverse-engineered by smaller actors, raising fears of autonomous weapons falling into the hands of militias and rogue states.
As a result, we may be approaching a post-strategic age, where speed and data replace deliberation and wisdom.
Are We Evolving Backward?
So, are we evolving backward? Technologically, no. Strategically and ethically, perhaps yes. The wars in Ukraine, Gaza, and Yemen suggest that:
- Technological power does not equate to moral authority.
- Precision tools do not prevent human suffering.
- Superior firepower does not guarantee victory.
Instead of evolving into a peaceful, rational global order, we may be regressing into a technologized version of ancient warfare, where tribal logics—us vs. them, conquest vs. resistance—are conducted with drones, missiles, and satellites.
Conclusion: Reimagining Progress
This analysis does not deny the importance of national defense or technological advancement. Rather, it challenges the assumption that these automatically translate into peace or justice. The future of warfare will be determined not by how intelligent our machines become, but by how wisely we choose to use them.
To truly evolve, we must align our ethical reasoning, diplomatic institutions, and strategic culture with the pace of our technological development. Otherwise, we risk becoming the most sophisticatedly armed yet morally stagnant civilization in history.
References
Bacevich, A. J. (2016). America’s war for the greater Middle East: A military history. Random House.
Benjamin, M. (2019). Drone warfare: Killing by remote control. OR Books.
Clausewitz, C. von. (1989). On war (M. Howard & P. Paret, Eds. & Trans.). Princeton University Press. (Original work published 1832)
Echevarria, A. J. (2007). Fourth-generation war and other myths. Strategic Studies Institute. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA467428.pdf
Foy, H. (2024, May 7). Ukraine’s drone war flips the battlefield. Financial Times. https://www.ft.com/content/e5418bff-ae29-4335-9f69-1c90d598d54a
Malsin, J. (2023, October 12). How Hamas managed to surprise Israel. The Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/how-hamas-surprised-israel-2023-10-12
McCarthy, J. (2024, April 29). Operation Spiderweb: How Ukraine pulled off the unthinkable. News.com.au. https://www.news.com.au/technology/operation-spiderweb-how-ukraine-pulled-off-the-unthinkable/news-story/dd04e0a479cd858256fffa47c875a96d
Seddon, M. (2024, May 10). How AI-guided drones gave Ukraine an edge. Financial Times. https://www.ft.com/content/ccd83e2a-521f-4e35-a5f0-2ec1ef63749e
UN Panel of Experts. (2023). Final report on Yemen. United Nations Security Council. https://www.undocs.org/S/2023/492