Infantry in the present: between mass infantry and high-tech infantry
The infantry, the land component of the armed forces, plays a central role in modern military operations. Over the decades, it has evolved to meet the changing challenges of warfare. In the current war in Ukraine , the infantry finds itself at a crossroads, oscillating between two distinct approaches: mass infantry and high-tech infantry.
Mass infantry
Traditionally, mass infantry was characterized by large numbers of troops and intensive use of firepower. It was based on the doctrine of attrition, seeking to overwhelm the enemy by sheer numbers and occupy the terrain. This approach was particularly evident in the two world wars, when millions of infantry soldiers were deployed on vast fronts.
Although the concept of mass infantry has been called into question over time due to its high human costs, it remains relevant in certain situations. Asymmetrical conflicts and peacekeeping operations may require a large military presence to stabilize a region or deter hostile actors.
High-Tech infantry , The coexistence of two paradigms
The reality today is that massed infantry and high-tech infantry coexist in armed forces around the world. Varying operational needs dictate the adoption of one or the other approach, or even both at the same time. The ideal infantry would be made up of two complementary components:
High-tech infantry:
A highly technological infantry force, smaller in number but highly specialized.
Well-paid, highly-trained soldiers with the advanced technical skills needed to meet modern challenges.
A direct link with armaments companies to stay at the cutting edge of technology and benefit from the latest advances in military equipment.
This component would be primarily intended for high-intensity, advanced defense missions and responses to complex contemporary threats.
Mass and reserve infantry:
A mass infantry force, drawn from general mobilization, military service or ad hoc recruitment.
Soldiers paid less and less equipped than their high-tech counterparts, but sufficiently trained for area control, peacekeeping missions on national territory, humanitarian assistance and high-intensity defensive missions.
This component would be better suited to situations where the number of soldiers is essential, while still being prepared to sacrifice second-rate human resources if necessary in the event of a mass infantry requirement.
Conclusion
Today's infantry is characterized by a diversity of roles and missions. While massed infantry is losing its strategic importance in many contexts, it has not been completely eclipsed by high-tech infantry. The two paradigms coexist and complement each other, enabling the armed forces to respond flexibly to contemporary challenges. The future of infantry probably lies in a balanced combination of these two approaches, adapted to each situation.