News

Sept. 12 (UPI) — Qatar’s prime minister, Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman al-Thani, will be at the White House on Friday before a summit between Arab states regarding Israel’s attack on Qatar’s capital city of Doha.

Al-Thani is expected to discuss the strike by Israel and potentially a defense deal between Qatar and the United States.

He is expected to meet with President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and diplomat Steve Witkoff.

Trump was in Doha in May, when the United States and Qatar finalized agreements regarding a letter of intent on defense cooperation between the Qatari Ministry of Defense and U.S. Department of Defense, which included a purchase of both drone systems and drone defense systems, as stated in a press release from the Qatar Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Trump has distanced himself from the Israeli strike, which was intended to target the leadership members of Hamas. White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt said on Wednesday that Trump assured the Qatari government that such an attack would never take place again.

The Israeli attack struck a residential compound in Doha and killed six people, including a Qatari security officer.

Qatar has since stressed it would “take all necessary measures to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity” in a statement from the Qatari government.

Other countries in across the Persian Gulf are also concerned and are holding an emergency summit in Doha Sunday in response to Israel’s attack.

Tehran, Iran – Iran’s authorities are discussing what comes next following an agreement with the global nuclear watchdog, as they urge the region to go beyond issuing statements in reaction to Israel’s attack on Qatar.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi is heading to an emergency meeting of the parliament’s national security commission on Saturday evening, with hardline lawmakers looking for answers as to whether the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) will be allowed to access nuclear sites bombed by the United States and Israel in June.

He is expected to reassure the hardline-dominated parliament that no access will be given to the IAEA without strict permission from the top echelon.

Araghchi had reached an agreement with the IAEA in Cairo, Egypt, on Tuesday, to try to resume cooperation that had been suspended after Tehran accused the nuclear watchdog and its chief, Rafael Grossi, of having paved the way for the strikes.

Grossi told the IAEA Board of Governors on Wednesday that the technical agreement includes “all facilities and installations in Iran” and “contemplates the required reporting on all the attacked facilities, including the nuclear material present”.

But Araghchi told Iranian state television that agency inspectors have no access to Iranian nuclear sites beyond the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant.

He said case-by-case permission would have to be granted by the country’s Supreme National Security Council, which includes the president, parliament and judiciary chiefs, several ministers, military commanders and those appointed by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Araghchi also confirmed that Iran’s high-enriched uranium is “under the rubble of bombed facilities”, and said the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran is investigating and assessing whether the sites are accessible or contaminated.

Europe’s ‘snapback’ and Iranian threats

Amir Hayat Moghadam, a hardline member of the parliament’s national security commission, claimed that Araghchi said Iran will leave the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) if United Nations sanctions are reinstated against the country, according to the state-linked Tabnak news website, ahead of the meeting on Saturday.

Araghchi and the foreign ministry have confirmed that legislation is in motion aimed at abandoning the global non-proliferation pact, but that finalising such a move would only potentially come if the “snapback” mechanism of Iran’s 2015 nuclear deal with world powers is abused by European countries.

France, Germany and the United Kingdom triggered the snapback mechanism in late August and were slammed by China and Russia, the other signatories to the landmark nuclear accord that the US unilaterally abandoned in 2018.

The European countries, known as the E3, gave Iran one month to reach a new agreement over its nuclear programme or face international sanctions.

Iran maintains that the three would lose legitimacy if they go through with the threat, and will “empower the US and marginalise Europe in future diplomatic engagements”.

Despite the rising tensions, Araghchi announced on Thursday that Iran and France are close to agreeing on a prisoner swap and expressed hope that an exchange would happen “in the coming days”.

Iran’s top diplomat did not detail which French prisoners held in Iran would be released, but said the exchange would include Mahdieh Esfandiari, an Iranian woman arrested in France over posts about Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza.

Esfandiari, a translator living in the French city of Lyon since 2018, was arrested in February, with French authorities accusing her of incitement to and glorification of “terrorism” and “hate speech” against Jewish people over posts on Telegram.

Tehran calls her a “hostage”, employing the word used by France and other European countries that have accused Iran for decades of holding foreign and dual-national citizens in relation to espionage charges.

‘Joint operation room against Israeli madness’

Fighting off surging pressure from the US and its allies, Iranian authorities have tried to warm ties with China and Russia, and to find common ground with regional players, particularly Arab neighbours, over Israel’s aggressions.

After Israel attacked Qatar for the first time this week in a failed attempt to assassinate the top leadership of Hamas, Iran joined the chorus of regional and international condemnation.

Ali Larijani, who was appointed Iran’s security chief last month, went further on Saturday and issued what he called a “warning to Islamic governments”.

“Holding a conference of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation filled with speeches without any practical outcome (as happens in UN Security Council meetings) in truth amounts to issuing a new order of aggression in favour of the Zionist entity!”, he wrote on X in Arabic, in reference to Israel.

“At the very least, form a ‘joint operations room’ against the madness of this entity,” Larijani said, adding that “you have done nothing for the hungry and oppressed Muslims in Palestine, at least take a modest decision to avert your own annihilation”.

Qatar announced on Saturday that it will host an emergency Arab-Islamic summit on Monday in Doha, preceded by a preparatory meeting of foreign ministers on Sunday.

Qatar’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Majed bin Mohammed al-Ansari said in a statement that “the summit will discuss a draft statement” on the Israeli attack.

Iran said President Masoud Pezeshkian will represent the country in the summit.

For many years, I have highlighted in detail the threat posed by lower-end drones, ranging from off-the-shelf and standard remote-controlled types to short-range First Person View (FPV) types to much longer-range, but comparatively inexpensive one-way attack munitions that blur the lines between cruise missiles and unmanned aerial systems. Combined, these weapons represent a vast and truly game-changing asymmetric threat that the Pentagon has long overlooked. Now the Department of Defense (DoD) is desperately trying to play catch-up at a time when the evolution of these systems is fast outpacing countermeasures to them. This massive failure in vision could be heavily paid for in blood if a major conflict were to erupt between the U.S. and a capable adversary.

At the same time, the Pentagon has also been bizarrely slow at widely adopting lower-end drones for its own offensive operations. This is glaring for short-range types, especially after all the lessons learned in Ukraine. Thankfully, we are finally seeing some much-needed change in this regard. But what’s arguably even more frustrating is the DoD’s lack of urgency when it comes to producing massive numbers of long-range one-way attack drones, even now, when the need for these weapons, which have transformed modern warfare, isn’t just clear, it’s absolutely critical for deterring and, if all else fails, winning a conflict.

For our regular readers, what you are going to read isn’t exactly new. It is something we have been harping on for many years. In recent times, the lack of movement on doing everything reasonably possible to produce as many relatively inexpensive long-range attack and decoy drones borders on downright negligence when it comes to ensuring America’s national security. That being said, I have hopes the Trump administration will reverse this wrong, and there are indications from the very top that it will, but the Pentagon cannot approach it like it has done with any other weapon system in the recent past. This urgent challenge requires a more aggressive and streamlined approach that looks at the procurement of these weapons differently. There simply isn’t the time left to obtain this critical combat mass using the DoD’s ‘business as usual’ procurement playbook.

We are talking about putting in place the means to sustain rapid production of tens of thousands of these weapons a year, not hundreds or a few thousand. If the U.S. fails to do this, it hands a massive advantage to our near-peer adversaries, China and Russia, which are in far more advantageous positions to supply these capabilities in very large numbers today.

To put it bluntly, this post is not just a prediction of things to come, it is a plea for urgent action.

Attack of the clones

The drones that are so desperately needed are not complex. They are not expensive. They are anything but exquisite. They are also not innovative in any way. In fact, they take a play right out of our adversary’s playbook. They are clones of a long line of clones — that’s a huge feature, not a bug. And as a result of these attributes, they are intrinsically repulsive to the Pentagon’s legacy vision for America’s dominance in future wars.

Those making the decisions for the DoD have been dreaming up how to fight wars of the past — ones dominated by qualitative advantage. The last decade and a half or so has seen a stunted force transformation that was designed in denial of what’s on the horizon, specifically when it comes to unmanned technologies.

The same exact flavor of apathy and lack of vision within the DoD that has been occurring toward long-range one-way attack munitions was present in the last decade with the much higher-end, opposite end of the future unmanned air war. You can read about this bizarre reality in our 2016 exposé on a capability — unmanned combat air vehicles (UCAVs) — that remains an obvious hole in America’s aerial force mix as our adversaries and some allies alike pursue it with urgency.

Not surprisingly, these polar opposites in terms of deferred unmanned aircraft capabilities have one thing in common — a massive premium put on range. The decision not to aggressively procure high-end unmanned combat aircraft in the last decade was a luxury that no longer exists, but doing so with the lower end of the drone spectrum is arguably even a bigger mistake today.

A loose vision of what we so desperately need is already being mass-produced in Russia today. It is also Moscow’s primary standoff weapon with which it bombards Ukraine on a daily basis. This is the Shahed-136 — renamed Geran in Russia — long-range one-way attack munition.

This weapon was ‘designed’ by Iran, who loosely cloned it from Israel, which largely originated the development and operational use of this type of capability decades ago, a reality which you can read all about here. Today, Russia is producing thousands of ever-improving variants and derivatives of the Shahed-136 per month. That production is set to expand drastically in the near term. It is very possible that 2026 could see Russia build over 50,000 of these drones annually. The basic Shahed concept has also been copied by other countries in recent years, from China to North Korea, as well as some U.S. allies.

The Shahed-136 is an efficient delta planform, modified flying-wing-like design. It can carry plenty of fuel to get to its destination, roughly around 1,000 miles away, give or take a couple of hundred miles, as the range varies quite dramatically depending on the sub-variant. It measures around eight feet wide by 11 feet long. It delivers a roughly 50-to-100-pound warhead. It does this at plodding light aircraft speeds with the use of a small and simple internal combustion engine. The basic engine/airframe combination is intrinsically adaptable. While primarily a ‘kamikaze drone,’ it can be viewed simply as a platform. Development of improved configurations and ones capable of tackling emerging mission sets is done in a low-cost and high-risk, rapid iterative manner, not over years of development and prolonged procurement processes. The Russians have been steadily evolving their Shahed variants in exactly this way.

As noted earlier, the Shahed-136, and many other types with a similar mission, blur the line between cruise missiles and drones. This often frustrates those who obsess over definitions and designations. The fact is, you can look at these weapons as slow, low-cost cruise missiles or long-range drones that are designed, at least primarily, to fly a single, one-way suicidal mission. It is worth noting that some variants can be reused under various circumstances when used for non-strike missions.

While there are many drone configurations that could do this job, from traditional fuselage-and-wing combinations to more exotic ones, the delta planform design has proven itself as something of a sweet spot for similar drone performance capabilities dating back many decades. That being said, any airframe design that can be built as cheaply as possible and can achieve very basic range and payload objectives will work.

When it comes to this class of drone, speed and advanced guidance concepts do not define its utility. Range and cost do. Survivability comes in numbers, and due to their smaller size, use of composite materials, and small internal combustion engine, as well as their slow speed. These attributes, along with their low-altitude flight profile, mean they possess a reduced signature and general level of detectability that can be a challenge for traditionally configured ground-based radars. Despite their smaller signature, the fact that they are still somewhat vulnerable to interception is actually a positive, but we will get to that in a moment.

Above all else, the Shahed-136 and other long-range one-way attack drones exist to put a relevantly-sized warhead on a target far from their launch position at the lowest possible cost. It was previously estimated that the Russian Shahed-136 variant costs around $50,000 per copy, with some estimates being far lower. This cost has also likely declined significantly since Russia has mastered the design and drastically ramped up serial production. By comparison, traditional cruise missiles with similar range have costs in the millions of dollars per round, so the price differential is very dramatic. The Shaheds are also just far easier to build and can be produced in much less time than a typical cruise missile.

Go big or choose to lose

Before we continue, it’s absolutely crucial that if you take away anything from this piece, it’s that the U.S. military needs to acquire many long-range one-way attack munitions very fast. The basic framework for doing so that I lay out below is not the only way to realize that goal, although I believe it is, by far, the best way to do so. Regardless, the DoD must act now, and at dramatic scale, to stockpile as many of these weapons as possible in the near term.

The Shahed-136 was developed by Iran with, ironically considering its roots, Israel in mind as a primary target. Russia has tweaked their versions for range and payload optimization dictated by the conflict it is in with Ukraine — and for a potential future broader European fight by default. The U.S. military needs a drone to meet similar requirements, but it also needs another, less numerous type that is better suited for the extreme challenges of the Pacific. Critical to the latter design would be the objective of having the range to reach from the Second Island Chain to the Chinese mainland — this is roughly 2,000 miles one-way.

Having two variants, one that can reach around 1,000 miles and one that can reach over 2,000 miles, provides maximum tactical unpredictability and theater optimization. This addresses the extreme challenges of a Pacific contingency while also providing a more prevalent and efficient type for potential wars anywhere, including the Pacific.

Considering the shorter-range variant can be launched from any ship that can hold a shipping container, or that those containers can be placed on any landmass and even be activated remotely, the enemy has no way of targeting them at scale. These drones can also be launched by a small catapult or even from a moving truck bed. Air launch is also an interesting concept to ponder. Because they can be launched from pretty much anywhere, the drones can approach the enemy from every vector accessible to the launching force.

The smaller, cheaper, far more prevalent of the two ‘U.S. Shahed’ configurations can be just as useful for posing a threat to China virtually everywhere within the First Island Chain and out to 1,000 miles from Chinese shores as it would be in Europe. The larger, more expensive 2,000-plus-mile configuration is less flexible, but it’s so important because it provides an even greater targeting problem to the adversary, and extra ‘left of launch’ survivability via the sheer distance it can attack from. Its utility would be highly important in a scenario where accessing anywhere within 1,000 miles of the Chinese mainland becomes highly dangerous after the opening shots of a conflict, making resupply and distribution of additional shorter-ranged one-way attack munitions to areas within that bubble very problematic.

It’s also worth noting that the range of these drones can be consumed by flying circuitous routes to maximize survivability or to assist in coordinated attack operations with other standoff munitions and crewed platforms. Regardless, the existence of many thousands of these drones packed in non-assuming containers ready to fire, or in ships’ holds, or storehouses with a catapult nearby, and forward positioned across a vast battlespace, will demand that the enemy’s available defenses be distributed beyond their capacity to defend.

So, to sum this up, the U.S. military needs two classes of long-range one-way attack munitions and, for at least by far the most prevalent one, cloning the Shahed-136 will do. While an infinite number of configurations from different suppliers could fill those two requirements, going that route only lessens the ability to produce, stockpile, maintain, and employ the extreme quantities required. This is why two standardized configurations are absolutely key. Making such weapons is easy and by no means requires the expertise of huge defense contractors. Quite the opposite. Producing them and stockpiling them in bulk is where the biggest opportunities and challenges lie for the United States.

A new way

When I say stockpile, I don’t think it’s intuitive to visualize the scale of such an operation that is required. While the Pentagon is now slowly trying to pivot to a high-low mix of some classes of standoff munitions, with the lower end of that spectrum also being focused on the ability to rapidly produce them on demand, it is very debatable that this concept will meet expectations. This is especially true during a wartime scenario when the possibility of massive disruptions in global supply chains and even within the homeland will be part of a near-peer enemy’s battle strategy.

Yes, in a major all-out fight in the Pacific, the war will come home to the United States, too.

This could manifest in the form of some very concerning cyber weaponry China has amassed, as well as potential sabotage and kinetic operations targeted at degrading America’s ability to respond militarily and its citizens’ will to support such a response. Defense production will be among the top targets, as well as military assets. Transportation, energy, and financial infrastructure are also likely to be in the crosshairs.

Just look at what happened in Russia and Iran when it comes to near-field attacks inside their countries with adversaries using relatively basic drones and other short-ranged guided weaponry. These were precisely the kind of potential attacks we have been predicting for many years, right down to the very details. As it sits now, there are no robust domestic defenses in the United States against these kinds of enemy actions. This is another byproduct of the U.S. government’s massive lapse in not taking the drone threat seriously. This appears to be changing now, hopefully. Regardless, these are just one set of tactics, but China has clearly dreamed up many. While we can hope the words I am writing here prove to be hyperbolic and that things don’t actually occur this way should a U.S.-China fight come to pass, that is a massive ‘divorced from the facts’ gamble that nobody should be willing to take at this point.

China is also the industrial production powerhouse of the globe. It can produce things at truly massive scales to a degree the United States can’t really replicate. This is especially true when it comes to relatively long-range one-way attack drones. Famously, the first time Ukraine used such systems on Russia, they were drone airframes available on Alibaba converted into weapons. The possibility of how many of these systems China could pump out on short order presents a very dark picture when compared with America’s industrial capacity, as well as its available air defense capabilities to counter throngs of Chinese drones.

So yeah, we are far behind in the rapid production capacity realm, and especially when it comes to cheap composite airframes, basic flight control systems, and small and relatively crude internal combustion engines. So instead of living in denial, let’s work around the problem while growing production capacity in the United States. We can do this by building many of these airframes and their basic subsystem components now, in peacetime, so we have a deep, widely distributed, and resilient magazine to rapidly draw from in wartime. This, paired with the ability to scale up production during a time of crisis to counter the massive use rate of these weapons in the early days and weeks of the conflict, will be key. Initially obtaining a shallow stockpile with the hopes that production can be scaled to deal with a crisis is a very risky and foolish strategy for such a critical capability.

What the U.S. needs to do right now is an industrial push to use many contractors to mass produce the same two basic airframe designs, and the flight control systems and powerplants needed to make them fly. It is critical that the U.S. government owns the rights to the basic designs so that it isn’t ‘vendor locked’ to a single contractor. This way, the Pentagon can openly compete every component of the common designs in perpetuity, as well as assembly, payload integration, and sustainment of the stockpile, all without being held hostage by a single contractor and lopsided licensing agreements.

Once again, these drones are just simple platforms, crude ‘open architecture’ ones by default due to their inherent simplicity. As noted earlier, Russia is taking advantage of this reality with its rapid evolution of its Shahed derivatives. What we need as fast as possible is a large stockpile of the basic components that make up a completed airframe, then we can insert payload advancements as they make sense and as tactics, countermeasures, and general technology evolve. This will allow us to achieve a proper capabilities mix that can fluctuate elastically over time.

Two standardized designs also mean launch systems and backend mission planning components can also be standardized, mass produced, trained on, distributed, and sustained at the cheapest cost.

It’s critical to note that there are a small but growing number of firms that are now actively pitching U.S.-built Shahed-like clones to the U.S. military. Spektreworks and Griffon Aerospace, for example. So far, beyond some financial assistance in prototype development, the DoD has mainly only shown interest in procuring them as threat representative targets for testing and training purposes. It’s possible that there have been orders for offensive configured types, but not at anywhere the scale needed as outlined in this post. While Shahed-like target drones are certainly badly needed, it’s a bit ironic that they want them for this use alone, because they represent a new threat that is vexing and asymmetric, but they aren’t rushing to actually obtain the same class of weapon in huge quantities for offensive use. Regardless, these firms are exactly the ones that can play a major part in bringing these two designs into service, along with other manufacturers, big and small.

Another Group 3 threat system (target) broadly similar to the FLM 136 G3 ‘reverse-engineered Shahed’ threat system.

“The MQM-172 Arrowhead is designed as a high-speed, maneuverable one-way-attack and target drone platform—perfect for realistic threat emulation, training, and… https://t.co/qaEanNEC8T pic.twitter.com/DwxlGypV4E

— AirPower 2.0 (MIL_STD) (@AirPowerNEW1) August 12, 2025

The American version of the “Shahed-136” — the “Low-Cost Unmanned Combat Aerial System” (LUCAS) — its production facility, although currently still at the CGI animation stage. via the second 2025 Technology Readiness Experimentation event (T-REX 25-2). https://t.co/y64Xd1B9QA pic.twitter.com/x4qwVvfTBx

— 笑脸男人 (@lfx160219) July 22, 2025

With all this in mind, the plan of action needs to include finding a slew of firms with the capability and the will to produce the basic standardized airframe, propulsion, and flight controls, and build these U.S.-Shaheds as fast and as cheaply as possible. Again, this cannot be the domain of one primary manufacturer. It requires many companies. This is how the United States can achieve a highly resilient supply chain, immediate scale, and rampant competition to drive the price of each drone down over time and increase capability while piling on our combat mass. With every dollar saved via this strategy, we can buy more drones. Once we have stockpiled tens of thousands of these weapons, we can taper production strategically to keep production lines warm and work to export them to our allies.

Other companies can produce insertion payloads — anti-radiation and optical seekers, electronic warfare payloads, swarm networking communications, warheads, hardened GPS and PNT capabilities, and especially revolutionary AI infusion that will allow the use of these common airframes in innovative and outright new ways. This includes taking on missions well beyond striking static targets or acting as decoys. Cooperative swarming capabilities and mesh network deployments could all be ported into these airframes as needed.

In summary, the DoD needs to consolidate around two long-range kamikaze drone designs that it owns the intellectual property to and stockpile them very rapidly.

Striking on the cheap

The most obvious drivers for an Americanized Shahed-136, and a bigger brother to it, are the ability to hit a target at great distance cheaply and having enough weapons that can do so to sustain a fight against a major foe.

The DoD’s rush to build cheaper cruise missiles, alongside far more expensive and capable models, is one intended measure to address this reality. The fact is that in even a limited conflict with China, the target sets will be measured in the tens of thousands. A much wider conflict will see that number balloon. So the U.S. military needs weapons that can put many thousands of targets at risk without rapidly consuming all of its multi-million-dollar cruise and ballistic missiles or putting its aircraft at much higher risk by requiring them to make closer proximity or even direct attacks because stockpiles of long-range standoff weapons are depleted. The fact that these weapons require a small logistical footprint with small groups of minimally-trained personnel able to deploy them, and that they don’t depend on a host delivery system, such as an aircraft or ship, to get them to their launch points are massive added bonuses.

As we noted earlier, as it sits now, the DoD’s hope for less expensive and faster-to-produce cruise missile options is palpable, but still unproven. These weapons will still cost hundreds of thousands of dollars — far cheaper than current options, but still not exactly dirt cheap, even when built at scale. We need a much lower-end option for the standoff munitions arsenal to complement these new lower-cost missiles, and that’s where the two classes of standardized one-way attack munitions come in. Additionally, they will possess far greater range than these lower-cost cruise missiles. They can also be stockpiled with far less sustainment demands and can be produced much faster and easier during an actual crisis. Just their forward presence by the thousands in a theater would act as a major deterrent against aggression.

It seems that the U.S. military has bet on any future war being quick and very violent, but that line of strategic thinking is extremely optimistic at this point, and it borders on outright hubris. Some would argue that it is unlikely in the China scenario. So we must prepare for much longer, sustained operations. Procuring the cheapest and easiest to build long-range strike weapons and stockpiling them en masse is a critical hedge against less convenient conflict timelines.

Effector depletion — a modern battle of attrition

The massive need for this critical capability goes beyond just putting tens of thousands of targets at risk over great distances on the cheap. That is the baseline threat the drones provide to the adversary. The byproduct of it is that, to the enemy, these weapons, whether they are decoys or armed with high-explosive warheads, need to be shot down before they reach a potential target. As a result, the attritable combat mass they provide gives them a secondary role — or it can even be considered a primary one, depending on the circumstances — to consume massive amounts of expensive and hard to quickly replace counter-air weapons. These include surface-to-air and air-to-air missiles primarily, as well as counter-drone loitering munitions.

Each combatant’s stockpile of kinetic counter-air effectors is relatively finite in the short term. These weapons are generally very costly, filled with complex proprietary components, and take a long time to procure. The faster you degrade the enemy’s stockpile of these effectors, the better off you are. This impacts everything, from the enemy’s resource allocation in peacetime to the downstream effects of enhancing the survivability of friendly platforms participating in an air war to making potential targets more vulnerable to attack. Being on the right side of the cost ‘exchange rate’ is critical here. The enemy using multi-million-dollar hard-to-replace interceptors to down $50,000 easy-to-replace drones is a win in many circumstances.

The cold, hard truth of America’s and its allies’ stockpiles of advanced interceptors has been all too clearly highlighted by the war in Ukraine. The U.S. and its NATO allies are scrambling to produce more interceptors, not just to replace those Ukraine has consumed, and for the U.S., those used up in actions in the Middle East, but also because it’s clear they do not have enough stockpiled for future fights. These contingencies will include facing thousands of enemy drones just like the Shahed-136, which will chew through effector reserves at an alarming rate.

China is not immune to this issue either, although they have a far larger industrial capacity and more government control over it to stockpile weapons and replenish them quickly, if needed. Still, during major conflict, especially a fast-developing and extremely violent one, the consumption rate will vastly outpace any production rate.

So, for examples of American Shaheds that never make it to their targets, if they are even intended to hit targets at all, their deaths at the hand of anything but a specific set of very short-range enemy point defense systems, could be considered a win — one that, collectively, could very well be critical to succeeding in a conflict over the long term.

Let’s talk about that short-range air defense caveat for a moment. The mainstream media has painted a picture that directed energy weapons — lasers and high-power microwave systems specifically — are the antidote to low-cost, but effective aerial attack drones. Today, these directed energy systems are still in their infancy, and delays in development and fielding have put many predictions of them dominating the battlefield in the near term in check. Regardless, these are very short-range systems with major operational limitations, even when they work as advertised. They are meant to protect a small area or a large facility at short distances measured in single miles, at best. The same can be said for gun and guided rocket counter-drone systems.

For high-value targets, these short-range protection measures can play a major defensive role, but they are far too costly to deploy over large areas. Even when used to defend high-value targets, they are a last line of defense, not a panacea for long-range one-way attack drones and other standoff munitions. In order to rely on them solely, the party being attacked has to be willing to let very dangerous weapons get within extremely close proximity of their most valued assets — ones that could be attacked en masse in an attempt to overwhelm these kinds of point defenses. So yes, they are a critical layer of defense under certain circumstances, and their role will grow as their capabilities do, but they are in no way an antidote for the long-range one-way attack drone threat.

Electronic warfare has its own limitations, including its reach, depending on the tactic being deployed. In order to act as an effector-consuming target, a one-way attack drone could rely on nothing that could be impacted by traditional electronic warfare. This includes just flying on a heading once entering into GPS-disrupted areas or working off of onboard inertial navigation system (INS) guidance alone, if it’s so equipped. Remember, the drone doesn’t even have to end up at a specific target for it to consume an effector. The enemy doesn’t know if it has a warhead or an advanced navigation system or not, nor what its target is. For basic missions, they do not need to be equipped to communicate, so jamming communications is not a viable vector of electronic attack, either.

Modern positioning, navigation, and timing (PNT) technologies will only improve upon this resilience to electronic warfare, even for those drones configured to strike with precision. Basic infusion of artificial intelligence (AI) is fast approaching over the horizon for lower-end drones, which will enable adaptive autonomous navigation without GPS and strikes even on mobile targets of opportunity. Again, you can read all about this in our previous feature linked here. Electronic warfare will not be able to impact these systems.

The key takeaway is that having tens of thousands of real threats that cost a fraction of the price of a standard cruise or ballistic missile, ready to gobble up precious air defense effectors, will be an absolutely critical factor in any major future conflict.

The enemy is also fully aware of this vulnerability and tactical opportunity, too, but that’s another post entirely.

Starting tomorrow is too late

Rapidly amassing a fleet of two types of relatively crude long-range, expendable drones seems remarkably simple for a country that builds stealth bombers and reusable rockets. The good news is that this isn’t technically wrong. What’s missing is the strategic vision and the urgency to actually do it. The fact that I am even having to write this about a weapon that has already changed modern warfare and is being used by the thousands every month in an active war in Europe certainly is as troubling as it is outright strange.

There is absolutely nothing sexy or innovative about any of this. This is borrowing and scaling, not innovating and slowly iterating. In simple terms, it is everything the Pentagon isn’t known for, regardless of its leadership’s constant messaging on needing to change the way they do procurement and ‘move fast.’ You can look at the scope of the Biden administration’s Replicator initiative to get an idea of just how out of touch the powers that be were when it comes to needing a huge infusion of combat mass ‘yesterday.’

Then again, we are at an inflection point. The picture isn’t pretty when it comes to the United States facing off with China, especially at the same time Russia’s war machine is being spun into high gear and poses an increasing threat to Europe, and other hot spots around the globe burn ever brighter. The good news is that we are seeing some promising signs within the DoD that this reality is sinking in that the need for change isn’t some nebulous goal for generals to pine about in future tenses.

Two types of relatively simple and adaptable long-range, expendable drones, built at scale by multiple companies, big and small. No, it’s not that much of an ask, is it?

So let’s do it.

Waiting for tomorrow is now too late.

Contact the author: [email protected]

Sept. 4 (UPI) — The United Nations General Assembly voted to back a Palestinian government without Hamas as part of a compromise.

The declaration was circulated at a conference from July 28 to 30, and “sets out an action-oriented pathway towards a peaceful settlement of the Israel-Palestine conflict and the realization of the two-state solution — the vision of an independent state of Palestine living side by side with the state of Israel in peace and security, based on the pre-1967 borders.” the U.N. said in a statement.

The so-called New York declaration was written by France and Saudi Arabia, The Guardian reported.

The declaration condemned the Oct. 7 attacks by Hamas and called for Hamas to release its hostages.

Israel, the United States, Hungary and Argentina were some of the countries that voted against it. Twelve countries abstained.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Thursday that Israel will never accept a Palestinian state. About three-quarters of the 193 UN member states recognize the Palestinian state proclaimed in 1988 by the exiled Palestinian leadership.

Germany and Italy still hold out against recognizing a Palestine state, although the Italian government is divided on the issue. Five European countries have now banned all imports from illegal Israeli settlements.

The declaration said Hamas must cease control of Gaza and hand over its weapons to the Palestinian Authority, “With the support and cooperation of the international community, in accordance with the objective of a sovereign and independent state of Palestine.”

It also mentioned deployment of a “temporary international stabilization mission” under a mandate from the U.N. Security Council to protect the population, support the strengthening of the capacities of the Palestinian state and give “security guarantees to Palestine and Israel.”

Hamas has said that it will not agree to disarm unless a sovereign Palestinian state is established.

The announcement came on Thursday as the U.N. security council condemned the bombing of Qatar, without naming Israel.

Military confirms deadly operations in Bajaur and South Waziristan amid rising attacks by the Pakistan Taliban.

Pakistani security forces have raided two hideouts of the Pakistan Taliban armed group near the Afghan border this week, triggering fierce clashes that killed 12 soldiers and 35 fighters, says the military.

The military on Saturday said 22 fighters were killed in the first raid in Bajaur, a district in northwestern Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province. Thirteen more were killed in a separate operation in South Waziristan district, it added.

The statement said the 12 soldiers, “having fought gallantly, paid the ultimate sacrifice and embraced martyrdom” in South Waziristan, their deaths underscoring the struggles Pakistan faces as it tries to rein in resurging armed groups.

The Pakistan Taliban, also known as the Tehreek-e-Taliban (TTP), claimed responsibility for the attacks in a message on social media. The group, which Islamabad says is based in Afghanistan, is separate to but closely linked with the ruling Taliban in Afghanistan.

The Pakistan Taliban uses Afghan soil to stage attacks in Pakistan, the military said, urging the Taliban government in Kabul “to uphold its responsibilities and deny use of its soil for terrorist activities against Pakistan”.

The military described the killed fighters as “Khwarij”, a term the government uses for the Pakistan Taliban, and alleged they were backed by India, though it offered no evidence for the allegation.

Pakistan has long accused India of supporting the Pakistan Taliban and separatists in Balochistan, charges that New Delhi denies. There was no immediate comment from the Taliban in Kabul or from New Delhi.

From 10-13 September, thirty five Khwarij belonging to Indian Proxy, Fitna al Khwarij were sent to hell in two separate engagements in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Province.

On reported presence of Khwarij, an intelligence based operation was conducted by the Security Forces in Bajaur…

— DG ISPR (@OfficialDGISPR) September 13, 2025

Pakistan has faced a surge in armed attacks in recent years, most claimed by the Pakistan Taliban, which has become emboldened since the Afghan Taliban seized power in Kabul in 2021, with many Pakistan Taliban leaders and fighters finding sanctuary across the border.

Saturday’s attack was one of the deadliest in months in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, where the Pakistan Taliban once controlled swaths of territory until they were pushed back by a military operation that began in 2014.

For several weeks, residents of various districts of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa have reported that graffiti bearing the Pakistan Taliban’s name has appeared on buildings. They say they fear a return to the group’s reign over the region during the peak of the so-called war on terror, led by the United States, which spilled across from Afghanistan.

A local government official recently told the AFP news agency that the number of Pakistan Taliban fighters and attacks had increased.

Nearly 460 people, mostly members of the security forces, have been killed since January 1 in attacks carried out by armed groups fighting the state, both in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and the southern province of Balochistan, according to an AFP tally.

Last year was Pakistan’s deadliest in nearly a decade, with more than 1,600 deaths, nearly half of them soldiers and police officers, according to the Islamabad-based Centre for Research and Security Studies.

Khas Kunar, Afghanistan – Stoori was pulled out from under the rubble of his house in Kunar province after it was destroyed by the magnitude 6 earthquake which struck on the night of August 31. But the guilt of not being able to save his wife haunts him.

“I barely had enough time to pull out the body of my dead wife and place her on the rubble of our collapsed home before my children and I were evacuated,” the grief-stricken 40-year-old farmer says.

Authorities say about 2,200 people have been killed and more than 5,000 homes destroyed in eastern Afghanistan, most of them in Kunar province, where houses mostly built from wood and mud bricks crumbled in the shocks of the quake.

Stoori, who only gave one name, is now staying with his children in a sprawling evacuation camp 60km (37 miles) from his village – in Khas Kunar.

“My village has become a graveyard. All 40 families lost their homes. The earthquake killed 12 people in my community and left 22 others badly injured,” he says.

Winter is coming

In all, the UN says half a million people have been affected by the quake.

In this camp, which is lined with tents provided by international NGOs, nearly 5,000 people are sheltering, each with stories of loss and pain.

Thankfully, the camp has access to water and sanitation, and there are two small clinics ready to receive injured newcomers, as well as an ambulance which can be dispatched to collect people.

Right now, workers are digging a trench to install another water pipe, which will divert water to areas in need around the camp.

Just a few hundred metres away, what were once United States military warehouses have been transformed into government offices coordinating the emergency response.

The Taliban, which returned to power after US-led forces withdrew in 2021 after 20 years of occupation, has been overwhelmed by the scale of the disaster.

Tens of thousands of people are without any shelter at all just weeks before the onset of winter, and the mountainous terrain makes relief and rescue efforts difficult.

Najibullah Haqqani, Kunar’s provincial director for the Ministry of Information and Culture, says the authorities are working through a three-step emergency plan: Evacuate those at risk, provide shelter, food, and medical care in camps, and, eventually, rebuild homes or find permanent housing.

But the situation is becoming more challenging by the day. “Fortunately, we have received support from the government, local businesses, volunteers and international NGOs. They all came and helped with food and money for the displaced people,” he tells Al Jazeera.

‘The smell of dead animals fills the air’

More than 10 days after the tremor, new arrivals join the camp daily, inside the fortified walls of the former US base on the banks of the Kabul River.

Among them is Nurghal, a 52-year-old farmer from Shalatak village who was able to reunite with the surviving members of his family only on Wednesday morning. “From my large extended family, 52 people were killed and almost 70 were left badly injured,” he says. The devastation is “unimaginable”, he adds.

“The weather is cold in our area, and we don’t sleep outside this time of the year. That is why many people were trapped in their houses when the earthquake hit, and they were killed. Everything is destroyed back home, and all our animals are buried in debris. The smell of dead animals fills the air in my village.”

Life before the quake, he says, was stable. “Before the earthquake, we had everything we wanted: A home, livestock, our crops, and land. Now life is in the hospital and tents.”

Women face particular challenges in the aftermath of this disaster, as Taliban laws prevent them from travelling without male guardians – meaning it is hard for them to either get medical assistance or, in the case of female medical workers, to provide it.

The World Health Organization (WHO) asked Taliban authorities last week to lift travel restrictions for Afghan female aid workers, at least, to allow them to travel to help women in difficulties following the earthquake.

“A very big issue now is the increasing paucity of female staff in these places,” Dr Mukta Sharma, the deputy representative of WHO’s Afghanistan office, told the Reuters news agency.

Furthermore, since women have been banned from higher education by the Taliban, the number of qualified female medical staff is dwindling.

Despite these difficulties, the Taliban leadership says it is committed to ensuring that women will be properly treated, by male health workers if necessary.

Haqqani, Kunar’s provincial director for the Ministry of Information and Culture, tells Al Jazeera: “During the emergency situation, the military and volunteers evacuated and cared for everyone. On the second day, UNICEF set up a medical clinic in Nurghal district and they had female doctors as well. We took as many injured people as the clinic could handle there and they were treating everyone, male and female. In any emergency situation, there is no gender-based discrimination; any doctor available will treat any patients coming in. The priority is life saving.”

At a field hospital which has been set up inside the old US barracks by the displacement camp at Khas Kunar, six male doctors and one female doctor, 16 male nurses and 12 female nurses are tending to the injured. Currently, there are 34 patients here, 24 of whom are women and children – most of them were taken to Gamberi from their remote villages by Taliban military helicopters and then transferred the last 50km (30 miles) to the hospital by car.

The hospital’s director, Dr Shahid, who only gave one name, says male doctors and nurses are permitted to treat women and have been doing so without any issue.

‘A curse from the sky’

From his bed in the field hospital, Azim, a farmer in his mid-40s from Sohail Tangy village, 60km (37 miles) away, is recovering from fractures to his spine and right shoulder.

He fears returning to the devastation at home.

“The earthquake was like a curse from the sky. I don’t want to move back to that hell,” he tells Al Jazeera. “The government should give us land to rebuild our lives. My village has become the centre of destruction. My only request is to give us land somewhere else.”

Azim is still coming to terms with the loss of his loved ones. “Yesterday, my son told me that three of my brothers are dead. Some of my family members are in the Kabul and Jalalabad hospitals. And my wife is in Kabul military hospital,” he says.

Back in the evacuation camp, Stoori says he is holding onto hope, but only just.

“If God blesses us, maybe we can go back to our village before the winter comes,” he says.

“We have nothing left except our trust in God, and we ask the international community and authorities for help.”

Sept. 12 (UPI) — Tropical Storm Mario is small but strengthening off the west coast of Mexico Friday.

The latest update from the National Hurricane Center was at 4:23 a.m. Friday. It said Mario is a small tropical cyclone about 20 nautical miles off the coast of Guerrero, Mexico. The tropical depression was boosted to Tropical Storm Mario with maximum winds estimated at 40 mph.

Because of Mario’s closeness to the coast of Mexico, the Mexican government has issued a tropical storm watch for a small segment of the coast from Lazaro Cardenas to Punta San Telmo.

NHS said it’s having trouble predicting Mario’s trajectory because of its small size and closeness to land. Some models show the system moving inland and dissipating Friday, but others show Mario reaching hurricane strength. Mario is expected to reach colder waters by day five and become a post-tropical cyclone.

Mario has been moving faster toward the west-northwest at 14 mph, parallel to the coast of Mexico.

Heavy rainfall will affect southern Mexico through Sunday, which could result in flash flooding, particularly in areas of higher terrain.

Tropical storm conditions are possible along portions of the coast of Michoacan Friday. Gusty winds are possible elsewhere along the coasts of western Guerrero, Michoacan, and Colima through Friday night.

Follow our live build-up, with toss and team news, ahead of our full text commentary stream.

Following deadly protests across Nepal, the country has appointed former Chief Justice Sushila Karki as interim prime minister. Al Jazeera’s Rob McBride looks at who she is and the challenges she faces.

The northeastern state has been bitterly divided since May 2023 when violence broke out between the Meitei majority and largely Christian Kuki community.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has made his first visit to the troubled Manipur state where at least 260 people have been killed in ethnic clashes in two years.

Manipur in the northeast has been bitterly divided since May 2023, when violence broke out between the mainly Hindu Meitei majority and the largely Christian Kuki community.

The violence has also displaced tens of thousands of people who are still living in makeshift camps set up by the government.

“In order to bring life back on track in Manipur, the government of India is making all possible efforts,” Modi told a gathering of thousands in Churachandpur, a Kuki-dominated town, on Saturday.

“I promise you today that I’m with you. The government of India is with the people of Manipur,” Modi said, while also appealing “to all groups to take the path of peace for realising their dreams.”

Modi was also scheduled to address a rally at Imphal, the Meitei-dominated capital of the state.

The Hindu nationalist leader last visited the state, bordering Myanmar and 1,700km (1,050 miles) from New Delhi, in 2022. He inaugurated development projects worth more than $960m, including five highways and a new police headquarters.

Manipur’s former chief minister, N Biren Singh, from Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), resigned in February after criticism that he failed to stop the bloodshed there. The state of nearly three million people has since been ruled directly from New Delhi.

Tensions between Meiteis and Kukis, rooted in competition for land and government jobs, have long simmered in the region. Rights groups accuse political leaders of fuelling the divisions for their own gain.

Modi’s visit to Manipur is part of a three-day tour that also includes Assam, which borders Bangladesh, and Bihar, India’s third-most populous state with at least 130 million people.

Bihar is a key electoral battleground ahead of polls slated for October or November, the only state in India’s northern Hindi-speaking heartland where Modi’s BJP has never ruled alone.

It is also India’s poorest, and Modi was set to unveil investments worth $8bn, a package that includes agricultural projects, rail links, road upgrades and an airport terminal.

Sept. 12 (UPI) — Two California-based tech firms on Friday joined a Federal Aviation Administration pilot program meant to speed up the delivery of advanced air mobility vehicles, commonly known as air taxis, the agency said.

The Electric Vertical Takeoff and Landing Integration Pilot Program will include at least five separate projects, the FAA said in a statement.

Both Archer Aviation and Joby Aviation are joining the public-private pilot program. The companies are primarily focused on electric vertical takeoff and landing technology.

The goal of the pilot program is to “form public-private partnerships with state and local government entities and private sector companies to develop new frameworks and regulations for enabling safe operations,” the FAA said in the statement.

Individual projects under the pilot program will focus separately on short-range air taxis, cargo aircraft, logistics and supply serving emergency management and medical transport, longer-range, fixed wing flights and increased automation safety, according to the FAA.

“This pilot program gives us another opportunity to advance the administration’s plan to accelerate safe eVTOL and advanced air mobility operations across the United States,” FAA Administrator Bryan Bedford said in the agency’s statement.

“We will take the lessons learned from these projects to enable safe, scalable AAM operations nationwide.”

The pilot program will run for a minimum of three years.

“The next great technological revolution in aviation is here. The United States will lead the way, and doing so will cement America’s status as a global leader in transportation innovation,” Transportation Secretary Sean P. Duffy said in the FAA’s statement.

Both private companies saw their stock prices climb following the announcement.

Shares of San Jose-based Archer Aviation were up $0.13 or 1.53% to $8.62 as of 12:56 p.m. EDT Friday.

The company’s CEO Adam Goldstein called the announcement a “landmark moment” for the country and industry.

“We have an administration that is prioritizing the integration of eVTOL operations in U.S. cities ahead of full certification in a pragmatic way. We’ll demonstrate that air taxis can operate safely and quietly,” Goldstein said in a statement on the company’s website.

“These early flights will help cement American leadership in advanced aviation and set the stage for scaled commercial operations in the U.S. and beyond.”

Joby Aviation shares were up $0.37 or 2.71% to $14.03 at the same time.

“President Trump has long recognized the significance of America’s leadership in the next era of aviation and this initiative ensures our nation’s leadership will continue,” Joby Aviation Chief Policy Officer Greg Bowles said in a statement on the company’s website.

“We’ve spent more than 15 years building the aircraft technology and operational capabilities that are defining advanced aerial mobility, and we’re ready to bring our services to communities. We look forward to demonstrating our aircraft’s maturity and delivering early operations in cities and states nationwide.”

China’s plan to build a nature reserve in the Scarborough Shoal brings strong responses from the Philippines and US.

United States Secretary of State Marco Rubio has expressed support for Manila’s opposition to Beijing’s plan to designate the contested Scarborough Shoal as a “nature reserve”, characterising the move as part of a broader Chinese strategy of coercion in the South China Sea.

“The US stands with our Philippine ally in rejecting China’s destabilising plans to establish a ‘national nature reserve’ at Scarborough Reef,” Rubio wrote on the X social media platform on Friday.

“This is yet another coercive attempt to advance China’s interests at the expense of its neighbours and regional stability,” Rubio said.

“… Claiming Scarborough Reef as a nature preserve is another example of Beijing using pressure tactics to push expansive maritime and territorial claims, disregarding the rights of neighbouring countries,” he added in a statement.

On Wednesday, China’s State Council revealed its intention to establish a nature reserve spanning 3,500 hectares (8,650 acres) on the disputed islet, describing the initiative as an “important guarantee for maintaining … diversity, stability and sustainability”.

While Scarborough Shoal lies 240km (150 miles) west of the Philippines’ main island of Luzon and is included in the country’s exclusive economic zone, it has been under Beijing’s control since 2012.

China’s nature reserve plans drew a string of strong responses from the Philippines, where the Department of Foreign Affairs promised on Thursday to lodge a “formal diplomatic protest against this illegitimate and unlawful action”.

According to the Philippine Star news outlet, Philippine National Security Adviser Eduardo Ano said China’s planned “Huangyan Island National Nature Reserve” is “patently illegal”.

Ano cited violations of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the 2016 arbitral ruling in favour of Manila regarding China’s claims in the sea, and the 2002 Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea.

“This move by the People’s Republic of China is less about protecting the environment and more about justifying its control over a maritime feature that is part of the territory of the Philippines and its waters lie within the exclusive economic zone of the Philippines,” Ano was quoted in the newspaper.

“It is a clear pretext towards eventual occupation,” he said.

Leading Filipino business newspaper BusinessWorld included excerpts from analysts who said Beijing is likely testing Manila’s resolve in asserting its claim over the region.

“China will likely want to see what the response will be from the Philippines,” said Julio S. Amador III, chief executive officer at Manila-based geopolitical risk firm Amador Research Services.

“If it sees that there is no effective pushback, then there is a strong possibility that it will try to do the same over other features,” Amador said.

Last month, the Philippines, Australia and Canada held joint naval drills east of Scarborough Shoal to simulate aerial attacks and how to counter such threats.

China, for its part, has insisted it will defend the area.

China asserts sovereignty over nearly the entire South China Sea – a strategic maritime corridor through which more than $3 trillion in trade passes each year – despite competing territorial claims from the Philippines, Brunei, Malaysia, and Vietnam.

We now have our first look at the U.S. Air Force’s two flying B-21 Raider stealth bombers together at Edwards Air Force Base. The second pre-production B-21 arrived at Edwards yesterday after making its maiden flight from the Air Force’s Plant 42, which TWZ was first to report.

Both of the pre-production B-21s delivered to date are now assigned to the 420th Flight Test Squadron at Edwards, which forms the core element of the B-21 Combined Test Force. Edwards has long been a central hub for Air Force test and evaluation efforts, but saw significant expansion of its facilities starting in the late 2010s, in large part to prepare for the Raider’s arrival.

At least two non-flying Raider airframes are also being used to help with ongoing testing. Four more pre-production Raiders are in various stages of construction at Northrop Grumman’s facility at Plant 42. As of January, Northrop Grumman had received two contracts for low-rate initial production of additional B-21s, as well.

Unlike the first pre-production B-21, which took to the skies for the first time back in November 2023, the second example is still largely devoid of uniquely identifying markings, like serial number, two-letter base code, and unit crests. We can now see that there is a motif on the inside of the nose landing gear bay door featuring an ancient Greek-style helmet with wings spread behind, as well as what looks to be crossed spears below. We have reached out to the Air Force and Northrop Grumman for more information about these symbols and their significance.

The first B-21 has the nickname Cerberus and a silhouette of that three-headed dog from ancient Greek (and later Roman) mythology is painted on the outside of its nose landing gear door. The aircraft also has a bird silhouette painted underneath the nose, an homage to past Northrop corporate logos.

The picture of the two B-21s together at Edwards, as well as other new Raider imagery the Air Force has released in the past day or so, also further underscores the aircraft’s unusual cockpit window arrangement. TWZ has explored the design of the cockpit windows, including the visibility limitations they impose, in detail in the past.

We also now have our first look at the second pre-production B-21 in flight, which offers a new view of the bomber’s conformal inlets. The bomber’s inlets are one of the most exotic known features of the design, as you can read more about here. In general, low observable inlets are among the most critical aspects of a stealthy aircraft, and it has been publicly disclosed that the ones found on the Raider presented significant challenges during development.

The first flight of the second B-21 had already afforded the best look to date of the Raider’s broad underbelly, including its weapons bay configuration. As TWZ wrote yesterday:

“The high-resolution image of the underside of the second B-21 is particularly notable in that it shows a single main bay. The other two sets of outboard door apertures are seen sealed shut with fasteners lining their perimeters. They also appear to be at least configured for radiofrequency (RF) sensor apertures. Together, this all points to the Raider only having a single large central weapons bay, not a pair of smaller additional ones on the side, a possibility that had been raised in the past. You can read about speculation regarding these bays here. Regardless, this could possibly change in the future, but, at this time, these appear to be access doors to the engines and other systems, not auxiliary weapons bays.”

In a press release yesterday, the Air Force touted the testing benefits that will come from now having two B-21s at Edwards.

“The addition of the second aircraft expands the Air Force’s testing capabilities beyond initial flight performance checks, enabling progression into critical mission systems and weapon integration testing phases. This advancement marks a significant step toward operational readiness of the nation’s sixth-generation stealth bomber,” according to the release. “The presence of multiple test aircraft at Edwards AFB also provides Air Force maintainers invaluable hands-on experience in managing simultaneous aircraft sustainment operations, testing the effectiveness of maintenance tools, technical data and the logistical processes that will support future operational squadrons.”

A separate press release from Northrop Grumman also highlighted plans to demonstrate an “enhanced software package” that will allow it to “deliver seamless upgrades to the B-21 fleet, ensuring its mission capability and weapons evolve to outpace any threat.” Beyond opening up a more streamlined path to integrating new and improved functionality down the line, the Raider’s heavy use of open-architecture, software-defined mission systems has already been a boon to the aircraft’s initial development.

“We are capitalizing on the revolution in digital [processes] – models-based systems engineering, open mission systems architecture software,” Air Force Maj. Gen. Jason Armagost, then Director of Strategic Plans, Programs, and Requirements at Air Force Global Strike Command (AFGSC), offered as an example back in 2022. “As an example, the software for the fuel control system, which is a pretty complex thing, is completely done on an aircraft that hasn’t even flown yet as a test article, because of how we’re able to do models-based systems engineering. And they actually built a fuel systems model and tested the software, and the software is ready to go.”

Armagost is now commander of the Eighth Air Force, which oversees all of the Air Force’s operational bomber fleets.

The Air Force’s current stated goal is to begin fielding the B-21 operationally before the end of the decade. The service plans to buy at least 100 of the bombers, though there are growing signs that the final fleet size could be larger, as you can read more about here.

“Concurrent with the expanded flight-testing effort, fiscal year 2026 will see the launch of extensive military construction projects at all three designated B-21 main operating bases,” the Air Force noted in its press release yesterday. “Ellsworth AFB, S.D., the first base set to receive operational B-21 aircraft, is already progressing rapidly on numerous infrastructure projects to ensure readiness when the aircraft arrive.”

With the help now of a second B-21, the test force at Edwards will continue to expand its work helping to pave the way toward future Raider operations.

Contact the author: [email protected]

Sept. 12 (UPI) — U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio will visit Israel and the United Kingdom to address security matters in Gaza and globally from Saturday through Thursday.

Rubio first will travel to Israel, where he plans to discuss the Israel-Hamas war and security in the Middle East while affirming the United States’ “commitment to Israeli security,” according to a State Department news release.

“He will also emphasize our shared goals: ensuring Hamas never rules over Gaza again and bringing all the hostages home,” said Thomas Pigott, State Department principal deputy spokesperson.

Rubio and Israeli leaders will discuss Israeli military operational goals and the objectives of the Israel Defense Force’s Operation Gideon’s Chariots II, which targets Hamas leadership and members in Gaza City.

Rubio and Israeli leaders also will discuss “our commitment to fight anti-Israel actions, including unilateral recognition of a Palestinian state that rewards Hamas terrorism and lawfare at the [International Criminal Court] and [International Court of Justice],” Pigott said.

Rubio also is scheduled to meet with the families of hostages being held by Hamas to “underscore that their relative’s lives remains a top priority,” Pigott added.

After concluding the visit in Israel, Rubio is scheduled to travel to the United Kingdom to meet with U.K. Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper to discuss “critical global challenges,” he said.

Those challenges include the war in Ukraine, stopping Iran from developing nuclear weapons, securing a cease-fire and the release of all hostages held by Hamas, and competing with China.

Rubio’s diplomatic trip is to occur after Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Adbulrahman al-Thani was to meet with President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance, Rubio and U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff on Friday.

The prime minister and president are expected to discuss the recent IDF strike against Hamas officials in Qatar’s capital, Doha, and a potential defense agreement between Qatar and the United States.

The Israeli offensive on Gaza City is displacing thousands of starving Palestinians.