US Army soldiers walk past a burning M-ATV armored vehicle after it struck an improvised explosive device near Combat Outpost Nolen in Afghanistan’s Arghandab Valley in July 2010. – Bob Strong/Reuters/File
In recent years, the U.S. military has faced an escalating threat: Iranian drone attacks across the Middle East. This challenge has forced military leaders to rapidly adapt and rush new defensive systems into the region. These developments feel like a revisit to past conflicts, reminiscent of the improvised explosive devices (IEDs) that plagued service members during the 20 years of the War on Terror.
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Dan Caine, and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth recently addressed lawmakers in a closed briefing that highlighted the unexpected severity of the drone threats. U.S. air defenses, they noted, are struggling to keep up with the sheer volume of drone attacks. The implications are dire, as just last month, a drone strike resulted in the first U.S. military fatalities in the ongoing conflict, killing six soldiers and injuring more during an attack on a temporary operations center in Kuwait.
George Barros, director of innovation and open source tradecraft at the Institute for the Study of War, expressed concern over the apparent lack of preparedness among U.S. military planners. He remarked on the shock within the national security community regarding the failures to internalize lessons learned from recent conflicts, particularly the drone warfare dynamics seen in Ukraine.
The urgency to enhance defensive capabilities echoes an earlier struggle against IEDs. In response to the drone threat, the military is not only reinforcing existing air defense systems but also investing in directed-energy weapons and alternative technologies that have proven effective in other theaters, particularly in Europe.
In a concerted push to bolster capabilities, the U.S. Army has recently procured 10,000 Merops anti-drone systems and 13,000 Bumblebee counter-drone systems. However, there remains uncertainty about how many of these systems were deployed before operations ramped up in late February or how many have been newly sent to the Middle East.
This screengrab, taken from a video geolocated by CNN, shows smoke rising from a US facility at the Port of Shuaiba on Sunday, March 1, 2026, following an Iranian strike that left six American service members dead. – Social Media
The stark parallels between the challenges posed by drones today and IEDs of the past are significant. Mark Cancian, a retired Marine Corps colonel and advisor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, remarked on the similarities: both are adaptable threats that dictated a costly, urgent response to develop countermeasures.
While IEDs were an unexpected menace encountered in Iraq and Afghanistan, the drone threat is surprisingly anticipated. U.S. military planners have been cognizant of drone warfare for over a decade, especially after observing its transformative impact in Ukraine. Nevertheless, when conflicts escalated, it became evident that preparations had not kept pace with the reality of battlefield threats.
Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell placed some of the blame on the previous administration, citing a lack of proactive measures in planning and budget allocation directed toward drone technologies. However, he noted that recent shifts under Hegseth’s leadership show a marked response in mobilizing efforts, including the establishment of Joint Interagency Task Force-401, which has made significant strides in acquiring equipment and resources to combat drone threats.
Reflecting back to the start of the War on Terror, IEDs accounted for significant combat casualties. In fact, by 2006, these devices were responsible for half of all combat casualties in Iraq. The U.S. military responded by developing intricate strategies and technologies to counteract the threat. Yet, while IEDs could be produced inexpensively and in vast numbers, counter-IED measures often cost significantly more and took years to implement fully.
Lessons learned from the past continue to inform military strategies. The unfortunate reality is that structures and fortifications that were designed to protect against ground threats, such as IEDs, prove insufficient against aerial attacks. The recent drone strike in Kuwait, aimed at a facility fortified with concrete barriers, demonstrated this vulnerability, leading to substantial casualties among U.S. troops.
Since late February, around 200 U.S. troops have been injured, with many withdrawing temporarily from service due to drone strikes. General Caine reported that the majority of these injuries stemmed from drone attacks, showcasing the urgency of addressing this new method of warfare.
An Iranian-made Shahed-136 drone flies over the sky of Kermanshah, Iran, on March 7, 2024. – Middle East Images/AFP/Getty Images/File
‘We’re moving as quickly as we can’
The destructive potential of inexpensive drones has been a focal point for military strategists, particularly as they watch the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine. As both sides intensified their focus on counter-drone technologies, the U.S. military found itself urgently needing to catch up. Training troops not just in tactics involving drones but also in their effective deployment and integration into existing operations became a priority.
A military source shared insights into the current operations in the Middle East, emphasizing that while U.S. planners had observed drone deployments in Ukraine closely, the scale at which drone threats are posed by Iran was unprecedented. This has prompted a swift reassessment of strategies and equipment in real-time.
However, many in the military firmly reject claims that U.S. forces were unprepared. They point to collaborative efforts with allies such as Ukraine, enhancing mutual understanding of drone warfare dynamics. The U.S. Army has ramped up efforts aggressively, including pushing for the necessary resources to address the challenges posed by drone technologies.
Despite these efforts, frustrations remain regarding Congress’s responsiveness to military needs. This has created a bottleneck in acquiring the required technologies swiftly, similarly hindering rapid adaptations that have become essential due to the evolving nature of warfare.
As Cancian observed, just as with IEDs, the challenge of countering drones will be ongoing, characterized by a continuous cycle of adaptation for both the U.S. military and its adversaries. Iranian forces, and indeed other nations, are likely to take cues from ongoing conflicts to enhance their capabilities, prompting further shifts in military tactics and technologies.