General Petraeus, former director of the CIA, gives ABC the keys to the future war

Today’s four-star general battle discusses battlefield squabbles; He was one of the most combative figures with the North American government during his time in Afghanistan. He does not do this alone; Standing alongside him, like a husband, is another historiographical heavyweight: Andrew Roberts, best-selling author, member of the House of Lords and author of several other best-selling books. Both have come together in 2023 to highlight an analysis that explores everything from the lessons of war the United States learned the hard way, to the benefits (or not) of artificial intelligence in warmaking. Now, two years later, they offer it in Spanish under the title ‘war. The development of the military conflict from 1945 to Gaza’ (Aliyat al-Kutub).

“We advocate that a country that aspires to become a superpower should always be on the crest of the wave regarding developments and advances in military technology. “If you don’t do that, you’re doomed to lose influence,” Roberts explains to the ABC. The best example, the English historian asserts, is on the other side of the Atlantic. “I am convinced: the future lies in advances such as computer-controlled aircraft, and the United States must lead in this field. It will not be easy. At the moment, China lags behind Iran when it comes to drones and Israel in laser technology. In addition, China is manufacturing a large number of aircraft carriers that exceed its defense capabilities.”

Achilles heel

The article returns to Vietnam, a defeat that showed the West that the powerful United States was not so powerful. Then, fear prompted the White House to adopt a more cautious approach to the intervention. The basic principles were to deploy overwhelming forces to destroy limited targets, reduce military spending, choose short conflicts and use victories as a show to heat the arms market. The war was essential for the Americans to show the world how they were continuing to develop new warfare technologies. “The massive sales of the F-16 and F-35, the latter to Saudi Arabia despite Israel’s concerns, have been a pillar of diplomacy and the national export industry,” says Roberts.

The plan didn’t always go so well. The invasion of Iraq in 2003 led to a bad occupation that ended with the retreat of the American army. The same thing happened in Afghanistan, where Petraeus clashed with the White House. “A series of serious mistakes occurred after the brilliant campaign carried out to eliminate the Haram The rule “And overthrowing the Taliban regime,” the soldier explains. He hastily reminds them: “They did not focus sufficiently on the country before moving on to the next conflict; they pursued a failed strategy for eight years; diplomats and intelligence officers were not reinforced; the necessary resources were only maintained for a few months before beginning a severe drawdown; and the intention to leave the region was repeatedly….”

New methods of intervention, combined with defeats on the battlefield, have overstretched the United States in recent years. “The arms gap that once existed between North America and the rest of the world is no longer so wide. The best example of this is in Asia. “China is developing a nuclear arsenal that, when combined with the Russian arsenal, will be astonishing and surpass those of the White House, France and Great Britain,” Roberts says.

Modern warfare

And from there, to the current changing situation in which conflicts are governed by what is called “hybrid warfare”: a strategy in which all kinds of tricks, unconventional forces, new technologies and even “fake news” are used to destabilize the enemy behind the scenes. Although both authors advocate that when the moment of battle comes, battles are won by deploying forces on the ground, they do not deny the importance of these actions to obtain certain advantages. “Most operations on the battlefield depend on intelligence of all kinds, as well as on data consolidation and analysis,” says the former CIA director.

One factor that is increasingly influencing this “hybrid warfare” is social networks. “Apps like TikTok are important from a propaganda standpoint and align with what we call soft power, the ability of one country to influence another country through persuasion,” Roberts says. Through X – the old Twitter – or Instagram, there are thousands of “influencers” who have helped spread and create “fake news” about the war in Ukraine or the conflict in Gaza. For his part, the former CIA director rejects the adage that “battles are fought on the ground, but wars are won online,” but he acknowledges that “campaigns, in current conflicts, include activities on the Internet” and that these can be useful.

Petraeus prefers to focus on artificial intelligence or open source software. “They are not used as weapons per se, but they are increasingly important in enabling new systems,” says the general. “Most likely, they will end up being used in all activities, including not only traditional domains of warfare, but also new cyber and cognitive dimensions.”

What they both agree on is the revolution that drones have brought to militaries around the world. “It has become more important, without a doubt!” Petraeus admits. Roberts agrees with his colleague: “Drones keep an infantry unit hopelessly stranded with their ability to drop explosives on every soldier.” Now, the British are taking on the biggest challenge: putting an end to them. “States capable of destroying it will have a decisive advantage. “Those who depend on others to achieve this will be condemned,” he concludes.

Ukraine is the clearest example of the effectiveness of drones. But Petraeus does not dare define it as the last conventional war. He says we are still a few decades away from achieving this: “It is not yet possible, although in major military operations of the future, unmanned or remotely piloted air, land and sea weapons and systems will be used with increasing frequency, first, and then through algorithms.”

For now, he says, we still have a lot to learn from conflicts like the one in Gaza. “It taught us the importance of trusting low-level intelligence analysts and developing appropriate contingency plans for all possible scenarios.”