In her analyses of the ‘Future Character of War’, the US Deputy Defense Secretary (DEFSEC), Kathleen Hicks, identified several notable characteristics in her speech at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) in London on 10 December 2024.
For all the defence capabilities used in conflict today – from uncrewed systems to 155-millimetre artillery – there is one lesson that still makes a detrimental impact.
Go deeper with GlobalData
“Make no mistake: taking and holding territory still requires a capable ground force,” stated Hicks.
This is currently playing out in Kursk and the Donbas, where Ukrainian forces are struggling to hold on to territory against waves of Russian troops. Early in December, in Syria, rebel forces garnered momentum from Aleppo to Damascus, leaving the despotic Assad regime to collapse at a surprising pace.
Hicks compared a capable ground force with the viability of emerging technologies that are said to be changing the landscape of war.
“We’ve repeatedly seen Russia raining down joint firepower strikes to try to capture Ukrainian territory. That alone didn’t get the job done, even when they were expending their best munitions. Remember: they used hypersonic missiles to virtually no strategic effect.”
How well do you really know your competitors?
Access the most comprehensive Company Profiles on the market, powered by GlobalData. Save hours of research. Gain competitive edge.
Thank you!
Your download email will arrive shortly
Not ready to buy yet? Download a free sample
We are confident about the unique quality of our Company Profiles. However, we want you to make the most beneficial decision for your business, so we offer a free sample that you can download by submitting the below form
By GlobalData
This example refers to Russia’s hypersonic Kinzhal missile capability – which can reach hypersonic speeds, up to Mach 10 according to the Kremlin. Nonetheless, the weapon lacked the necessary manoeuvrability to evade Ukrainian Patriot missile defence systems.
While it is fair to question the technical progress made with new military technologies such as hypersonics, Hicks’ statement alludes to an appropriate balance between a focus on technology enablers and building up combat forces doing the work on the ground.
UK armed forces struggle to project a credible size
This is a lesson some US allies, such as the UK, are struggling to confront. The number of full-time UK personnel has reduced by 20% between 2012 and 2024, down from 185,690 service people according to recent findings.
This is not helped by the country’s use of its reserves. Last week, Commander of the UK Strategic Command, General Sir Jim Hockenhull, during another RUSI conference, stated “we must view reservists as a strategic capability” rather than leaning on them as part of “an ad hoc response” to crises.
When asked about the US perspective on the size of the British armed forces, Hicks declined to comment other than to say that the long-awaited Strategic Defence Review presents an opportunity “to look fresh at balancing” the forces’ readiness, size and future investment.
“To determine which militaries would win a future war, look at the quality of their people, their existing capabilities, and their emerging technologies,” Hicks observed, “and look at how they fuse all three into new ways of fighting, operating, and adopting innovation at speed and scale.”
