In the past predictions about future warfare have often put too much emphasis on new technologies
and assumed only one country would have access to them in the 19th century the speedy victory of the
prussian army over france convinced european powers their rapid mobilizations by rail quick
firing artillery and the focus on blitz attacks would make wars short and decisive those ideas
were proven wrong at the beginning of the first world war countries went in already celebrating
the war thinking that it would be quick and painless but the four years of trench warfare
on the western front proved them wrong then in the 1930s it was believed that the aerial bombardment
of cities would prove devastating enough to prompt almost immediate surrender but england's refusal
to give in after years of bombardment from the luftwaffe once again proved them wrong and when
america demonstrated in the first gulf war what a combination of its precision-guided munitions
surveillance space-based communication and stealth technology could achieve
many people assumed that in the future the west would always be able to rely on swift
painless victories but after the terrorist attacks on 9 11 and a decades-long conflict
in the middle east the changing landscape of war proved once again difficult to predict as a result
the predictions relay forward will be limited to the next 20 years or so and will focus on
several long-term trends in warfare that can be identified with greater confidence
in the past half century wars between states have become exceedingly rare and those between great
powers and their allies almost non-existent mainly because of the mutually destructive
power of nuclear weapons international legal constraints the connectedness of global economies
and the declining appetite for violence among relatively prosperous societies
on the other hand interstate or civil wars have been relatively numerous especially in fragile
or failing states and have usually proved long lasting climate change population growth
and sectarian or ethnic extremism are likely to ensure that these kinds of smaller more localized
wars continue and increasingly they'll be fought in urban environments if only because by 2040
two-thirds of the world's population will be living in cities intense urban warfare as
demonstrated by the recent battles for aleppo and mosul in the fight against isis has proven to be a
slow grind fought in close quarters and sometimes literally street by street the rise of urban
conflicts will also limit the use of traditional weapons of war like tanks artillery and bombers
and will push countries to develop ever more precise weapons like drones capable of precisely
eliminating targets in populated city centers and these conflicts will continue to present difficult
problems with avoiding civilian casualties another reason conflicts won't be fought on
traditional battlegrounds is the rise of near instantaneous weapon systems in the past a jet
flying over enemy territory mainly have to worry about being targeted by rockets or rapid fire guns
these all took time to reach the jab but now the development of laser weapons
offers the possibility to instantly and precisely hit a target with weapons that
move at the speed of light and the rise and strength of individual weapon systems like
railguns and more powerful bombs present the possibility of centralized expensive weapon
systems like aircraft carriers being taken out by single shots and causing devastating losses
this fear has existed ever since the cold war when countries realized military air bases would be the
targets of first strikes in an effort to keep a nation's air force from taking off the ground
this has and will continue to incentivize governments to create distributed weapon systems
a prime example is a country like germany who maintains highway strips paved ground alongside
highways that could act as small air bases across the country in times of crisis this would allow
the nation's air force to continue operating even if centralized military airports were destroyed
today the us government operates hundreds of forward operating bases around the world
some no more than landing strips cut out from the jungle and china has multiple tools for military
bases spread throughout the south pacific with these powerful countries try to spread their
weapons capabilities across wider areas increasing their utility and protecting them with distance
another trend we'll see instead of all out warfare is strategic destabilization as countries like
russia attempt to operate in the gray zone taking calculated risks as to the extent of cyber warfare
they can dole out on their adversaries without risking escalation and russia isn't the only one
turning to cyber warfare in 2005 when the us wanted to disable iranian nuclear centrifuges
at the natanz facility they didn't launch aerial strikes and risk an all-out war instead
they enlisted the help of the nsa and mossad to take down the plants via cyber warfare and cyber
warfare unlike more traditional forms of warfare offers the possibility of attacking an enemy
facility without them ever learning who was behind the attack while it may seem that asymmetries of
power will increase as specific nations like the us and china pour money into their military r d
divisions the rise of third world countries out of poverty is likely to increase the so-called number
of players in the game as these countries become wealthier they'll develop their own military
forces and while these forces will still pale in comparison to those of first world countries
they'll allow their nations to exert more influence in their immediate international
community this will push out wealthier countries that have traditionally tried dominating the
international politics of countries in central and south america africa and the south pacific
even though full-scale interstate warfare between great powers remains unlikely there is still room
for less severe forms of military competition in particular both russia and china now seem
unwilling to bow to international pressures russia by annexing crimea and destabilizing ukraine
and china by building militarized artificial islands and exerting force in disputes with
regional neighbors in the 21st century both china and russia have invested in a wide range
of capabilities to counter america's presence in their respective regions in military terms
these tools are what are known as anti-axis aerial denial or a2ad systems they include a whole host
of defensive military technologies like advanced cruise missiles and mines their goal isn't to go
to war with the us but by beefing up defensive fortifications they want to make an american
intervention more risky and more costly another issue that has loomed large over international
conflicts for decades are nuclear weapons and the threat of mutually assured destruction but this
has offered a tantalizing possibility if a country could neutralize enemy ballistic missiles they
would no longer have to fear a nuclear attack and could act however they wanted largely unchecked
this need to neutralize nuclear threats has pushed nations to develop means of disabling them
russia and china now fear that technologies currently in development could allow the us
to threaten their nuclear arsenals without resorting to a nuclear first strike
america has been working on a concept known as conventional prompt global strike for over
a decade the idea is to deliver a conventional warhead at hypersonic speeds at up to five times
the speed of sound through even the most densely defended airspace possible targets include enemy
communication satellites command centers for those a2ad systems nuclear facilities and even incoming
icbms these missiles mixed with good old cyber warfare could potentially protect a nation from
enemy nuclear threats and the last major trend is that the domain of conflicts will only increase
9 000 years ago warfare was limited to land then it exploded into naval conflicts and in
the 20th century we saw armed conflicts take to the skies aboard planes missiles and eventually
icbms going into the future as the domains of human existence expand so too will the domains
of potential conflict everything from deep oceans to the arctic to outer space are now
perceived as gateways to economic and strategic advantage and so nations will vie to maintain
their dominance in them but whatever the future holds hopefully we'll all be alive to see it
don't forget to subscribe with notifications on so you never miss an upload and if you made it this
far consider watching this video here have a great day and remember there's always more to learn