Ukraine's drone strike on Russia spurs global military rethink, raises U.S. preparedness concerns

Yahoo

16 hours ago

Ukraine's drone attack on Russia last weekend was a technological and intelligence game changer. It will reshape not only how the United States bolsters its military, but how the entire world does — allies and adversaries alike.
While defense specialists examined the feat in the days since the attack and Ukraine celebrated its success, the question remains: How prepared is the U.S. to use and fend off this emerging tech in warfare?
Not well enough, former Utah Rep. Chris Stewart told the Deseret News.
Stewart spent 14 years as a pilot in the Air Force and served on the permanent Select Committee on Intelligence while he was in the House of Representatives.
He argued that President Volodymyr Zelenskyy's attack, which took more than a year and a half to plan, was 'brilliantly planned' and 'brilliantly executed.'
It was a 'dramatic event' that will reshape military thinking globally, Stewart said.
On June 1, more than 100 Ukrainian drones targeted military airfields and warplanes in Russia that held equipment used in the more than three-year war.
Zelenskyy shared a thread online celebrating his military's success in the mission, nicknamed 'Spider Web.'
The attack was unique because it demonstrated Ukraine's ability to conduct a successful mission without intelligence assistance, it struck deep into Russian territory, destroyed billions of dollars of Russian equipment and came at a very low cost to Ukraine.
The attack consisted of 117 unmanned drones, each with a drone operator. Drones were smuggled into Russia and placed in wooden containers that had remote-controlled lids. The drones then 'took off to strike their targets,' which were at four different Russian airfields, Ukraine's Security Service said.
Ukraine said 41 Russian aircraft were hit by their drones, dealing Russia a blow of an estimated $7 billion. Zelenskyy touted that one of the targeted locations was directly next to one of the FSB Russian security service offices and Russia had 'suffered significant losses.'
Zelenskyy said Ukraine will continue to propose a 'full and unconditional ceasefire' and work toward peace with Russia, but its June 1 attack may have pushed Russia further away from the negotiating table.
Stewart argued that the attack, while largely successful in its goal of targeting some of Russia's prized possessions, is also a 'destabilizing event.'
'It was an attack, direct attack on an asset that Vladimir Putin considers his highest priority and I worry a little bit about the implications of that,' he said, later adding, 'I'm not saying Zelenskyy shouldn't have done it, I'm just saying … one of the outcomes for that is it's going to make … the peace negotiations that are taking place much harder.'
President Donald Trump — who was apparently not aware of Ukraine's attack ahead of time — spoke with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Wednesday.
According to Trump, Putin said he would respond to the drone attack. It was a 'good conversation,' but not one that would lead to immediate peace, Trump said.
Hours later, Russia struck the Ukrainian city of Pryluky, killing at least five people, including a 1-year-old child.
On Friday, Russia launched one of its largest aerial attacks of the war, bombing six Ukrainian regions. The attack included 407 drones and 33 missiles. It killed four people, Ukraine said.
As Ukraine balances protecting its front lines and cities, continuing its counteroffensive against Russia and seeking to strike a peace deal, the escalation raises questions about what the recent attack means for the United States and its adversaries.
Stewart noted that the conflict between Russia and Ukraine has been interesting to watch because, in some ways, they are fighting a World War I-style war through trench warfare, but the use of unmanned drones in the battlefield has escalated fighting to World War III-level combat.
The drones used by Ukraine aren't 'sophisticated weapons' by any means, Stewart pointed out. They aren't much different than drones seen flying in the park on weekends. However, if they're deployed strategically, they can cause 'enormous damage,' as seen by Russia.
'Last Friday, could you have imagined what happened in Russia over the weekend? And the truth is is no one did. And that's just one example of, we don't know really how this is going to change and be implemented and we're probably not nearly as prepared as we should be,' Stewart said.
He also highlighted how Russia and Ukraine have 'leapfrogged' one another throughout the war. If Russia develops a drone with a new capability, Ukraine will develop a superior one weeks later, and so on. The technology itself is rapidly evolving in the war, Stewart said.
'Going back three years, if you had talked about how will drones affect the war in Ukraine, everyone would have shrugged their shoulders and said, 'Well, I'm not sure,' or they would have said, 'Well, probably not a lot,'' he said. 'And the answer to that question is, it impacted it greatly.'
During a briefing on Tuesday, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Ukraine's drone attack 'absolutely does' raise questions about the United States' security. She pointed to Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' and the expansion of defense funding to bolster the U.S. military as it examines how to respond to the emergence of drone usage.
'The president has a full understanding, I can tell you because I've spoken to him about it, about the future of warfare and how drones are a big part of that, and I will not get ahead of our policy team, but I think you can expect to see some executive action on that front in the very near future,' she said.
Evelyn Farkas, a former U.S. deputy assistant secretary of defense, said she believes the United States doesn't have the capability to protect against swarms of drones, should an adversary launch an attack. It's something the Department of Defense would need to look at, both domestically and at its overseas bases, she said.
But bolstering U.S. military operations would need to start with production. Most drones are being produced overseas, including by U.S. adversaries like China.
'Now that they've used them to strategic effect, it will be even more urgent for the United States to improve its drone capability and to invest in drones,' Farkas, who is the executive director of the McCain Institute, said.
The attack over the weekend proved that while drone warfare is not entirely a new operational tactic, the strategy behind using them changed the game.
Stewart argued the attack also proved there are two major issues facing the U.S. as it stands on the sidelines of the current war: drone defense and implementation plans need to be drafted, and the supply chain needs to be less dependent on China.
China, Stewart noted, has also been successful in purchasing land near U.S. military installations globally. Commanders have likely spent the last several days reviewing how to protect assets after seeing Ukraine launch drones into Russian bases at a very close range, he said.
'They weren't really particularly worried about the aircraft sitting out on their tarmac, and it turned out they should have been, right?' he said of the Russian military, later adding, 'I think people are looking at that differently now than they were.'
The U.S. military has said it must invest in drones, commonly called unmanned aircraft systems or UAS. Secretary of the Army Dan Driscoll said in a post online that modernization is critical to U.S. national security.
'Investing in UAS isn't optional — it's essential for battlefield dominance, enhancing precision and protecting Soldiers,' he said.
Air Force Gen. David Allvin highlighted the need for technological advancement and investment, pointing to Ukraine's attack.
'In today's environment not every asset must be exquisite/expensive. Look what Ukraine just did,' he said in a post online. 'We can't afford to walk by assets like this that generate lethal effects.'
Hoover Institution fellow Jacquelyn Schneider has long argued that the U.S. needs to invest in low-cost technology to advance its military.
In a 2023 op-ed, she expanded on her research and argued that the U.S. military has ended up in a paradox. It chased emerging technology that made weapons so expensive that upgrading them would be difficult. It left the Pentagon with a stockpile that was 'neither good enough nor large enough' for its plans, Schneider argued.
'The United States also underprioritized technology that would rein in the cost of logistics, maintenance, and replenishment, opting instead for high-tech weaponry patched together with fragile and outdated software,' she wrote.
Schneider said the U.S. needs to 'urgently' prioritize technology that would cut warfare costs and admit it cannot replace all of its systems. High-cost technology should be complemented with cheaper options, she said.
'If the United States hopes to persevere against Russia in the short term and China in the long term, it must consider the economic impact of technology even as it pursues technological advantage,' Schneider wrote.
Farkas agreed. The United States has an undeniable issue by having 'very expensive systems that are now vulnerable to foreign drones,' she said.
War is a 'great accelerator,' Stewart said of technological advancements. It just depends on if the U.S. military will use it properly, he argued.
'The problem on the defense spending side is, we're just not spending the money we should. The bigger problem is, are we spending it right?' he questioned. 'It doesn't do us much good to buy $50 million Predator drones when we know now that a $500 plastic drone can do nearly the same thing.'
Stewart said one of his largest concerns after Ukraine's attack is how the U.S. will respond. It's a pressing issue for the industry and the Pentagon as it grapples with rapidly evolving technology and the price tag of modern warfare.
'Will we spend it in the right way and are we keeping up with technology?' he asked, saying he hopes the administration is prompted to ask those questions after Ukraine's attack.