Can AI and drones replace soldiers and jets?

Mint

18 hours ago

When Ukrainian drones struck deep inside Russia last month and damaged strategic bombers once considered untouchable, it sent shock waves through military circles. Operation Spider's Web was more than a display of technological ingenuity; it challenged longstanding assumptions about modern warfare. An outgunned but nimble force using off-the-shelf drones disrupted a far larger adversary. Speed, asymmetry and creativity outmatched legacy systems.
Weeks later, Israel's strike on Iranian nuclear facilities offered a sharper, more enduring lesson: the future of warfare isn't about drones replacing jets—it's about integration. While Ukraine revealed how smart, agile tactics can disrupt an adversary, Israel put on a masterclass in modern warfare by blending conventional and new battlefield technologies.
In Israel's opening strike, more than 200 aircraft dropped 300 precision munitions on 100 Iranian targets, according to the Israel Defense Forces. Simultaneously, Israeli quadcopters launched from a clandestine drone base inside Iran destroyed missile launchers aimed at the Jewish state. Using vehicles reportedly smuggled into Iran, Israeli operatives deployed weapons systems and precision missiles to destroy antiaircraft batteries. Acting on intelligence collected over decades, Israel targeted and killed dozens of Iranian military and nuclear officials. Human intelligence, cyber operations, unmanned systems and manned air power operated in the pre-emptive strike—it was a feat of modern military orchestration.
The lesson is clear: Successful military operations no longer depend only on overwhelming firepower or technological novelty. They now require synthesis—air and ground, legacy and next-generation, human and machine.
Israel's opening strike redefined how the IDF thinks about conflict. According to a former IDF general I spoke with days after the operation, Israeli military leaders accelerated their planning cycles from five years to five months. The pace of technological change, the blurring of operational environments and the shifting tactics of adversaries demanded the faster timeline. To stay ahead on the battlefield, there is no longer time for slow adaptation.
This is a warning to democracies, especially the U.S. The wars of the 21st century won't be won by choosing between drones and jets, analog and digital, artificial intelligence and human intuition. They will be won by militaries that combine them—creatively and continuously.
Ukraine's drone campaign exemplifies adaptation. Facing a vastly superior military, Kyiv equipped commercial drones with explosives and software. Ukraine destroyed more than 40 Russian aircraft hundreds of miles from the front for a fraction of the cost of a single fighter jet.
But while cheap drones represent the tip of the spear, they aren't the spear itself. Israel's air assault required a blend of stealth and brute force, AI and human judgment, unmanned systems and pilots. This was military doctrine catching up to technology.
That distinction is where the U.S. military faces its most serious challenge. America's legacy weapons platforms—tanks, ships, aircraft—remain formidable, but they are often disconnected from one another and from the networked, AI-enabled architecture that defines modern conflict. Innovation is bolted onto outdated hardware rather than built into the organization's DNA. AI enhances precision targeting but rarely informs strategy. Interoperability between old and new remains patchy, held back by legacy procurement and bureaucratic stovepipes.
Meanwhile, competitors are rapidly advancing. In 2021 China stunned U.S. officials with a hypersonic missile test that circumnavigated the globe. Gen. Mark Milley, then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, testified that it was 'very close" to China's Sputnik moment. The real shock was the integration behind the weapon: space-based guidance, hypersonic propulsion and precision targeting functioning in coordination. Beijing rewired its military around how that capability fits into the broader strategy.
By contrast, the U.S. often treats technological upgrades as plug-ins rather than catalysts for larger transformation. This leaves critical gaps—against China, but also against ragtag adversaries in Afghanistan and Iraq who showed they can outmaneuver American forces with cheaper tech and ingenuity.
To close this gap, democracies must embrace the entrepreneurial power of the private sector. Venture-capital firms and startups are increasingly driving battlefield innovation. In Silicon Valley and Tel Aviv, small companies often push the edge of what's possible faster than traditional defense contractors. But for this innovation to translate into strategic advantages, defense establishments must connect emerging technologies with military requirements. That means rethinking procurement, creating incentives for experimentation, and making startup integration the norm.
If the U.S. can't reconcile its industrial-age forces with digital-age demands, even a massive defense budget won't guarantee superiority. AI and unmanned systems must be treated as integral components of training, war-fighting culture, and objectives. A truly modern military trains every commander to think with drones, and it writes AI into the rules of engagement. Integration is a continuous process of aligning tools, talent, and tactics with the future fight.
That future fight is here. Hypersonic weapons, cyberattacks, and autonomous swarms are already operational. Militaries must move faster—on the ground and especially in their thinking. What will separate winners from losers in this new era will be the creativity and coherence with which militaries combine their assets. Ukraine's battlefield improvisation and Israel's strategic integration both underscore this point: Tools matter, but how you use them matters more.
The U.S. military can either lead this transition or risk being overtaken by forces quicker to adapt. Democracies, constrained by public accountability and limited by budgets, have no choice but to do more with less—and to do it smarter. They must lead this evolution not only with brute force, but with imagination.
Mr. Kaplowitz is founder of 1948 Ventures, a U.S.-based venture-capital firm that invests exclusively in Israeli dual-use technology companies.