Abhijit Bhattacharyya | Air Power Flourishes Amid Fresh Conflicts Worldwide
No armament industry would want to see the end of this booming, lucrative market with instant extinction of the enemy. The more the enemies and the longer the wars, the more the profits for American and allied Western companies
Nearly four years ago, the American retreat from Afghanistan, beginning August 15, 2021 with its combatants flying out of Kabul’s Bagram airbase, came as a huge shock to Western arms manufacturers. The end of a long war in a distant land after almost 20 years signalled a looming recession and the loss of profits for the US arms industry.
Providentially, however, the good times returned within just six months, with Russian President Vladimir Putin ordering a “special military operation” targeting neighbouring Ukraine, with the West poised to rush to its defence. Then came the horrific Hamas terrorist attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, prompting a brutal response by the Jewish state in the Gaza Strip, and later against Hezbollah in Lebanon. As conflicts continued and live fronts saw destructive missions on land and in the air, the evolving tactical situations ensured a steady flow of profits to the West’s arms bazar. The defence and defence budgets of Europe zoomed, and the US flourished most.
While the “good times” for land-war weapons, drones, air-launched missiles and rockets began February 2022 with the Moscow-Kyiv conflict in Europe, “better times” arrived in May and June 2025 for arms merchants, with two fresh conflicts in Asia, where the extensive deployment of air assets, especially drones, enhanced the role and importance of air power several notches higher. It was a windfall gain, as 46 months after the end of US-led Afghan war, there was a fresh opportunity for the West to enhance defence budgets to soaring heights.
While the India-Pakistan conflict, which followed the terrorist attack in J&K’s Pahalgam, lasted just four days and ended in a ceasefire on May 10, the critical importance of air power instantly re-surfaced. India’s calibrated and calculated counter-terror ops, focused on static ground targets through air assaults as any land operations would have resulted in an unacceptable number of body bags. India adroitly used high-explosive ammunition from the air, targeting only accurately identified points. The tactics of air-launched precision guided munitions even hit the ground units of the rival military. The Pakistanis too did what they could with its fighters. What drew attention, however, was its use of longer-range PL-15 “beyond the horizon” (BTH) air-to-air missile.
The four-day conflict saw deployment of New Delhi’s French and Russian fighters, and Islamabad’s US, French and Chinese air assets. The pin-point accuracy of target identification and hits by Indian aircraft stood out. The counter air assault also came through Chinese weapons, but India’s joint BrahMos and S-400 air defence systems did commendable offensive targeting of airbases and destruction of two US F-16, two Swedish SAAB airborne warning and control system (AWACS) aircraft, and one Chinese-Pakistani JF-17 too. Thus, precision ground targeting from the air brought back the role of air power to pole position in defence planning.
As the wars in Ukraine and Gaza simmered, the sudden assault by the Israeli Air Force on Shia Iran’s strategic assets, including its nuclear sites, on June 13 left the entire world rattled. Over a week later, on June 22, President Donald Trump took America directly into the war, striking at Iran’s Fordo, Isfahan and Natanz nuclear sites with deep-penetration “bunker-buster” bombs delivered by the sparsely-used Northrop Grumman (NG) B-2A Spirit (capable of carrying nuclear weapons) long-range striker bomber. While the US claimed initially all three sites were “completely obliterated”, it later emerged that while the damage was extensive and may have set Iran’s nuclear programme back by months, it was not totally wiped out. So why did Mr Trump act as he did? Did the US and Israel really believe that one sortie of seven B-2A would see the end of Iran’s nuclear programme?
The US armament industry is a multi-billion-dollar business. Which industrial lobby or company would try for a quick end of the enemy -- whether Iran, Hamas, Ukraine, Russia, Houthi, Hezbollah or ISIS -- when their prolonged “commercial value” helps to extend the period of arms profitability? No armament industry would want to see the end of this booming, lucrative market with instant extinction of the enemy. The more the enemies and the longer the wars, the more the profits for American and allied Western companies. That’s just economics.
The half-hour bombing mission of the NG B-2A Spirit must be seen in this light. The B-2A is an “old” machine, no longer in production. “First developed in 1980-1983; produced in 1989-2000; it has a service life of 35 years, and will be out by 2032”. A total of 21 were constructed, and today 20 are in operation.
The NG B-2A Sprit has a successor-in-waiting: the B-21 Raider long-range bomber. Conceived in July 2014, the US government gave the contract due to its lower price in comparison with the Boeing-Lockheed consortium in 2015. Development models are already operating and undergoing extensive flight tests. Its expected date of induction into the US Air Force is 2028-2030.
Jane’s All the World’s Aircraft 2024-2025 says that the future NG B-21 Raider is priced at $564 million per unit in 2016. If so, by the time it flies combat missions, can its cost be less than $650 million per aircraft? Compared to the B-2 seen over Iran, the B-21 is half the size of the B-2 and there is “provision for nuclear and large-size conventional bombs and payloads for intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, electronic attack”. On December 2, 2022 the B-21 bomber was unveiled before a restricted audience at Palmdale, California, and so far, Australia is the sole foreign country to be offered the high-tech bomber.
The reality is that it will take at least six more years for the B-21 to be deployed for any combat mission. Therefore, the best way to improve future combat capability is to “learn from active war” situations of the B-2 over difficult and dangerous combat ambience. The real-time signature of the long-range NG B-2 bomber will be captured for future aircraft in an increasingly difficult and restricted 21st century war zone.
Learning to improve via actual combat conditions is infinitely preferable to doing things by CAD (computer-aided design) or simulator operations to train to fight wars. President Trump’s use of the B-2 to “destroy” Iran’s nuclear sites was essentially for the benefit of the B-21 Raider’s manufacturers. The US Air Force plans to deploy 145 B-21 Raiders, and for Northrop Grumman it spells profits of over $80 billion. Growing cash for global corporations earned in combat killing zones may thus be good for countries as well as their rulers.