Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine, which completes three years on 24 February 2025, has had profound political, strategic, and tactical implications that have reshaped the global order and the way military conflicts are conducted in the 21st century. As the Russia-Ukraine war enters its fourth year, several crucial lessons emerge, offering insights into the dynamics of international relations, modern warfare, and military doctrine.
One of the most significant political outcomes of the war has been the strengthening of NATO and the European Union, both of which have demonstrated a remarkable degree of unity in supporting Ukraine. This underlines the importance of alliances in ensuring national security. NATO’s coordinated response reinforced the principle that a unified international community can help limit violence through diplomatic isolation and military support. Yet, at the same time, it has exposed the shortcomings of international institutions such as the United Nations.
Information warfare has been as intense as the physical conflict itself. Both Russia and Ukraine (with the backing of the West), have engaged in a fierce battle for control of the global narrative. Ukraine, led by President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in his trademark T-shirt, effectively used social media, traditional media, and high-profile international speeches to galvanise support and appeal for international aid. He has emerged as an international symbol of resistance who effectively used diplomacy and public relations to secure arms, financial support, and humanitarian assistance.
Similarly, and with some success, Russia used state-controlled media and information warfare campaigns to promote its version of the war both domestically and internationally. The Russia-Ukraine war has highlighted the increasing importance of information warfare, where control over narratives can influence public opinion and even shape the outcome of the conflict. Even now, the rights and wrongs of this war remain ambiguous.
Ukraine’s resistance, bolstered by a strong national identity has shown that democracies, despite their inherent vulnerabilities, can effectively mobilise in the face of external aggression. The war has also showcased the importance of political cohesion, effective leadership, and the mobilisation of civil society in times of crisis. Democracies can exhibit extraordinary solidarity and resilience when their sovereignty is threatened, especially if they have well-established democratic norms and institutions.
Also read: India must reduce defence acquisition timeline—product should take priority over process
The Russian invasion of Ukraine was characterised by a highly ambitious plan to capture Kyiv within days. However, Russia’s failure to achieve strategic surprise, combined with the slow pace of mobilisation and logistical challenges, allowed Ukraine to mount a much more effective defence than anticipated. Ukraine’s ability to quickly activate its forces, rally its population, and receive rapid international assistance from NATO countries was pivotal in stalling Russia’s initial advances. In modern warfare, the element of surprise is crucial, but success depends on the ability to rapidly execute well-coordinated operations while maintaining their tempo.
One of the most profound strategic lessons from the conflict is the importance of logistics and the ability to sustain military operations over long periods. Russia’s initial overextension and failure to properly manage its logistics networks were significant factors in its setbacks during the early phases of the war. Ukrainian forces could better leverage Western arms shipments and maintain their supply chains despite the administrative challenges posed by the country’s large size and the character of the conflict.
Despite Russia’s numerical superiority in troops, armour, and artillery, Ukraine’s success in resisting and even pushing back Russian forces illustrates the limitations of conventional warfare in the modern age. The use of asymmetrical tactics, such as sabotage, guerrilla warfare, and the strategic targeting of supply chains and command centres, allowed Ukraine to counterbalance Russia’s military might effectively. Conventional military superiority might not always be decisive. Asymmetrical tactics, well-executed intelligence operations, and the use of advanced technology such as drones and cyber capabilities can level the playing field against a larger and more heavily armed adversary.
Technological innovation has played a central role in shaping the strategic outcomes of the Russia-Ukraine war. Both sides have extensively used advanced technologies, from drones and precision-guided munitions to cyberattacks and electronic warfare. Ukraine’s ability to integrate these technologies into its military strategy provided it with significant advantages – particularly in terms of intelligence gathering, targeting, and battlefield awareness. Russia, while initially slow to adapt to some of these technologies, made significant strides in integrating cyber warfare and electronic warfare capabilities to disrupt Ukrainian military communications and infrastructure. The strategic integration of new technologies can significantly alter the balance of power in modern conflicts.
Tactically, Ukraine’s ability to adapt quickly to changing circumstances has proven to be a crucial factor in this conflict. The country’s forces have demonstrated a high degree of tactical flexibility, shifting from defence to offence as the situation evolved. This adaptability allowed Ukraine to regain territory in the Kharkiv and Kherson regions, despite facing overwhelming odds. Tactical flexibility and the ability to capitalise on fleeting opportunities can turn the tide of battle. Commanders must be able to reassess and adapt to the battlefield environment, using innovative tactics to exploit weaknesses in the enemy’s posture.
The Russia-Ukraine war has highlighted the extreme challenges posed by urban warfare, particularly in densely populated areas. Built-up Areas (BUA) favour defenders because buildings provide them cover and attackers struggle to control captured territory in such areas. Both Russian and Ukrainian forces have experienced heavy casualties in BUAs, leading to protracted and brutal street fighting in key cities. Urban warfare is among the most complex and costly forms of military engagement. Control over cities and population centres, thus, requires both superior firepower and more troops.
The Russia-Ukraine war has provided numerous lessons, and as the war continues, many more will emerge. These lessons will shape the future of military doctrine, international relations, and the broader geopolitical landscape. What stands out is that, while the nature of war remains a constant, the character of war is always evolving.
General Manoj Mukund Naravane PVSM AVSM SM VSM is a retired Indian Army General who served as the 28th Chief of the Army Staff. Views are personal.
(Edited by Zoya Bhatti)
