Following the war in Ukraine can often feel complex and, at times, confusing, especially with conflicting statements from prominent figures. One moment, President Trump suggests Ukraine has minimal leverage; the next, he asserts its capability to reclaim all Russian-occupied territory and even advance further.
To gain a clearer understanding of the reality on the ground, I recently traveled to Ukraine, working alongside the dedicated team of Times reporters there, led by our bureau chief, Andrew Kramer. This team has provided continuous, often perilous, coverage directly from the front lines.
My conversations with soldiers, government officials, innovative entrepreneurs, and community activists revealed two distinct, crucial battles unfolding beyond the conventional front lines: a fierce technological race to revolutionize future warfare and a critical test of endurance to maintain internal political stability.
The Drone War Reshaping Modern Combat
While artillery, missiles, tanks, and traditional trench warfare defined the early stages of the conflict, they no longer hold the same dominance. Our Ukraine correspondent, Marc Santora, and his colleagues have reported that drones are now responsible for the majority of casualties.
These aren’t the large, high-cost Predator or Reaper drones familiar from U.S. military operations. Instead, both Russian and Ukrainian forces rely on small, mass-produced quadcopters and inexpensive aircraft, some no larger than a kayak. Both sides are in a relentless race to produce these drones faster, more economically, and with greater lethality. Russia’s industrial capacity has recently given it a significant advantage, deploying over 34,000 drones into Ukraine this year—nearly nine times the number from a year ago, as compiled by my colleagues Paul Sonne and Kim Barker using data from the Ukrainian Air Force.
The innovation isn’t limited to aerial drones. Kim accompanied me to a decommissioned facility, aptly named Killhouse Academy, where Ukrainian recruits are being trained to operate unmanned ground vehicles. These robots are essential for delivering supplies and evacuating the wounded—tasks that have become far too perilous for human soldiers. Similarly, in the Black Sea, agile drones resembling speedboats and torpedoes have successfully deterred Russia’s naval fleet.
This conflict highlights the evolving economics of war: relatively inexpensive drones, costing hundreds or thousands of dollars, must be intercepted by missiles costing millions, which in turn protect tanks and ships valued at even higher sums. This dynamic fundamentally alters the nature of modern combat.
The imperative now is to rapidly advance counter-drone defenses and simultaneously find ways to circumvent them. Sophisticated electronic jamming can be countered by drones tethered to fiber optic cables, which themselves can sometimes be defeated by simple, low-cost nets. Ukraine is witnessing a surge of venture capital investment into defense startups, while Moscow is receiving crucial support from countries like Iran and China.
The next major technological breakthrough, potentially driven by artificial intelligence, could decisively shift the balance of the war or solidify the current stalemate.
Internal Pressures and Democratic Resilience
The internal political landscape in Ukraine is also under considerable strain. In July, large protests erupted in Kyiv against President Volodymyr Zelensky’s attempt to undermine the nation’s independent anticorruption agencies. He swiftly reversed course, but public concern persists.
Ukraine has been under martial law for nearly four years, meaning Zelensky avoided a presidential election last year. However, even his primary political rivals acknowledge the wisdom of postponing a potentially divisive election while the country remains at war.
This prolonged state of martial law has left Ukraine’s democracy, a system its citizens fought and bled for a decade ago, in a precarious position. Lingering worries about corruption are now amplified by fears that vital wartime funds are being illicitly diverted. Although Ukrainians initially rallied together in unity at the war’s outset, that cohesion is starting to fracture. One lawmaker expressed concerns that Zelensky’s actions against anticorruption bodies could inadvertently make Ukraine more susceptible to Russian efforts to destabilize its political system – a strategic move Moscow might leverage to accelerate its victory.
Meanwhile, in Moscow, Vladimir Putin appears to maintain a stronger grip on power. Yet, even his authoritarian regime continues to experience internal pressures stemming from the war, evidenced by a paramilitary revolt two years prior.
Our Moscow bureau chief, Anton Troianovski, reported a significant internal division within Putin’s inner circle last month, following the resignation of a long-standing aide who had advocated for a peace settlement. Another Times correspondent, Anatoly Kurmanaev, detailed how the Kremlin is extensively funding its war machine and mitigating public dissent by offering substantial, life-changing bonuses to attract new military recruits.
The ongoing struggle between Russia’s capacity to sustain its war spending and Ukraine’s efforts to maintain national unity represents a profound test of contrasting political systems, one that we are observing with as much intensity as the military conflict itself.