“As in the First World War, we have reached a level of technology that is bringing us to a standstill,” Ukrainian General Valery Zaluzhny admitted late last year. “There probably won’t be deep and beautiful progress.”
This harsh assessment by the Ukrainian leader in an interview with The Economist in November triggered waves of extreme pessimism. Headlines around the world said the war was almost over. Ukraine fought bravely – and lost.
Western politicians, including Republicans in the US Congress, said it was time to stop deliveries to Kiev and demand serious concessions from Moscow.
The general's actual argument, however, was less fatalistic. In a nine-page essay published in a British magazine, Zaluzhny does not use the word “containment.” Instead, he referred to the war as a “war of position” because both sides exchanged only small areas of land. However, he criticized the fact that Ukraine could still win. But, he writes, this means “the search for new, non-trivial approaches to breaking military parity with the enemy.”
According to Zaluzhny, technological innovations, more modern equipment and changes in strategy can still transform this war. He outlined five areas in which progress could mean defeating the Russian adversary: gaining air superiority, improving mine clearance, expanding counter-battery warfare, recruiting additional troops and developing electronic warfare.
To achieve these goals, he writes, Ukraine needs a unique technological breakthrough.
“One simple fact: we see everything the enemy does and everything we do,” Zaluzhny writes. “To break this blockade, we need something new, like the gunpowder that the Chinese invented and that we still use to kill each other with.”
In recent months, WIRED has spoken to numerous NATO leaders and military analysts, as well as Ukrainian officials, about the future of warfare. The consensus is clear: there is no magic solution Ukraine can come up with to win this war. But he agrees that Ukraine can and must innovate if it hopes to defeat a better-off and more entrenched enemy.
“The right mix of new ideas, new institutions and new technologies will break the logjam,” said Mick Ryan, a 35-year Australian Army veteran who writes extensively about the future of warfare. “It’s about combining this trinity of ideas, technologies and institutions into something new.”
