Published on: 2026-02-24

AI-powered OSINT brief from verified open sources. Automated NLP signal extraction with human verification. See our Methodology and Why WorldWideWatchers.

Intelligence Report: The US Army hasn’t faced serious threats from above in years The war in Ukraine is forcing a rethink

1. BLUF (Bottom Line Up Front)

The US Army is reassessing its air superiority assumptions due to lessons learned from the Ukraine conflict, where neither side has secured air dominance. This shift necessitates changes in training and tactics to prepare for environments where air control is contested. The most likely hypothesis is that the US military will increasingly integrate drone warfare and air defense strategies into its operations. Confidence in this assessment is moderate, given ongoing developments and potential for rapid technological changes.

2. Competing Hypotheses

• Hypothesis A: The US Army will successfully adapt to contested air environments by enhancing drone and air defense capabilities. Evidence includes current training initiatives and NATO warnings about future conflicts. However, uncertainties remain about the speed and effectiveness of these adaptations.
• Hypothesis B: The US Army will struggle to adapt to contested air environments, leading to operational vulnerabilities. This is supported by the historical reliance on air superiority and potential resistance to change within military culture. Contradicting evidence includes proactive training efforts.
• Assessment: Hypothesis A is currently better supported due to active training programs and strategic awareness within NATO. Key indicators that could shift this judgment include technological advancements in drone warfare and changes in military doctrine.

3. Key Assumptions and Red Flags

• Assumptions: The US military will prioritize adapting to contested air environments; technological advancements will continue to favor drone and air defense systems; NATO allies will align with US strategies.
• Information Gaps: Detailed data on the effectiveness of current training programs and the pace of technological integration in military operations.
• Bias & Deception Risks: Potential overconfidence in technological solutions; reliance on limited sources from military training programs may skew perspectives.

4. Implications and Strategic Risks

The shift towards preparing for contested air environments could lead to significant changes in military strategy and alliances. Over time, this may alter global power dynamics and influence conflict outcomes.

• Political / Geopolitical: Increased military spending and collaboration among NATO allies; potential arms race in drone and air defense technologies.
• Security / Counter-Terrorism: Enhanced readiness for asymmetric warfare; potential vulnerabilities if adaptation is slow.
• Cyber / Information Space: Increased focus on cyber defense as part of integrated air defense systems; potential for misinformation campaigns targeting military readiness.
• Economic / Social: Economic strain from increased defense budgets; societal impacts from prolonged military engagements and technological warfare.

5. Recommendations and Outlook

• Immediate Actions (0–30 days): Conduct comprehensive assessments of current training programs; increase intelligence sharing with NATO allies regarding air defense strategies.
• Medium-Term Posture (1–12 months): Develop partnerships with tech firms for advanced drone technologies; enhance resilience through diversified defense capabilities.
• Scenario Outlook: Best: Rapid adaptation and technological superiority; Worst: Failure to adapt leading to operational setbacks; Most-Likely: Gradual integration of new strategies with mixed success.

6. Key Individuals and Entities

• Maj. Rachel Martin, Director of the Army’s Unmanned Advanced Lethality Course
• Carl Larson, Iraq veteran with experience in Ukraine
• Not clearly identifiable from open sources in this snippet.

7. Thematic Tags

national security threats, military strategy, air superiority, drone warfare, NATO, defense adaptation, Ukraine conflict, training programs

Structured Analytic Techniques Applied

• Cognitive Bias Stress Test: Expose and correct potential biases in assessments through red-teaming and structured challenge.
• Bayesian Scenario Modeling: Use probabilistic forecasting for conflict trajectories or escalation likelihood.
• Network Influence Mapping: Map relationships between state and non-state actors for impact estimation.

Explore more:
National Security Threats Briefs ·
Daily Summary ·
Support us