Focused analysis on land combat doctrine, infantry modernization, battlefield tactics, force structure evolution, and lessons from recent ground conflicts.
Maj Gen (Dr) S B Asthana, SM, VSM (Veteran) “Geography, Sea Denial, and the Timeless Art of Making the Stronger Adversary Fight on Unfavourable Terms“ “History remembers great battles. Strategic history remembers those who avoided them. From Shivaji’s mountain forts…
A Warning Proven Right by Time
Six years ago, during my address at the Strategic Studies Institute (SWI), I issued a clear challenge to our domestic defence industry: India’s future battlefield dominance will belong to whoever controls unmanned systems. At the time, the conversation was centered around specialised, high-altitude surveillance platforms like the Predator or the indigenous Rustam series.
Today, the geopolitical landscape has shifted dramatically. Unmanned warfare is no longer an elite asset reserved for surgical strikes; it is the fundamental currency of modern attritional conflict. Looking back at my 2020 presentation alongside the staggering realities of current global theater dynamics, one thing is undeniably clear: the future I warned about is already here, and our scale of thinking must undergo a massive transformation.
The United States possesses the most formidable military machine in history, yet since 1945 it has repeatedly failed to convert battlefield dominance into durable political success. From Vietnam and Afghanistan to Iraq, Libya and now Iran, America has demonstrated an extraordinary capacity to start wars, destroy regimes and win tactical battles—but a remarkable inability to achieve sustainable strategic outcomes. This paper examines the recurring strategic failures that have transformed military victories into political setbacks.
The discourse surrounding India-China relations is often caught between the extremes of inevitable confrontation and optimistic reconciliation. However, the reality on the ground is a sophisticated "cautious re-engagement"—a strategic management of competition in an increasingly turbulent global order.
In my recent interview with an Italian international journal World Geostrategic Insights, I delve into why the 2025 "Tianjin Reset" between PM Modi and President Xi is more than just diplomatic optics. We explore the "special problem" India faces with its northern neighbor—a complexity that transcends trade and enters the realm of unsettled borders and collusive threats.
The Iran–Israel–US conflict highlights a critical lesson in modern warfare: tactical military success does not guarantee strategic victory. Despite overwhelming airpower, the US–Israel coalition has struggled to achieve decisive political outcomes against Iran’s resilient, asymmetric defence model. By leveraging geography—especially the Strait of Hormuz—Iran has turned energy flows into a strategic weapon with global consequences. The conflict is accelerating a shift toward a multipolar world order while exposing vulnerabilities for energy-dependent nations like India. Ultimately, without a clear political end-state or exit strategy, even the most advanced military campaigns risk becoming long-term strategic setbacks.
My latest article in Business Standard Blueprint (Defence & Geopolitics) analyses how and why India and China have moved towards a limited tactical reset since late 2025. I argue that the current engagement “is a product of necessity amid global turbulence, not trust” and is best seen as “cautious re‑engagement, not reconciliation.” The reset offers breathing space from US tariff pressures and global uncertainty, but it does not resolve the underlying structural rivalry or the unresolved boundary dispute.
