Manoeuvring Technology: Redefining Military Strategy in the Era of MDOs

Author : Lt Gen Karanbir Singh Brar

Multi-Domain Operations mark a fundamental shift in warfare, where success depends less on platforms or firepower and more on integrating technology, information, and leadership

Technological advancements are fundamentally reshaping the character of warfare, shifting the focus from sheer manpower and firepower to information dominance, precision, and speed. Emerging domains such as cyber, space, artificial intelligence, and autonomous systems are redefining how battles are planned and fought. Modern conflicts now demand integration of advanced technologies across multiple domains, making adaptability and innovation as critical as traditional combat power. This shift was the central theme of “RAN SAMVAD-2025”, an event recently heldat the Army War College, where the evolving nature of warfare was intensely debated.

While the infusion of technology is not new,  today, the urgency is greater, the scope wider, and the consequences deeper.

During the event, Defence Minister Rajnath Singh lauded Operation Sindoor as “a striking demonstration of technology-driven warfare”. Echoing this sentiment, the Chief of Defence Staff, General Anil Chauhan, in his keynote address, emphasised that “the ascendancy of technology requires swift and decisive joint responses across multi domains.” An outcome of this event was the release of The Joint Doctrine for Multi-Domain Operations (MDO), institutionalising the integration of land, sea, air, space, cyber, and cognitive domains.This reflects a broader global trend wherein militaries are reassessing how technology shapes strategy, operations, and leadership. While the infusion of technology is not new,  today, the urgency is greater, the scope wider, and the consequences deeper.

Why the Hype Around MDO Now?

The urgency of adopting Multi-Domain Operations (MDO) today stems from the fact that technological and operational changes are no longer occurring in isolation but converging and unfolding simultaneously at a disruptive pace. Advances in AI, cyber, space, robotics, and information warfare are collapsing traditional boundaries between domains, creating fluid battlefields where superiority in one sphere is meaningless without integration across all. This convergence demands immediate adaptation, as delays risk leaving armed forces vulnerable to adversaries already leveraging these shifts.

The nature of modern warfare is being reshaped by several disruptive shifts, making Multi-Domain Operations (MDO) an urgent necessity. Unlike earlier revolutions driven by one or two key innovations, today we see the simultaneous maturing of technologies such as artificial intelligence, cyber, quantum computing, hypersonics, unmanned systems, space assets, biotechnology, and big data. Their convergence creates a powerful “system-of-systems” effect, with disruptive potential far greater than the sum of their parts. At the same time, the boundaries between war and peace are increasingly blurred. Conflict is no longer limited to conventional battlefields; cyber intrusions, disinformation campaigns, and space denial operations now occur continuously below the threshold of open conflict, influencing societies, economies, and politics on a global scale.

Digital systems evolve exponentially faster than traditional military platforms, and forces that fail to adapt risk rapid obsolescence.

The pace of technological change adds another layer of complexity. Digital systems evolve exponentially faster than traditional military platforms, and forces that fail to adapt risk rapid obsolescence. Moreover, the increasing interdependence of domains requires militaries to rethink doctrine and command structures. For instance, a cyberattack disabling radars can directly enable precision airstrikes, showing that actions in one domain can instantly shape outcomes in another. In this context, information has become the central determinant of victory. Where firepower and manoeuvre once dominated, information dominance now defines success. The side that can observe, orient, decide, and act faster—the OODA loop—gains a decisive edge.

Finally, warfare is shifting from a platform-centric to a network-centric paradigm. In the past, military advantage came from superior platforms; today it lies in the seamless integration of all assets into a cohesive, networked force. Legacy systems, no matter how advanced individually, can be rendered ineffective by a well-integrated multi-domain adversary. Together, these trends demand a fundamental transformation of military thinking, forcing armed forces to embrace MDO as the framework for future conflict. 

Why the Technological Transformation to MDO is Proving to be Difficult

While the rationale for adopting Multi-Domain Operations (MDO) is compelling, militaries worldwide face significant challenges in translating the concept into reality. These obstacles are institutional, technological, human, and financial in nature. Legacy doctrines and institutional inertia often slow progress, as change disrupts established hierarchies and operational comfort zones. Integrating across domains is equally complex, since cyber and space effects are often invisible, difficult to quantify, and demand real-time joint data fusion—an immense technological and doctrinal challenge.

Technology gaps further complicate the transition. Many legacy platforms lack compatibility with digital systems and are difficult to upgrade, while access to cutting-edge technologies is restricted by geopolitical rivalries. This makes ‘Atma Nirbharta’—self-reliance in defence technology—a non-negotiable requirement. On the human front, traditional warfighters are trained in manoeuvre and firepower, yet MDO requires proficiency in artificial intelligence, cyber, space systems, and data analytics—skills that are difficult to scale across large forces.

Many legacy platforms lack compatibility with digital systems and are difficult to upgrade, while access to cutting-edge technologies is restricted by geopolitical rivalries.

Command and control structures also need transformation. Classical hierarchies, designed for deliberate decision-making, are too rigid and slow for the decentralised and agile approach MDO demands. Striking the right balance between autonomy and coherence remains a daunting task. Finally, financial pressures add to the burden. Militaries must invest heavily in advanced capabilities while still maintaining conventional forces, stretching already constrained budgets.

In essence, MDO demands far more than just the infusion of technology. It calls for a fundamental paradigm shift in doctrine, organisation, human capital, and leadership culture.

Rethinking Military Strategy

Classical theorists such as Clausewitz and Jomini definestrategy in terms of using armed forces across land, sea, and air. Today, this definition is no longer sufficient; strategy must account for cyber, space, and the information environment—domains where forces may not even be military in nature such as hackers, commercial satellites, and social media influencers. The modern definition should this be:“The art and science of employing the full spectrum of a nation’s military and related capabilities—including land, maritime, air, space, cyber, and the information environment—to achieve political objectives in peace, crisis, and war. It integrates operations across these domains, synchronising kinetic and non-kinetic means, to create advantages, deny adversary options, and shape the course of conflict in alignment with national policy.”

MDO, thus, demands more than technology infusion. It requires a paradigm shift in doctrine, organisation, and leadership culture because the character of warfare itself is changing rapidly. Traditional doctrines that emphasised sequential campaigns, clear battlefields, and rigid hierarchies are no longer adequate in an era where cyber, space, information, and kinetic operations overlap continuously. To remain effective, military strategy must shift from domain-specific thinking to integrated, adaptive, and network-driven approaches.

Traditional doctrines that emphasised sequential campaigns, clear battlefields, and rigid hierarchies are no longer adequate in an era where cyber, space, information, and kinetic operations overlap continuously.

For India, this rethinking is particularly urgent. The nation faces a complex security environment marked by an assertive China with advanced cyber, space, and missile capabilities, as well as a volatile Pakistan leveraging asymmetric warfare, including disinformation and terrorism. India’s legacy platforms and service-centric structures risk slowing operational synergy at a time when adversaries are already experimenting with MDO-like concepts. Without doctrinal and organisational reform, even the best technological acquisitions could fail to deliver a decisive advantage.

Equally important is the human and leadership dimension. India’s armed forces must move toward decentralised, agile decision-making while still maintaining coherence across joint commands. Leaders will need literacy not just in manoeuvre and firepower, but also in AI, data analytics, cyber defence, and space operations. Financial constraints make this shift even more pressing—India cannot simply outspend its adversaries, so it must outthink and out-integrate them.

In short, for India, MDO is not just about technology adoption—it is about transforming military strategy itself to ensure survivability, deterrence, and decisive effectiveness in a rapidly evolving battlespace. 

Redefining “Manoeuvre”in the Age of MDO

Traditionally, manoeuvre meant the deliberate movement and positioning of physical forces—troops, tanks, ships and aircraft—to seize terrain or create decisive tactical advantage. In the Multi-Domain Operations era, manoeuvre extends into a far broader, multi-dimensional concept that blends physical motion with information flows, cyber effects, and space-based sensing. These shifts have their operational implications.

• From physical to multi-dimensional:Manoeuvre no longer belongs solely to roads, seas, and air corridors; it now runs through networks, orbits, and electromagnetic wavelengths. A brigade advancing on terrain will be synchronised with space assets that cue fires, ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) drones that refine targeting in real time, and cyber teams that disrupt enemy C2 (command-and-control) or degrade air defences. Information flows—sensor feeds, shared maps, predictive analytics—become the unseen arteries of movement, guiding physical units with far greater situational awareness. Operational planning must therefore choreograph effects across these layers so that a physical advance and a digital operation amplify, rather than conflict with, one another.
  
• From movement to effects:Modern manoeuvre prizes the ability to create decisive effects—kinetic or non-kinetic—over the mere repositioning of mass. Pre-positioning a cyber payload in an adversary’s logistics network, seeding false data to misdirect enemy sensors, or degrading satellite links before an assault can be as decisive as a flanking column. These pre-planned, non-physical actions shape the battlespace ahead of physical arrival, reducing risk and multiplying force effectiveness. Commanders must therefore think in terms of effect timelines and build campaigns that sequence cyber, electronic warfare, information operations, and fires to create cascading operational advantages.
  
• From linear to distributed:Where past doctrine emphasised concentrating force at a decisive point, MDO rewards distribution, networked autonomy, and reach. Small, dispersed units—remote sensors, loitering munitions, ISR teams, and autonomous systems—can achieve asymmetric effects when linked by resilient networks and long-range fires. Distributed forces complicate an adversary’s targeting and create multiple dilemmas simultaneously: defend the node, chase the drone swarm, or counter the information campaign. This requires robust, low-latency communications, trust in delegated authorities, and doctrines that accept dispersion as a force multiplier rather than a weakness.
  
• Operational Implications:To operationalise this redefined manoeuvre, militaries must invest in joint planning tools, cross-domain training, resilient C2 architectures, and a doctrine that sequences non-kinetic and kinetic actions as parts of a single campaign. Leaders must be comfortable delegating authority, trusting networks, and thinking in synchronised timelines of effects rather than in purely geographic phases.

In short, manoeuvre in MDO becomes an art of orchestrated effects across physical and virtual spaces—where timing, information, and integration matter as much as mass and speed.

Leaders must be comfortable delegating authority, trusting networks, and thinking in synchronised timelines of effects rather than in purely geographic phases.

Conclusion

If strategy now spans physical and virtual domains, strategic leaders cannot master operational art and logistics alone; they must evolve. Strategic leaders must also be technologically fluent; they should be able to execute offensive/defensive cyber, EW, data security, organize space-enabled ISR, coordinate AI-led targeting, decision-support and autonomous systems,  shape narrative control and social media manipulation, building cross-domain synergy, systems thinking—networked system, not isolated battles.

As RANSAMVAD 2025 and India’s new doctrine underscore, the future of military leadership lies in mastering not only the art of war but also the science of technology. If the last century belonged to generals who manoeuvred forces, the coming one will belong to leaders who manoeuvre technology.

---

Lt Gen Karanbir Singh Brar, PVSM, AVSM (Retd). He currently is a Distinguished Strategic Advisor to IITM PRAVARTAK.