In an unconventional military context, the Gulf states find themselves engaged in a costly and asymmetric conflict, in which advanced warplanes priced in the hundreds of millions of dollars are being used to shoot down Iranian drones worth no more than tens of thousands of dollars, raising serious questions about the sustainability of this defense model.
According to a report by journalist Jacob Judah in the Financial Times, advanced fighters have spread widely in the skies of the Gulf in recent weeks to confront waves of slow, low-altitude Iranian drones, targets that these aircraft were not originally designed to deal with.
Despite the effectiveness of this approach, its high cost has become an increasing burden, both financially and in terms of human and technical readiness. “This is not sustainable in the long term in any way,” said Lauren Khan, a former Pentagon adviser.
The discrepancy is that the cost of an Iranian Shahed-136 drone ranges between $20,000 and $50,000, while the cost of operating an F-16 fighter exceeds about $25,000 per hour. As for the missiles used to shoot down these drones, some of them cost more than a million dollars, such as the AIM-120 missiles, or about $485,000 for the AIM-9X missiles.
Even alternative solutions, such as converting unguided missiles into anti-drone missiles, remain expensive, with the unit cost exceeding $20,000, with it being unclear whether the Gulf states have received the quantities approved for sale since 2018.
Experts confirm that this equation is economically unbalanced. “It’s a very poor cost ratio for intercepting a cheap threat,” said Samuel Bendet of the Center for Naval Analyzes. “The defender has to use cheaper means.”
The Gulf air forces have tried using machine guns on aircraft instead of missiles, due to their lower cost, but this option forces pilots to get closer to the target, which increases the risks, especially over populated areas, in addition to limited ammunition, as the F-16 fighter can only fire for about 5 seconds before running out of ammunition.
Since February 28, Iran has launched more than 3,000 drones toward targets in the Gulf, the vast majority of which have been intercepted. The UAE announced that it shot down more than 1,600 drones, although some of them were able to hit military bases, energy facilities, and civilian infrastructure with remarkable accuracy.
But cost is not the only challenge, as experts warn of great pressure on pilots and aircraft. “This operational rhythm is very stressful,” said Kelly Greco of the Stimson Center. “At some point, failure rates will increase and the need for maintenance will increase.”
Also, shooting down drones is not an easy task even for advanced fighters, as the slowness of the “Shahed-136” planes compared to the speed of the fighters may lead to overtaking the target easily, especially for less experienced pilots.
It is estimated that the Gulf armies were not prepared for this type of threat, as they focused mainly on ballistic missiles, according to Greco, while the marches require various radar systems capable of distinguishing them from birds and buildings, in addition to using acoustic sensors to monitor their engines.
In an attempt to preserve their stocks of Patriot missiles, the cost of each interception is about $4 million, the Gulf states resort to using fighters as a first option, while these missiles are used as a last resort.
These countries also used the expertise of Ukraine, which has developed effective and low-cost methods to deal with the drones since 2022, including the use of interceptor drones. The United States has sent 10,000 interceptor drones of this type to the Middle East, along with Ukrainian advisory teams.
Anatoly Khrapchinsky, from the Ukrainian company Fly Group, said: “Fighters can be part of the defense system, but they cannot be the basis… If you face hundreds of cheap drones with multi-million dollar missiles, this model will not survive.”
In addition, the Gulf armies use helicopters, which have proven effective in shooting down drones, but they are less widespread and less capable of covering areas than fighters, while the region also suffers from a shortage of anti-aircraft guns.
As for the technology level, the Israeli army, in addition to fighters, “Iron Dome” systems, and helicopters, used a laser-based defense system, which is estimated to have “almost zero” cost of interception, while the UAE seeks to acquire similar systems.
Despite the focus on the cost of confrontation, Tom Karako of the Center for Strategic and International Studies believes that the decisive factor is not only the cost, but the ability to stop the launching of marches at the source, saying: “You cannot continue playing defense indefinitely… The issue is related to how quickly the attacks can be stopped.”
In light of this equation, the Battle of the Marches appears to be a new test that forces the region’s armies to rethink their defense priorities, as power is no longer measured solely by technological superiority, but rather by the systems’ ability to confront cheap threats with sustainable methods.
