War today is changing fast, and not always in ways we can understand or control. The Sum of Our Disquietude looks at recent and past conflicts to show how modern technology, distant strikes, and new battle tactics are shaping a future where peace feels harder to plan and even harder to keep.

“I am Sick of Everything, and of the Everythingness of Everything” Fernando Pessoa, (The Book of Disquiet)

The last two and a half years of the information age have presented to humanity, unique and terrifying glimpses of future war. War institutionally has been a painful companion to humanity since the dawn of civilisation. It has always represented a period of suffering, death, pestilence and violent change. The recent transformations that we have seen, bring to fore critical issues that impact directly on how nations will need to plan their future security. More significantly, this bears directly on the much-quoted aspect of ‘comprehensive national power’. While there have been several attempts to define and give a set of parameters to this domain, recent conflicts have revealed challenging and exceedingly disquieting aspects.

Images of the recent wars commencing with that in Ukraine (Feb 2023), have illuminated our perception on various novel elements that have infiltrated the political strategic calculus. While the commencement of the Russia – Ukraine War was a type of conflict which one could relate to, its gradual positioning in the additional domain of ‘No Contact War’ has been instructive. We all sat in horror, when the Hamas terror attacks on Israel erupted on 7 Oct 2023.  This has led to a new genre of war now waged around Israel. There have in addition, been a slew of mind-boggling offensive initiatives. The attacks by Ukraine on Russian targets on 01 June 2025; Israel against Iran in June 2025, and not to be ignored, the Israeli attacks on Hezbollah leadership of Sep 2024. What has confronted the extant strategic paradigm, has been the exceptional manoeuvre from the air by the US on Iran.

Not for a moment, should we be in any illusion that distant manoeuvres well away from home bases are in any way a new innovation in war.  The numerous attacks and campaigns across the various oceans and seas, over history, stand testimony to the use of operational manoeuvre and force far from the homebase.  While offensives across landmass have seldom achieved the kind of momentum and reach of the Mongols, those across the seas have being daring, and also had lasting results.

Some campaigns in history that have had unintended outcomes are instructive. While it is tempting to talk off, Alexander as ‘The Great’, I reserve my view on his greatness. Undoubtedly his operational genius and evolved Army, gave him victories. Two battles Issus and Gaugamela gave him the Persian Empire. This operational genius and strategic style, however, failed on the Jhelum when he faced Porus. While the jury is still out on who won the battle of Hydaspes (326 BCE), it is evidently clear that Alexander lost all his impetus and determination between, the Jhelum and the Beas rivers, resulting in a desultory retreat which cost him, his life. A fine example of power projection and strategic outcomes is that of Hannibal who carried an Army and elephants from North Africa, across the Alps to debouch in the battle of Cannae (216 BCE), South East Italy. The alarming presence of armies from North Africa, its unusual elements coupled with the asymmetric brilliance of Hannibal resulted in a crushing defeat of the Roman Legions at Cannae. It’s a different matter, that for several reasons, Hannibal did not press this advantage.

Another iconic example that stares at us from the pages of history is the Russo-Japanese war in the Tsushima Straits (May 1905). Decision by the Tsar to move the Russian Baltic Fleet 33,000 Km, over seven months to seek battle with the Japanese Navy was an astonishing example of seeking to project power. The outcome of this mammoth enterprise was the complete destruction of the numerically superior Russian fleet in less than 24 hours. This diminished the stature and influence of Russia, opening opportunities for subsequent unrest, wars and revolution.

Some colonial battles that have swung empires are now out of view. Significant are those that were waged by the British and the French Navies (1746-1791) off the coast of what is today Tamil Nadu, for supremacy on the Indian Subcontinent.  Despite the brilliance of the French Admiral De Suffern, the French could not prevail. This paved the way for an unhindered access, of Britain to India leading to the establishment of a Colonial Empire.

The First World War, left us with exceptionally painful lessons. One that reflects in an upended manner to the Russia-Ukraine War is that of the Naval Rivalry between Britain and Germany prior to the War.  Britain saw herself as the mistress of the Seas, riding centuries of Naval Supremacy. Germany set about challenging this and its rapid commissioning of Capital Battleships, was a huge factor in the descent into War. Strategically, it was quite simple there could be no challenge to the British domination of the Atlantic, North Sea and to a lesser degree the Baltic.

Strategic space. The backdrop of the contesting views and contortions of the Strategic Space Argument, haunt the Russia-Ukraine conflict. There is one significant difference, it’s not about the open seas, it’s over sovereign territory.

The Second World War gave us outstanding examples of power projection and operational manoeuvres over extensive regions. The Pacific War in its stretch to Pearl Harbour, Midway, capture of the dominant Pacific Islands and the bombing of Japan. As also the indisputable high tide of such power projection in Normandy, France by the Allied Expeditionary Force. While this war very convincingly displayed the dominant frontier of Air War, there was no instance of this in itself being decisive. Of course, we have to quickly reflect on the dropping of two nuclear weapons against Japan, based on air power. It can be argued that these came at the end, of a dominant phase of bombing of the Japanese Islands, which had been left with negligible air defence or Air Force capability, to prevent the drops.

There was an almost seamless transition from the Second World War to the Cold War.  Unseen to many, Cold War conflicts raged over the globe. What was soon evident was that sovereignty of a State and its control over governance and territory, had very different meanings in diverse contexts. Gone were the notions of a state of war, conflict termination, and the state of peace. Most of the ideals that nations had sworn to abide by in the UN charter, were disregarded. The era of unending wars saw its dawn, in Vietnam, Angola, and the Iran – Iraq War. These wars however, almost up to the Syrian Civil War (2011-24) followed some understandable outlines. Taking of centre space by the elements of unified real time C4ISR and No Contact War has changed all that.

Commencing from Feb 2023 Russia-Ukraine, till US Operation Midnight Hammer (22 June 2025), targeting Iranian Nuclear Sites, is a period that has changed the environment. We need to be realistic, with hyperboles, that wars have become more unpredictable, more destructive etc. All wars through history have been predicated on destruction, death, and violence. It is interesting therefore to deliberate on the central aspects of the extant ecosystem.

Air-Space Domain. All above land, and all above sea have seamlessly merged into one continuum up to space. The segmentation of this domain no longer makes any sense. Whether it is air defence or indeed application of force the entire spectrum has to be contended as one. While this imparts great advantages for those who are technologically buoyant, it cripples the majority who either lag behind or are technologically challenged.

Velocity and Momentum. Once operations and manoeuvres commence, they generate an exceedingly high velocity of orders and execution, and impart unforgiving momentum to actions. Politico-military leadership does not have the luxury of periods of review and reassessment. These have to be done on the fly. This increases the opportunities for miss-stepping, and engendering unpredictable outcomes, beyond capability to redeem.

Battle Field Tech. This is best described as ‘Mean, Selfish and Darwinian.’ Drones or UAVs were the ubiquitous ‘Eye in the Sky’ commencing effectively post 9/11, and graduated to high precision targeting. The High and Medium altitude soon began getting the surface skimming breed. Tech escalated, costs dropped, volumes increased and sizes became smaller. By the commencement of the Russian-Ukraine war a full family of low-cost drones with multiple use became evident. Ukrainian drones waited in ambushes, carried logistics, delivered stores and crashed into targets. All in an electronic globe of C4ISR, intimate guidance and precision geo-data. Presently the battlefield is dominated with wire guided drones, riding fibre optics to avoid electronic and optical jamming. A transition from electronic, IR, Optical, to fibre optics in 2 years. A Ukrainian drone can carry a fibre optic cable up to 20 KM long, and the sole nation to supply the cable is China. I leave you to imagine the complexity and frenetic activity behind only one battlefield weapon. Small tech advantages and sovereignty of software operated systems are crucial battle winning factors.

The Unblinking Bright Eye. ‘Eye in the Sky’ is a horribly outdated concept. What is sought, and maintained by some, is the ‘Unblinking Eye’. From satellite to UAV, to computers, cameras and a variety of observation and monitoring, 24/7 as well as predictive surveillance on targets. The process has to be Intelligent, so ‘Unblinking Bright Eye.’ Only a few operate and sustain these domains. So, there is a global embedded class system, those who have assiduously established themselves on the high ground, and the rest. Catch up is a difficult game to play since no one is stopping.

The Catch Up Game. Is Tough. Asymmetric brilliance will lead. Let’s look at the example of Indian Space startups. 3 to 5 Indian companies are aggressively pursuing satellite manufacturing and assembly in India. Nations around the world are in a heightened demand for space-based surveillance and defence infrastructure. The companies are targeting a 17 billion USD, contribution to the Indian economy in the next eight years. One of the companies has revealed it will provide ultra-low earth orbit satellites, a game changer. These companies also benefit from the ‘Big Players’, all being inaccessible to nations for one or another reason. This bold innovative and highly intellectual effort is eminently achievable. A model for others.

Distant Warriors. The present paradigm, has thrown up a breed of distant warriors. Those that manage C4ISR systems, Drones, Missiles, Satellites, Air Defence systems and very long-range artillery, distant from the battle zones. The skills, domain awareness, sensitivities, and empathy with the ‘in your eye’ battle spaces are challenging. If these become dedicated cadres, there is real danger that conflicting minds will be addressing battle space realities.

Midnight Hammer. A nonstop flight from the US mainland to Iran and return, multiple mid-air refuelling, massive ordinance bombs, precision, and an indeterminate air and sea support package. From the B2 Spirit, (a Batman weapon lookalike), to the bombs and the entire int and guidance eco system, only the US, in a single member club, could do it. That’s weaponised Darwinism. And let’s be very clear, there is no one presently even near second spot.

Voodoo Economics, Magic Money. In the centre of this global trend is the complex process of selective globalisation and de-globalisation. Economic assertion and economic deprivation as a weapon of coercion. Oil, gas, rare minerals, trade all are new arenas of contest. Financial stability and liquidity of Nation States, prevents drawing up of any definitive plans. Economic and Monetary perspectives at best are assessments with very short timelines, small windows and tight frames. A challenging environment for any long-term defence and security perspective planning.

Then there is the burning question of conventional military forces. A valid question, but easily answered. The Ukrainian land battle front is now about 750 KM. Vicious and stinging battles are being fought, for every inch of territory. No change on how nations define and seek victory. Territory. The land battle is central to the Israeli, Gaza conflict. NATO nations are concerned about their land borders, primarily, related to security. Unsurprising that European nations are putting their heads together for a future land fighting tank. So the fighting man and the fighting systems that dive into the fire of land battle cannot ever be neglected.

The other factor central to human conflict that has remained unchanged, is the spirit and resilience. As we have read about and studied the recent conflicts, one cannot but be inspired by repeated displays of the human spirit, and exceptional resilience, in the face of alarming and relentless adversity.

How does one gather enough speed to run and gain on a treadmill that is presently hurtling away. What is essential beyond compromise, what is aspirational and what is the vision we hold. These are some of the portentous priorities facing our planners at all levels. All pursuits demand human intellect, innovation, asymmetric thinking and exceptional stamina in execution. Our long path of war conflict and weapons have left us with death of distance, death of geography, destruction at will from distant locales, and an inability to plan on peaceful progress. When human development and furthering the life of the planet should be our priorities, we are fearful of our ability to remain at peace.

“if four things are followed-having a great aim, acquiring knowledge, hard work, and perseverance- then anything can be achieved” -APJ Kalam, Hon President of India