Connect with us

Drones

The UAE Drone Attack is a Grim Reminder for Better Regulation of Drones

Published

on

The drone technology has ushered in an era of revolution, not only in military sector but in other sectors as well. Unmanned aerial vehicles have found employment in agriculture sector for purpose of spraying hazardous chemical fertilizers which might cause several skin diseases if sprayed with bare hands. Drones are used for the purpose of crop assessment and India has recently employed drones for measuring agricultural lands and digitizing the land records. Drones are also used for delivering critical pharma ingredients and have recently been used to deliver Covid-19 vaccines in remote and inaccessible areas. Other potential uses of the technology include surveillance of mines before mining for any potentially-hazardous gases.

But this drone technology is not a win-win technology and comes with its own security concerns. On January 17, 2022, two Indian and one Pakistani national were killed in a drone attack at a fuel storage facility which was claimed by Yemen’s Houthi rebels. In retaliation, the Saudi-led coalition targeted Houthi strongholds in the capital city of Sana’a through air raids. However, this is not the sole incident where a non-state actor has resorted to drone technology for carrying out successful attacks. In June 2021, Pakistan-sponsored terrorists detonated drone-carried IED at an Indian Air force base. Drones have also been used by ISIS to target bases of coalition forces.

The dynamic drone technology has become a growing concern for law-enforcement agencies all over the world. The main objective of drone technology, also known as the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle was to benefit commercial, humanitarian, civilian and peaceful military activities. However, these have become a new tool of mass destruction with little to no collateral damage to the perpetrator. The recent attacks highlighted above are a glaring example of the destructive potential of this critical and emerging technology.

What are the challenges from drone technology?

I want to make it very clear in the first place that the threat lies not from this technology itself but rather who uses this technology. Hence, the foremost challenge comes from the potential misuse by the rogue elements as mentioned above. Non-State actors, terrorist organisations can use drone technology to carry out simultaneous attacks. Moreover, evidence suggests that drones intended for commercial purpose can be modified for non-commercial purposes. Hence, it is quite difficult to identify the type of technology; the kind of drone which can be employed to launch attacks.

ALSO READ :  The Abysmal Security Situation And PML (N) Government

Another significant concern for the law-enforcement agencies is that low-flying drones escape air defence systems. The use of these small drones in the night time can prove more deadly. The small and insignificant size of these drones grants them weak radar, thermal and aural signatures. These nano-drones are not very expensive and are readily-available in the market. Hence, the cost-benefit analysis provides desirable results.

Another concern regarding the Unmanned Aerial Vehicles technology is that this technology is a rapidly-evolving technology which requires a constant monitoring of the modifications introduced in the technology. Over the past few years, drones have become central to the functions of various businesses and governmental organizations and have managed to pierce through areas where certain industries were either stagnant or lagging behind. This requires both the national as well as the global security apparatus to be on toes to counter this evolving technology.

Another problematic aspect of drones is that the technology supports both intra-and-inter country drones. In other words, the attack can be perpetrated from a place within a country as well as from a place across the border. A recent example of cross-border drone attack is of course the recent attack by the Houthis on the UAE oil storage facility highlighted above. The worrying trend in this regard is that most of the time, the victim country does not have enough insight over what is being planned or evolved across the border. Probably, that was the reason why both the UAE as well as Indian authorities failed to thwart the respective attacks in their territories.

Present defences available against Drone attack-

Present counter-drone technology can be bifurcated in kinetic and non-kinetic defences. Kinetic systems are countermeasures designed to impact a drone in-flight to disable/damage it. Kinetic defences involve the use of an external element to thwart the attack. It can be done through spraying bullets on the UAV, destroying it through laser or high-powered electro-magnetic waves, using a small-range ballistic missile, collision with another drone, etc.

However, Kinetic counter-measures come with their own limitations. For a kinetic defence to be successful, a number of factors need to be ensured. The foremost among these factors is the ability to track drones as soon as possible. Without tracking of drone in time, it would not be possible to coordinate the defence in time. Moreover, the weapons used to bring down drone are generally short-range weapons which are effective only up to a small distance, say 100 feet. Any skilled-drone operator can easily defy these weapons maintaining good flight planning and situational awareness in monitoring the drone’s flight path.

ALSO READ :  Will Digital Currency Replace Traditional Paper Currency in Pakistan? Implications and Possibilities

Another set of counter-drone technology consists of non-kinetic defences. It includes using jammers to disrupt communication between the drone and the drone operator, disrupting the GPS signal, etc. Basically, these measures do not require the security forces to conduct any combat operations. However, much needs to be done in the realm of counter-drone technology because of the nature of the rapidly-evolving drone technology.

What needs to be done?

I have already highlighted the potential of this drone technology to transform various sectors and the fact that it is not the technology but the user of this technology who might pose a threat. Hence, the foremost thing to be kept in mind is to prevent drones from falling into wrong hands. This can be done through placing stringent registration requirements on the part of operators. Issuing a Unique Identification Number for each drone can be helpful in this regard. Further, certification of every drone by the competent aviation authority must be made compulsory.

Low-cost drones have the potential for more mischief. These drones weigh as less as 250 grams. Hence, there is a greater need to regulate these type of drones. Official supervision requirements can be placed for manufacturing of drones beyond a certain size. Moreover, a greater emphasis should be there on encouraging self-discipline within the drone industry in order to prevent the drones from falling into wrong hands.

With respect to counter-drone technology, the need is to respond swiftly and remain one-step ahead while working on counter-technology. Development of an all-encompassing air-defence system must be prioritised in order to track and bring down any drone irrespective of size. More funds are required to be poured in for research and development purposes in this regard. The focus should be on autonomous hard-kill counter-technology.

Via MD


Discover more from The Monitor

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Analysis

Trump’s ‘Civilisation Will Die’ Warning: Kharg Island Strikes and the Global Oil Shock

Published

on

The Ultimatum That Shook the World

Shortly before Tuesday’s dawn broke over Washington, President Donald Trump published a post on Truth Social that will be quoted in history books — or perhaps never read again, depending on what happens next. “A whole civilisation will die tonight, never to be brought back again,” he wrote. “I don’t want that to happen, but it probably will.” Free Malaysia Today

The words landed with the weight of an airstrike. Within minutes, oil markets convulsed. Crude jumped more than 3% to nearly $116 per barrel — Brent clearing $110 — on renewed fears that Trump’s 8 p.m. ET deadline for Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz could trigger the most catastrophic escalation of a conflict already rewriting the rules of the global energy order. NBC News

At the same time, something far more concrete was happening in the Persian Gulf. American forces conducted new strikes on military targets on Iran’s Kharg Island, a vital hub through which roughly 80–90% of Iran’s crude oil is exported. The U.S. official who confirmed the strikes noted that, as with previous attacks in mid-March, oil infrastructure was not deliberately targeted — but the distinction may be academic when the surrounding ecosystem of pipelines, pumping stations, and loading terminals sits within blast radius. CBS News

Kharg Island is relatively small — about 8 kilometres long and 4–5 kilometres wide — but it hosts extensive infrastructure, including storage tanks, pipelines, and offshore loading terminals capable of loading roughly 1.3–1.6 million barrels of crude per day. euronews Destroy it, seize it, or simply render it inoperable, and you have not just wounded Iran’s economy — you have surgically removed its financial heartbeat.

This is the story of the most dangerous night in modern oil history. It is also the story of a diplomatic gamble of breathtaking recklessness — or, if you are inclined toward a more charitable read, of breathtaking nerve.

Kharg Island: The Island the World Cannot Afford to Lose

To understand why Kharg Island is ground zero in this conflict, you need to understand the extraordinary geography of Iran’s petroleum infrastructure. Unlike Saudi Arabia’s vast overland pipeline network, Iran pumps virtually its entire crude production through underwater pipelines to this single offshore staging point in the northern Persian Gulf.

Just 20 miles off Iran’s northern Gulf coast, Kharg Island has long been the hub through which about 80–90% of its crude oil is exported. Trump has not ruled out using U.S. ground forces in Iran, and has suggested the possibility of seizing Kharg as part of an effort to stop Iran from controlling maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz. CBS News

History is instructive here. During the Iran-Iraq War of the 1980s, Saddam Hussein launched sustained strikes against Kharg in what became known as the “Tanker War.” Iraq flew more than 400 sorties against the island between 1985 and 1988. Iranian oil exports fell — but never stopped entirely. Tehran improvised: floating storage vessels, shuttle tankers, alternative loading points further south. Earlier in the current war, American forces already struck air defenses, a radar site, an airport, and a hovercraft base on Kharg, according to satellite analysis by the Institute for the Study of War and the American Enterprise Institute’s Critical Threats Project. PBS

The strategic logic is sound: if you cannot force open the Strait of Hormuz militarily — a task of extraordinary complexity against Iranian shore-based missiles, mines, and fast-boat swarms — you can try to make Iran’s continued blockade economically suicidal by threatening the one asset it cannot afford to lose. The problem, as strategists from Rapidan Energy to the Center for Strategic and International Studies have noted, is that this logic requires a compliant adversary. Tehran, for four decades, has rarely obliged.

Iran’s Calculated Defiance

Asked about Trump’s repeated deadlines, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baqaei told reporters that U.S. officials “have been trying to intimidate Iranians with such language for 48 years.” “Iranians are not going to be subdued by such deadlines in defending their country,” he said. “We will not allow ourselves the slightest hesitation in responding and defending the country.” CBS News

This is not merely bluster. Iran’s strategic calculus, however brutal, has an internal coherence. Iran’s Revolutionary Guard warned it would “deprive the U.S. and its allies of the region’s oil and gas for years” if Trump follows through on his threats. Officials called on young people to form human chains to protect power plants. NBC News These are the gestures of a regime that believes it is fighting for survival — and that knows a cornered power with popular mobilization behind it is extraordinarily difficult to compel.

Iran’s president said he was willing to die alongside millions of Iranians to defend his country. Iran’s 10-point ceasefire proposal — which included a guarantee against future attacks, an end to Israeli strikes on Hezbollah in Lebanon, and removal of sanctions — also notably proposed that Iran impose a $2 million fee per ship transiting the Strait. KANW That last clause tells you everything about how Tehran reads this moment: not as a crisis demanding unconditional capitulation, but as a leveraged negotiation in which it still holds valuable chips.

ALSO READ :  Sharpen Your Scimitar, Prince: A Guide to Weapon Upgrades in The Lost Crown

Sources told Axios that there has been some progress behind the scenes in the past 48 hours, even as Iran has maintained a hard public posture. Vice President Vance, involved in the Iran diplomacy, said in Budapest that intense negotiations would take place right up to Trump’s deadline. Axios

This is the fundamental tension at the heart of the current crisis: the diplomatic channel is not entirely dead, but the military pressure is rapidly foreclosing the space in which it can operate.

The Economic Catastrophe Already Unfolding

Whatever happens tonight, one verdict is already in: the world is paying an enormous price.

Over the course of March, global benchmark Brent crude surged more than 60%, marking the biggest monthly price gain since records began in the 1980s. IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol described the energy crisis sparked by the U.S.-Iran war as the worst in history. CNBC That is not rhetorical inflation — it is arithmetically defensible.

“When you look at the 1973 and 1979 oil shocks, in both of them we lost about 5 million barrels per day. These oil crises led to global recession in many countries,” Birol said. “Today, we lost 12 million barrels per day — more than two of these oil crises put together.” CNBC

Bloomberg Economics’ SHOK model projected that at oil around $110 a barrel, the euro area could see roughly 1 percentage point added to annual inflation and 0.6% shaved off GDP. But if the Strait of Hormuz stays closed into the second quarter, the risk is that oil prices move sharply higher. At $170 a barrel, the inflation and growth impact roughly doubles — a stagflationary shock that could shift everything from central bank policy to the outcome of U.S. midterm elections. Bloomberg

The maritime blockade triggered a concurrent “grocery supply emergency” across Gulf Cooperation Council states, which rely on the Strait for over 80% of their caloric intake. By mid-March, 70% of the region’s food imports were disrupted, forcing retailers to airlift staples and resulting in a 40–120% spike in consumer prices. The crisis has shifted from fiscal contraction toward fears of a humanitarian emergency following Iranian strikes on desalination plants — the source of 99% of drinking water in Kuwait and Qatar. Wikipedia

The ripple effects extend far beyond the Gulf. In conversations with more than three dozen oil and gas traders, executives, brokers, shippers, and advisers, one message was repeated: the world still hasn’t grasped the severity of the situation. Many drew parallels with the 1970s oil shock, warning a prolonged closure of the Strait of Hormuz would threaten an even bigger crisis. Bloomberg

Brazil, which accounts for nearly 60% of global soybean exports, is almost entirely dependent on imported fertilizers, with nearly half of its supply transiting the Strait of Hormuz. A sustained fertilizer shortage could compel farmers to reduce usage, causing crop yield drops with significant implications for global food security. Wikipedia We are, in short, watching a supply-chain crisis of 1970s vintage compounded by 21st-century complexity.

The Rhetoric of Total War and the Limits of Coercive Diplomacy

Let us be direct about what Trump’s “civilisation will die” statement represents — and what it does not.

As coercive diplomacy, it follows a recognizable playbook: escalate the perceived costs of non-compliance to a level so existential that the adversary capitulates before the deadline. The logic has precedent. In the final days before the Gulf War, the Bush administration’s unambiguous signaling about military consequences helped produce (briefly) a diplomatic opening. Reagan’s willingness to escalate in the 1987 tanker war — Operation Earnest Will, reflagging Kuwaiti vessels — eventually pushed Iran toward a ceasefire.

But Trump’s framing has introduced a complication that those precedents did not carry: he is threatening collective punishment of a civilian population. Human rights expert Kenneth Roth, former executive director of Human Rights Watch, told NBC News that Trump is “openly threatening collective punishment, targeting not the Iranian military but the Iranian people.” “Attacking civilians is a war crime. So is making threats with the aim of terrorizing the civilian population,” Roth said, noting that threats to carry out war crimes may themselves constitute a violation of international humanitarian law. NBC News

This matters not merely as a legal nicety, but as a strategic liability. When American presidents in past Gulf crises spoke of targeting military infrastructure, they preserved diplomatic credibility with European allies, Gulf partners, and international institutions. Trump’s language — “a whole civilisation will die” — obliterates that credibility. It transforms what might be defensible military coercion into something that looks, to the rest of the world, like a threat of collective annihilation. Strikes on Tuesday hit railway and road bridges, an airport, and a petrochemical plant and knocked out power lines, according to Iranian media Free Malaysia Today — making the threat feel less abstract by the hour.

China, which receives approximately a third of its oil through the Strait of Hormuz, has watched this crisis with mounting alarm and increasing opportunity. According to Lloyd’s List, payments were being assessed by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards in Chinese yuan for ships using Iran’s alternative channel north of Larak Island. Wikipedia Beijing is simultaneously positioning itself as a potential diplomatic broker — its only responsible role, given the stakes — while quietly benefiting from a crisis that weakens U.S. credibility as a guarantor of global order. Every day this drags on, the argument that American hegemony is a stabilizing force in the Gulf becomes harder to make.

ALSO READ :  The Flawed Electoral System And Good Governance

The Scenarios: What Happens After 8 p.m.?

There are, broadly, three trajectories from tonight’s deadline.

Scenario One: A Last-Minute Deal. The diplomatic back-channel that Axios and others have reported produces a framework — perhaps a temporary reopening of the Strait in exchange for a pause in strikes, with full negotiations to follow. Markets would stage an historic relief rally, oil retreating perhaps to the $80-$90 range. But the structural damage to U.S. credibility, to the global shipping insurance market, and to the fragile architecture of the rules-based order would not be reversed overnight.

Scenario Two: Escalation Without Resolution. The deadline passes, strikes intensify against infrastructure — power plants, bridges, potentially oil terminals — and Iran retaliates across the Gulf. Market analysts predict a “gap up” in oil prices, with WTI potentially hitting $130 per barrel overnight as military operations begin. FinancialContent Iran has already responded by declaring it would no longer hold back from hitting Gulf neighbors’ infrastructure and claimed to have carried out fresh strikes on a ship in the Gulf and on Saudi industrial facilities linked to U.S. firms. OPB The King Fahd Causeway — the only land link between Saudi Arabia and Bahrain, home to the U.S. Navy’s 5th Fleet — has already been temporarily closed.

Scenario Three: Seizing Kharg. The most extreme option: U.S. forces attempt to occupy Kharg Island, removing it from Iranian control and using it as leverage, or simply as a base for reopening the Strait by force. The military logistics are formidable — the island is heavily mined and defended, according to U.S. military assessments — and the geopolitical consequences of an American military occupation of Iranian territory would be without modern precedent. It would almost certainly trigger sustained Iranian missile attacks on U.S. assets throughout the Gulf, including the 5th Fleet’s Bahrain headquarters.

The Bigger Reckoning

Step back from the noise of a single Tuesday evening, and the deeper story of this crisis is about the structural fragility of a world order built on the assumption that the Persian Gulf’s chokepoints will remain open.

“There are very real, physical manifestations of the closure of the Strait of Hormuz that are working their way around the world,” Chevron CEO Mike Wirth said. Shell CEO Wael Sawan warned that fuel shortages will ripple around the world beginning with jet fuel, followed by diesel and then gasoline. CNBC

The IEA’s strategic petroleum reserve releases, which have softened the immediate blow, are “only helping to reduce the pain” — not providing a cure, in Birol’s words. “The cure is opening up the Strait of Hormuz.” CNBC

That cure requires, above all, a diplomatic outcome. And yet the last several weeks have been characterized by a relentless escalation of rhetoric and military action that has progressively narrowed the corridor in which diplomacy can operate. Deadlines breed counter-deadlines. Ultimatums breed defiance. Bombing campaigns, however surgically intended, produce civilian casualties and political hardening on the other side.

None of this means Trump is wrong to apply maximum pressure — that debate belongs to another column. What it means is that maximum pressure, deployed without a credible diplomatic architecture to absorb a potential Iranian concession, risks producing not a capitulation but a catastrophe.

The Iranian regime is brutal, ideologically committed to anti-Americanism, and demonstrably willing to accept enormous civilian suffering to preserve its rule. It has survived 47 years of sanctions, isolation, and periodic military confrontation. Whether it can survive tonight is a question that markets, chancelleries, and four billion energy-dependent civilians across Asia and Europe are watching with mounting dread.

Conclusion: The Night the World Held Its Breath

History has a habit of hinging on moments that looked, in real time, like theater — until they weren’t. Tonight may be one of those moments. It may also be another deadline that passes into the long ledger of Trump-era ultimatums that were ultimately extended, renegotiated, or quietly forgotten.

What is not in question is the scale of what is at stake. The head of the International Energy Agency described this as “the greatest global energy security challenge in history.” Wikipedia Brent crude trading above $110 a barrel, a fifth of the world’s oil supply strangled by a de facto naval blockade, desalination plants under threat in countries where they represent the entire water supply, food prices spiking across three continents, and a U.S. president writing on social media that “a whole civilisation will die tonight” — these are not the conditions of a managed geopolitical crisis. They are the conditions of a world that has lost its footing.

The deeper question — the one that will occupy historians long after tonight’s deadline has passed — is not whether Trump’s gamble works. It is whether the institutions, alliances, and legal frameworks that have governed the global order since 1945 are capable of surviving a world in which a U.S. president can threaten to obliterate a civilization in a social media post, and the most consequential response is a 3% oil price spike.

The Strait of Hormuz is 21 miles wide at its narrowest point. The gap between the world we thought we inhabited and the one we are now navigating may be rather wider.


Discover more from The Monitor

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Facebook

Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2019-2025 ,The Monitor . All Rights Reserved .

Discover more from The Monitor

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading