Finding the balance between armour and air defence as UAVs proliferate
Estonia cancelled its procurement of additional CV90s in April 2026 and is expected to instead upgrade its existing platforms. (Photo: Estonian MoD)
Estonia’s recent decision to cancel the procurement of new CV90s in favour of new air defence systems highlights a debate at the heart of defence procurement.
Since the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine, there has been a recurring narrative that traditional armoured platforms are obsolete. This line of thought has argued that armoured vehicles are slow, expensive and can be easily destroyed by first-person view (FPV) uncrewed aerial vehicles (UAVs).
The recent US-Iran war has reinforced the need for a variety of air defence systems to counter the proliferation of UAVs and loitering munitions.
This, however, ignores the importance of
Our news & analysis is now part of Defence Insight®
A Basic-level or higher Defence Insight subscription is now required to view this content.
More from Land Warfare
-
Clearer military requirements could unlock UGV market growth
Western armies continue to test uncrewed ground vehicles, but wider procurement will depend on turning ambitions for autonomy into defined operational roles and funded requirements.
-
Can NATO’s CUAS marketplace turn urgent demand into deliveries?
Framework contracts and leasing options aim to shorten acquisition timelines, while manufacturing partnerships could help suppliers scale production to meet allied demand.
-
A medium UGV market emerges as the US weighs up its options
The US is pursuing multiple UGV programmes, from commercial robotic platforms to new autonomy technologies. The combination of these efforts could prove key to turning ambition into operational capability.
-
NATO looks for answers to overcome standards hurdles and improve procurement
NATO is looking to artificial intelligence to provide integration between different C2 systems to create a common operational picture, potentially offering a faster route to interoperability than the slow-moving processes of NATO standards committees.