What do you think?
Rate this book
The Automated Battlefield
A fascinating glimpse of future war -- fought without human confrontation. Argues that advances in surveillance & target acquisition systems, the development of increasingly intelligent missiles & highly destructive conventional warheads, & the automation of command, control, & communications operations foreshadow the advent of war fought entirely by machines. Reveals an new perspectives on the modern battleground where advancing forces are not men but mechanized drones, monitored on video screens by commanders who base their strategies on unmanned aircraft, reconnaissance from satellites, & underground sensors.
- GenresMilitary Fiction
192 pages, Paperback
First published October 1, 1986
8 people want to read
About the author
Frank Barnaby
36 books4 followersFrank Charles Barnaby is Nuclear Issues Consultant to the Oxford Research Group, a freelance defence analyst, and a prolific author on military technology, based in the UK.
Barnaby trained as a nuclear physicist and worked at the Atomic Weapons Research Establishment, Aldermaston, between 1951 and 1957. He was on the senior scientific staff of the Medical Research Council (UK) when a university lecturer at University College London (1957–67). Barnaby was Director of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) from 1971–81. He was a Professor at the VU University Amsterdam 1981–85, and awarded the Harold Stassen Chair of International Relations at the University of Minnesota in 1985.
Barnaby trained as a nuclear physicist and worked at the Atomic Weapons Research Establishment, Aldermaston, between 1951 and 1957. He was on the senior scientific staff of the Medical Research Council (UK) when a university lecturer at University College London (1957–67). Barnaby was Director of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) from 1971–81. He was a Professor at the VU University Amsterdam 1981–85, and awarded the Harold Stassen Chair of International Relations at the University of Minnesota in 1985.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
March 18, 2025
Very interesting book written in the second half of 1980's about ever going automation of the military technology and finally the very battlefield.
Author gives very interesting views on ever evolving lethality of weapons - culminating with smart weapons, more precisely smart missiles - and the arms race that seems to be aiming for extermination of humans.
I agree with majority of author's points. Issues I have are about the constant comments of how obsolete certain weapons are (from my perspective, author is just in line of many predicting end of use for various weapon systems).
For example tanks. I think tank was buried and revived more times than Dracula. Was it ever omnipotent weapon? No, not even in WW2, not even in the wars in Middle East in the post-WW2 period. Tank was created as a means to provide fast, high caliber firing support for the infantry and this is the role it is best suited for. Fast moving, well armored and heavily armed tank can burst through anything on its way and lay down devastatingly precise fire at distances up to couple of kilometers, or provide cover with smoke screens. For infantry this direct support means everything. Will tank take punishment? Of course, even in WW2 so much hyped German tanks were obliterated through ant tank gun weapons from ambushes and prepared positions. They brought destruction but were also visited destruction too.
That is war. There are no set pieces actions where one side just runs over the other. This only happens in commercial materiel from weapon industry. In real life, it gets up close and personal very very quick.
Reliance on light, fast moving vehicles is a folly. In case of any serious opposition that can lay anything from mines to artillery fire curtains vehicle can be fast but if it is not heavily armored it will be gone equally fast.
Same applies to surface ships. Until large submersible carriers (for troops, heavy weapons and say airplanes and heavy vehicles) become available, surface ships have role to play. Are they big targets, of course they are but they are also not that easily killed off (it is not just single missile single ship - saturation effect is required and again nothing exists in vacuum, it is not like any surface ship group will wait for attack then riposte, then wait for enemy etc, there will be weapons flying around like crazy). To say surface navy is made obsolete due to presence of missiles is like saying that infantry became obsolete with advent of firearms. it is still needed and (same as for the tanks) they need to adapt.
All the technology presented is Western, and there is certain bias here - note that this is something I have noticed, author purposefully writes this way because targeted audience is in the West. I found it very funny when he described need for tanks to be lighter, smaller, faster but in very comparison author sees Western tanks that are opposite of everything listed as much superior :) and of course tanks are obsolete :)
Then the constant talk about the end of human troops on the battlefield. While this comes from the humanitarian perspective, people will always be present on the battlefield, and in numbers. Reason is very simple - if you talk about all terrain forces that can fight anywhere and everywhere and with anything at their disposal you are not talking about any drones, robots or vehicles - you are talking about people. Author is aware of demographic challenges (this was very interesting read) and he has a view that military will work towards automation and introduction of autonomous weapons to take care of dwindling recruitment roster. For me this is double edged sword.
What is required is to make nations feel proud about themselves and be aware of horrors of war, in other words be aware of the risks and aim to avoid them (this is important) but at the same time not shy away from them. This is something once neutral countries like Switzerland and Sweden fully understood once upon the time. Israel should be one of the countries like this, but they embraced constant war and I am not sure they would ever be able to live in any state resembling peace.
Greatest danger with fully automated battlefield is that people get disconnected from war, start to look at it as an amusement, something that runs for its own purpose. it becomes something without any other purpose except for constant conflict. War loses the very meaning - struggle for ones goals that could not be achieved through any other means, ultimate sacrifice if you want, something not to be taken lightly.
Look at what war has become in last decades after end of Cold War - constant brush fires, long range attacks, devastating strikes against targets that cannot defend themselves but build up the ego of the attacker, military adventures in distant lands that just build up the ire and anxiety of entire parts of the world and total disconnection of people from the attacking nations from the war their nation is waging on those distant frontiers.
And then, as it was to be expected, line gets crossed, and someone with means to respond and counter is attacked. And man, what broken dreams and what scream of these same moronic leaders to their own people - now we need you to fight.
Fully automated battlefield is wet dream of politicians - imagine projecting ones will without need to report back casualties, waging war and not having problems with ones populace, no demonstrations, nothing. Pure ideal for these freaks.
But dont be fooled, once they cross the line they will expect from that very same population to lay their lives for all their mistakes. And people will do it, never underestimate the propaganda.
Problematic part is that this might escalate and end everything for everyone.
Automation and increase of lethality has an effect on both military and politician mind - they start to think that what was once unthinkable, like winning a nuclear war, might actually be achievable. And this then starts vicious cycle without end that can only culminate in world wide nuclear conflict.
Author's final notes on NATO and recommended approach to de-escalation (this was issue even back then) are great but I think thy fell onto the deaf ears back then and especially today.
It is interesting how his book resonates today with everything, from weapons to military doctrine and stance West (and world in general) should adopt in order not to end up in vicious cycles of violence and priming for the never-ending war. It seems that pause somebody clicked 30-something years ago ended and we just found ourselves back in the very precarious times.
Terrifying.
Highly recommended.
Author gives very interesting views on ever evolving lethality of weapons - culminating with smart weapons, more precisely smart missiles - and the arms race that seems to be aiming for extermination of humans.
I agree with majority of author's points. Issues I have are about the constant comments of how obsolete certain weapons are (from my perspective, author is just in line of many predicting end of use for various weapon systems).
For example tanks. I think tank was buried and revived more times than Dracula. Was it ever omnipotent weapon? No, not even in WW2, not even in the wars in Middle East in the post-WW2 period. Tank was created as a means to provide fast, high caliber firing support for the infantry and this is the role it is best suited for. Fast moving, well armored and heavily armed tank can burst through anything on its way and lay down devastatingly precise fire at distances up to couple of kilometers, or provide cover with smoke screens. For infantry this direct support means everything. Will tank take punishment? Of course, even in WW2 so much hyped German tanks were obliterated through ant tank gun weapons from ambushes and prepared positions. They brought destruction but were also visited destruction too.
That is war. There are no set pieces actions where one side just runs over the other. This only happens in commercial materiel from weapon industry. In real life, it gets up close and personal very very quick.
Reliance on light, fast moving vehicles is a folly. In case of any serious opposition that can lay anything from mines to artillery fire curtains vehicle can be fast but if it is not heavily armored it will be gone equally fast.
Same applies to surface ships. Until large submersible carriers (for troops, heavy weapons and say airplanes and heavy vehicles) become available, surface ships have role to play. Are they big targets, of course they are but they are also not that easily killed off (it is not just single missile single ship - saturation effect is required and again nothing exists in vacuum, it is not like any surface ship group will wait for attack then riposte, then wait for enemy etc, there will be weapons flying around like crazy). To say surface navy is made obsolete due to presence of missiles is like saying that infantry became obsolete with advent of firearms. it is still needed and (same as for the tanks) they need to adapt.
All the technology presented is Western, and there is certain bias here - note that this is something I have noticed, author purposefully writes this way because targeted audience is in the West. I found it very funny when he described need for tanks to be lighter, smaller, faster but in very comparison author sees Western tanks that are opposite of everything listed as much superior :) and of course tanks are obsolete :)
Then the constant talk about the end of human troops on the battlefield. While this comes from the humanitarian perspective, people will always be present on the battlefield, and in numbers. Reason is very simple - if you talk about all terrain forces that can fight anywhere and everywhere and with anything at their disposal you are not talking about any drones, robots or vehicles - you are talking about people. Author is aware of demographic challenges (this was very interesting read) and he has a view that military will work towards automation and introduction of autonomous weapons to take care of dwindling recruitment roster. For me this is double edged sword.
What is required is to make nations feel proud about themselves and be aware of horrors of war, in other words be aware of the risks and aim to avoid them (this is important) but at the same time not shy away from them. This is something once neutral countries like Switzerland and Sweden fully understood once upon the time. Israel should be one of the countries like this, but they embraced constant war and I am not sure they would ever be able to live in any state resembling peace.
Greatest danger with fully automated battlefield is that people get disconnected from war, start to look at it as an amusement, something that runs for its own purpose. it becomes something without any other purpose except for constant conflict. War loses the very meaning - struggle for ones goals that could not be achieved through any other means, ultimate sacrifice if you want, something not to be taken lightly.
Look at what war has become in last decades after end of Cold War - constant brush fires, long range attacks, devastating strikes against targets that cannot defend themselves but build up the ego of the attacker, military adventures in distant lands that just build up the ire and anxiety of entire parts of the world and total disconnection of people from the attacking nations from the war their nation is waging on those distant frontiers.
And then, as it was to be expected, line gets crossed, and someone with means to respond and counter is attacked. And man, what broken dreams and what scream of these same moronic leaders to their own people - now we need you to fight.
Fully automated battlefield is wet dream of politicians - imagine projecting ones will without need to report back casualties, waging war and not having problems with ones populace, no demonstrations, nothing. Pure ideal for these freaks.
But dont be fooled, once they cross the line they will expect from that very same population to lay their lives for all their mistakes. And people will do it, never underestimate the propaganda.
Problematic part is that this might escalate and end everything for everyone.
Automation and increase of lethality has an effect on both military and politician mind - they start to think that what was once unthinkable, like winning a nuclear war, might actually be achievable. And this then starts vicious cycle without end that can only culminate in world wide nuclear conflict.
Author's final notes on NATO and recommended approach to de-escalation (this was issue even back then) are great but I think thy fell onto the deaf ears back then and especially today.
It is interesting how his book resonates today with everything, from weapons to military doctrine and stance West (and world in general) should adopt in order not to end up in vicious cycles of violence and priming for the never-ending war. It seems that pause somebody clicked 30-something years ago ended and we just found ourselves back in the very precarious times.
Terrifying.
Highly recommended.
Displaying 1 of 1 review