Warnings Grow Inside and Outside NATO Against 'Drone' Panacea [Current Affairs Show]

Russia's Conventional Arms Production Overwhelms Europe
South Korea Faces Its Own 'Drone' Dilemma

■ Broadcast: Asia Economy 'So Jongseop's Current Affairs Show'

■ Host: Political Specialist So Jongseop

■ Director: Producer Ma Yena

■ Guest: Reporter Lee Hyunwoo

As ceasefire negotiations in Ukraine become more serious, European countries are facing even greater concerns about national defense. There is an ongoing debate over whether to focus on drones-spotlighted as new cutting-edge weapons during the Ukraine war-to enhance Europe's future defense capabilities, or to prioritize the expansion of conventional forces.

Russia Expected to Restore Conventional Forces by 2030...Europe Running Out of Time

AP Yonhap News

Military experts have analyzed that Russia is expected to almost completely recover the conventional military power it lost in the Ukraine war by around 2030. Therefore, Europe is in an urgent situation where it must build up sufficient military strength to counter Russia within the next five years. However, time is short and budgets are limited, making it inevitable to make choices and focus resources. As a result, the debate between 'investing heavily in drones' and 'prioritizing conventional force buildup' is intensifying.

On one side, there are calls to invest heavily in drones, which demonstrated tremendous efficiency in the Ukraine war. Proponents argue that the destructive power of drones has been proven, as Ukrainian drone attacks have destroyed thousands of Russian tanks and armored vehicles, and even fighter jets at airfields deep inside Russia.

On the other hand, some argue that relying too much on drones is risky and that strengthening conventional forces should come first. Many military experts in the United States and Europe also support the latter view, emphasizing that drones alone cannot solve all problems. After analyzing the outcomes of the Ukraine war, military experts concluded that not all successes were achieved by drones alone. Drones are ultimately auxiliary weapons that support counteroffensive operations alongside ballistic missiles and conventional weapons, rather than decisive tools that can single-handedly change the course of a war or guarantee victory.

In fact, despite the impressive performance of drones, Ukraine still has about 20% of its territory occupied by Russia. The reality is that, although Russia's overwhelming conventional military power was inefficient in combat, it ultimately pushed back Ukrainian forces. Analysts point out that Ukraine was able to maintain its defensive lines not because of drones, but thanks to conventional firepower such as artillery shells and ballistic missiles supplied by the United States and Europe, as well as the mobilization of up to one million conscripted soldiers.

Therefore, experts commonly agree that only when conventional forces are well established can drones be used effectively as auxiliary weapons. Since Europe's conventional military power is currently too weak, the argument that Europe should first strengthen its conventional forces and then build up its drone capabilities is gaining traction.

Europe vs. Russia: A 'Desperate' Gap in Conventional Arms Production Capacity

Reuters Yonhap News

Looking at the concrete numbers, the gap in military production capacity between Europe and Russia is at a desperate level. Starting with artillery shell production-the most basic element of modern warfare-Europe's annual output before the Ukraine war was only 300,000 shells. This is less than South Korea's annual output of 800,000 shells, meaning all of Europe produced less than half of what South Korea alone produced. Europe has since tripled its output to one million shells per year, but almost all of these are being sent to Ukraine. In contrast, Russia produces over four million shells annually, creating an overwhelming fourfold gap.

The gap in tank production capacity is even more severe. Currently, the only company in Europe that regularly manufactures and sells tanks is Germany's Rheinmetall, with an annual output of just 50 tanks. Meanwhile, Russia, having shifted to a wartime economy, is expected to produce 1,500 tanks this year, a difference of more than 30 times.

The situation is the same in the drone sector. Russia produces 5,000 drones per month, totaling 60,000 per year, while all of Europe cannot even produce 1,000 drones annually. Experts commonly agree that, given such overwhelming disparities in the production of basic conventional weapons, there is no room to debate whether to prioritize drones or conventional forces.

'Drone' Dilemma Also a Concern for South Korea...Adapting to Local Conditions Is Key

Reuters Yonhap News

Europe's dilemma is not just a distant issue for South Korea. With North Korean troops participating in the Ukraine war, there is a high possibility that North Korea will acquire advanced drone attack techniques. As a result, South Korea also faces a similar dilemma and must strengthen its own drone countermeasures.

In particular, the South Korean military is experiencing a significant reduction in personnel due to low birth rates. The number of active-duty soldiers has dropped to 450,000, falling below the traditional defense threshold of 500,000. Due to this manpower shortage, there is growing support for increasing reliance on unmanned systems, including drones. In fact, South Korea is not only increasing production of aerial drones but also land-based drones, and is pushing for organizational reforms such as the establishment of a drone command.

However, there is also strong opposition that warns against overlooking the unique geographical characteristics of the Korean Peninsula. While Ukraine's mostly flat terrain allowed for high drone effectiveness, most of South Korea is mountainous, which limits drone visibility. The abundance of mountains and forests also makes drone jamming or shoot-downs relatively easy. Analysts predict that, on the Korean battlefield, conventional artillery, mechanized units capable of surprise attacks, and attack helicopters will continue to play important roles alongside drones. This strengthens the argument against concentrating the budget solely on drones.

Ultimately, experts advise that no single weapon system is a panacea on every battlefield, and that focus must be adjusted according to local conditions. Rather than blindly applying the lessons of the Ukraine war, it is necessary to develop tailored defense policies that consider each country's geographical and strategic characteristics.

No matter how advanced warfare becomes, the importance of soldiers must not be overlooked. Maintaining manpower through efficient personnel allocation and improving conditions for soldiers remains crucial. More research is expected on how to maintain a balance between drones and conventional forces in the future. To achieve maximum effectiveness with limited resources, cold, data-driven analysis and strategic choices tailored to each nation's situation will be key.