Evolution of War

Department of Research, Studies and International News -26-07-2025

Mariam El Sayed is a researcher at BUC’s Centre for Global Affairs. She graduated with a Bachelor of Science in Political Science from the British University in Egypt. Her research interests include International Relations, Conflict and Security Studies, Socio-political analysis, and Comparative Politics.

“The greatest victory is that which requires no battle.” Little did Sun Tzu know how profoundly his words would resonate centuries later. While warfare during his time involved swords, spears, and crossbows, his strategic wisdom transcended the means of his era.

The generations of war are not measured solely by weaponry, but each generation is a reflection of the shift in tactics, technology, organisation, and the role of state and society. Thus, the same or similar weaponry can be used through two or more generations of war.

The evolution of warfare is not a mysterious one. As of right now, there are five known generations of war. The first generation of warfare refers to organised large groups of infantry formations clashing. Strategic manoeuvring was crucial for armies to implement to ensure greater combat effectiveness—as documented in the Napoleonic Wars. Rifled firearms and mass-produced weapons marked the introduction of the second generation of warfare, resulting from the alteration of war tactics that revolutionised the scale and mobility of warfare—the First World War is a notable example. The third generation of warfare saw the emergence of manoeuvre, focusing on speed, surprise and bypassing enemy lines to collapse their forces. The Germans developed this concept as their primary strategy for combat during World War II. The fourth generation of warfare set a new precedent—the enemy ceased to be a single physical entity. It was a new face of conflict, a fight against ideology and religion, non-state actors such as militias, gangs, mafias and terrorists began using guerrilla tactics, information warfare and propaganda, which challenged the traditional state militaries. Fourth-generation warfare altered the face of war; instead of only needing to destroy the enemy on the battlefield, the state was required to annihilate the enemy internally, along with any ideological remnants they left behind in society, thereby reclaiming the state’s monopoly over violence. The fifth generation of warfarin prioritised influencing or hindering the enemy’s decision-making through information and psychological manipulation. The essence of it is the shift, like conflict, information, perception, manipulation and technology now play a critical role in shaping the outcome—not necessarily the army itself. Methods such as social engineering, misinformation, and cyberattacks can be used alongside emerging technologies like AI and autonomous systems.

Two sides on the battlefield, identifiable visible enemies and physical confrontations, all of that is what we knew war to be. But today, that is fading; in contemporary warfare, war is no longer simply “open hoslitly between armies.” State and non-state actors have been engaging in cyberwarfare, stealing data, disabling infrastructure, and sowing chaos without a single soldier present or a shot fired. Along with the introduction of drones—and their rapid technological advancements—a single drone operator can execute a strike anywhere in the world.  Now, with the addition of artificial intelligence being used to identify, target and even engage with enemies autonomously, the norms of warfare no longer exist. The battlefield is no longer what it used to be; it is now in the sky, cyberspace, and the realm of perception itself.

The battlefields we once knew disappeared, but Sun Tzu’s emphasis on deception, information and psychological dominance is more relevant than ever. War is quiet now, and fast-paced. This was witnessed in the recent ‘war’ between Iran and Israel, with the intervention of the USA. Instead of the traditional formal declarations of war or invasions, they engaged in cyberattacks, drone strikes and covert operations—not a soldier seen in sight. Israel’s attack set a new precedent in warfare with its very specific targeted assassinations alone. The USA has long deployed economic warfare, cyber tools and deterrence as a substitute for direct military confrontation. The ‘war’ between Israel and Iran lasted a total of 12 days with a total of 1,060 casualties from Iran and approximately 30 from Israel, the majority civilians—highlighting the nature of contemporary, non-traditional conflict where military and civilian boundaries blur.

Similarly, the Russia-Ukraine War demonstrated that even in a large-scale war, the idea of a battlefield with soldiers and tanks on opposite ends fighting one another is nearly obsolete. While there is combat from the front lines, the war itself is being fought on a multidimensional domain. Cyberspace, airspace, online platforms, and strategic hits, among others, are being utilised. Ukraine employs asymmetrical methods such as weaponising commercial drones, real-time satellite data and digital coordination tools—relying heavily on civilian tech infrastructure—to support battlefield operations and more strategically against a much powerful enemy. In the meantime, Russia combines information warfare, missile strikes in cities and cyberattacks along with conventional military action. Both sides engage in psychological operations, targeting each other’s economies and morale.

While the fundamental pillars of war have not changed—and one might argue that they will not change—the factors, strategies, and methods have evolved. Today, conflicts are dispersed, multidimensional, and fought across physical, digital, and psychological terrain. Armies no longer meet on defined battlefields; instead, states and non-state actors engage through drone strikes, cyberattacks, economic sanctions, and proxy warfare. Warfare now blurs the line between combatant and civilian—with the majority of casualties being civilians—along with battlefield and home front, peace and war. This transformation is not a departure from the fundamental structure of war, but it reflects an expansion into every domain and facet of modern life—the building blocks of a sixth generation?