DB Markham's Homepage

TNN - Networked Sovereignty Backup Research

26 min read

Networked Sovereignty

Global Technology As

Executive Summary

As the final month of 2025 begins, the international security landscape is undergoing a structural transformation defined not by a single hegemon or a unified threat, but by the radical decoupling of legitimacy from traditional state machinery. The period spanning late October to early December 2025 has crystallized a global dynamic where parallel systems of governance, warfare, and law are actively supplanting established state institutions. This report, covering this critical forty-day window, analyzes five distinct yet interlinked verticals: the rise of parallel educational and financial states in Myanmar; the operationalization of AI-driven “kill webs” in modern combat; the economic inversion of air defense via drone saturation; the escalation of internationalized intrastate conflicts in Sudan, the DRC, and Yemen; and the desperate race to codify “algorithmic international law” before autonomous weapons systems outpace human regulation.

The unifying theme connecting these disparate theatres is the democratization of high-consequence capabilities. Whether it is the National Unity Government (NUG) in Myanmar deploying blockchain-backed digital identity systems to bypass a military junta, or Ukrainian volunteer groups manufacturing “Sting” interceptors in garages to down state-level jet drones, the monopoly on force and administration traditionally held by the Westphalian state is eroding. In its place, we observe the rise of “Networked Sovereignty”—agile, distributed, and often digitally native entities that can project power, administer services, and wage war with a lethality and resilience that state hierarchies struggle to match.

The following analysis is exhaustive, synthesizing technical data on emerging weapon systems, legal texts from Geneva, and field reports from conflict zones. It serves as a “referee’s” assessment of contested narratives, stripping away emotive rhetoric to reveal the underlying mechanics—supply chains, software architectures, and legal doctrines—shaping the future of organized violence and governance.

  1. The Parallel State of Learning: Myanmar’s Digital Sovereignty vs. Junta Legitimacy

The conflict in Myanmar has evolved beyond a struggle for territorial control into a contest for cognitive sovereignty. As the military junta (State Administration Council or SAC) attempts to re-legitimize its rule through a controlled election process scheduled for late 2025, the resistance has operationalized a sophisticated “parallel state” that functions primarily in the digital domain. This divergence represents a new frontier in civil conflict where the state controls the physical capital, but the resistance controls the educational and financial infrastructure of the future workforce.

1.1 The December 2025 Election: A Kinetic Ritual of Legitimacy

Approaching the scheduled elections in late December 2025 and January 2026, the political atmosphere in Myanmar is characterized by a violent dissonance between the regime’s procedural goals and the resistance’s disruptive capabilities. The SAC views these elections as the final step in its “roadmap to discipline-flourishing democracy,” a mechanism designed to transition the military’s direct rule into a civilianized administration that can garner international recognition, or at least acquiescence.1

However, the operational reality on the ground in November 2025 suggests that this election is less a democratic exercise and more a kinetic theater. The regime has resorted to repressive tactics to secure polling areas, deploying heavy security to enforce voter registration and subdue dissent in urban centers. Conversely, resistance groups, including the People’s Defense Forces (PDFs) and Ethnic Armed Organizations (EAOs), have declared the election illegitimate and are actively seeking to disrupt the logistical preparations. This includes targeting administrative offices and discouraging participation, effectively turning polling stations into frontlines.1

The “parallel state” dynamic is most visible here: while the SAC attempts to perform the rituals of a state (elections), it lacks the prerequisite territorial and social control to do so effectively. The elections act as a flashpoint, forcing the population to choose between complying with the physical coercive power of the junta or the moral and digital authority of the National Unity Government (NUG).

1.2 The Architecture of the Parallel State: LearnCloud and the NUG

While the junta struggles to secure physical polling stations, the NUG has entrenched its governance in the cloud, specifically targeting the education sector as a strategic asset. This “Parallel State of Learning” utilizes Information and Communication Technologies for Development (ICT4D) to bypass the junta’s control over the curriculum and the minds of the youth.

1.2.1 LearnCloud: The Content Layer

The flagship of this educational resistance is the LearnCloud initiative. Originally conceptualized for refugee camps, LearnCloud has been adapted into a national digital infrastructure. It operates as a decentralized content curation portal that allows educators to upload, share, and rate digital educational resources.2

  • Low-Bandwidth Resilience: Acknowledging the digital divide and the junta’s frequent internet throttling, LearnCloud is engineered for resilience. It supports mobile learning solutions and SMS-based content delivery, ensuring that educational materials can reach students in conflict zones where high-speed internet is nonexistent. This technical architecture mirrors the resistance’s political structure: distributed, resilient, and difficult to interdict.4

  • Curriculum as Resistance: The platform offers an alternative to the junta’s nationalist and militaristic curriculum. It emphasizes critical thinking, federalism, and democratic values, effectively functioning as a “cognitive firewall” that insulates the youth from regime propaganda. By controlling the curriculum, the NUG is attempting to secure the ideological allegiance of the next generation, even if it cannot yet secure their physical safety.2

1.2.2 The “Spring University” and Digital Credentialing

A critical weakness of non-state educational systems is the lack of recognized credentials. To address this, the NUG has established the Spring University Myanmar (SUM) and implemented a blockchain-based credentialing system.

  • Validation Mechanisms: SUM has forged partnerships with international institutions such as the University of Arizona and Victoria University of Wellington. These partnerships provide external validation, ensuring that degrees and certificates issued by the resistance hold value in the global marketplace.6

  • Blockchain and Self-Sovereign Identity (SSI): In a pioneering move for a government-in-exile, the NUG is utilizing blockchain technology to issue tamper-proof digital identities and academic records.8 This system prevents the junta from retroactively invalidating a student’s academic history. It effectively decouples “citizenship” from the physical state; a student can hold a valid, globally recognized digital identity issued by the NUG while living under junta occupation.

  • The “Exit” Strategy: By aligning these credentials with international standards, the NUG provides a pathway for Myanmar’s youth to access global higher education and employment. This creates a “brain drain” from the junta’s sphere of influence, weakening the regime’s long-term human capital while strengthening the diaspora network that funds the resistance.2

1.3 Financial Rails: NUG Pay and the Crypto-Economy

The sustainability of this parallel education system is inextricably linked to the NUG’s ability to finance it. The regime controls the central bank and the physical printing presses, but the NUG has leveraged financial technology to create an independent monetary jurisdiction via NUG Pay.

1.3.1 The Digital Kyat (DMMK)

NUG Pay operates using a digital currency, the DMMK, which acts as a stablecoin pegged to the Myanmar Kyat.

  • Circumvention: The system allows the diaspora to remit funds directly to the digital wallets of teachers and civil servants participating in the Civil Disobedience Movement (CDM). This bypasses the junta-controlled banking system (e.g., Myanmar Economic Bank), which monitors and freezes accounts associated with the resistance.10

  • Scale and Volatility: By late 2025, NUG Pay has processed transactions valued at over 312 billion kyat ($148 million USD), with a user base exceeding 28,000 active participants.12 The utility of the DMMK is amplified by the collapse of the physical kyat, which has devalued from 2,000 per USD pre-coup to over 5,000 per USD in late 2025. In this hyperinflationary environment, the NUG’s digital financial rails offer not just resistance, but economic survival.13

  • The “White Money” Debate: The establishment of the Spring Development Bank (SDB) in 2023 further institutionalized this system. However, it faces the challenge of “white money” (legitimate funds) versus “black money” (illicit flows). To gain international legitimacy and connect to the global financial system, the SDB must implement strict compliance measures, a difficult task for a revolutionary entity operating clandestinely.12

1.4 Assessment: Dual Sovereignty

The situation in Myanmar in late 2025 is a quintessential example of “Dual Sovereignty.” The junta maintains “hard” sovereignty—guns, borders, and embassies. The NUG maintains “soft” or “networked” sovereignty—education, identity, and financial flows. The December election is the junta’s attempt to use its hard power to crush the soft power of the resistance. However, the resilience of the LearnCloud and NUG Pay architectures suggests that the resistance has successfully migrated a significant portion of the state’s functions to a domain where the military’s traditional coercion is ineffective.

  1. The AI-Driven Cognitive Battlefield and Battle Networks

The second major theme of late 2025 is the maturation of Artificial Intelligence from a theoretical “force multiplier” into the central nervous system of modern warfare. This shift is encapsulated in the concept of the “Mind-Tech Nexus,” a doctrinal framework that prioritizes the integration of human cognition with machine speed to dominate the “kill web.”

2.1 The “Mind-Tech Nexus”: Defining the New Paradigm

The term “Mind-Tech Nexus” gained prominence with the 2025 publication of Human, Machine, War by Air University Press. It is defined not as the replacement of the human soldier, but as the “interface and convergence” of human factors (will, skill, daring) with technologies (AI, quantum computing, neuroscience).14

2.1.1 Offloading Risk, Not Judgment

According to US Army Futures Command General James E. Rainey, the operational goal of this nexus is “offloading risk and work” to machines. The objective is to free human commanders to focus on the “art of command” and ethical decision-making, while the AI handles the data processing and routine execution of kill chains.16 This “centaur” model—half human, half machine—is viewed as superior to fully autonomous systems because it retains the flexibility of human intuition while leveraging the speed of machine calculation.

2.2 From “Kill Chains” to “Kill Webs”

The practical application of the Mind-Tech Nexus is the transition from linear “Kill Chains” to resilient “Kill Webs.”

  • The Topology of War: In a traditional kill chain (Find Fix Track Target Engage Assess), the destruction of a single node (e.g., a radar station) breaks the chain. In a kill web, every sensor is connected to every shooter in a decentralized mesh. If one node is destroyed, data reroutes dynamically, preserving the lethality of the network.17

  • Operationalization: This concept is no longer theoretical. By late 2025, the US Department of Defense has restructured its budget to support this shift. Project Maven, once a standalone computer vision experiment, has been subsumed under the Chief Digital and AI Office (CDAO) as a foundational layer for CJADC2 (Combined Joint All-Domain Command and Control). Fiscal Year 2025 budget documents reveal a shift of funding to “Alpha-1” development activities (372 million), signaling that these systems are moving from R&D to operational deployment.20

2.3 The “Delta” System: Ukraine’s Digital Backbone

The most advanced real-world implementation of a kill web is Ukraine’s Delta system. Originally a situational awareness tool, by late 2025 it has evolved into a comprehensive battle management platform that integrates NATO standards.

  • Capabilities and Updates: In the October-November 2025 window, Delta received significant updates. The system now includes modules to “assess unit performance, identify excessive personnel losses, and collect analytics on tactical radar performance”.22 This moves Delta from a passive map to an active management tool.

  • Performance Metrics: The Ministry of Defence of Ukraine reports that Delta has increased the speed of target data delivery by 45% and reduced duplicate target detection by 30% in the last quarter of 2025. These metrics are critical in a saturation environment where ammunition conservation is paramount.22

  • NATO Interoperability: During the REPMUS 2025 exercises, Delta was used to coordinate over 100 unmanned platforms across maritime, air, and land domains. This successful integration demonstrates that Ukraine’s “garage” innovation has matured into a system capable of serving as the digital backbone for multinational coalition operations.24

2.4 The Dark Side: Israel’s “Lavender” and the Routinization of Lethality

While Delta represents the “situational awareness” side of the Mind-Tech Nexus, Israel’s use of the “Lavender” system in Gaza represents the “targeting” side, highlighting the ethical perils of algorithmic warfare.

  • The “Kill List” Algorithm: Lavender is an AI-Decision Support System (AI-DSS) designed to identify potential combatants by analyzing massive surveillance datasets. Reports persisting into late 2025 indicate that in the early phases of the war, the system generated 37,000 targets with a reported 10% error rate.26

  • Automation Bias: The critical controversy is the “routinization” of the kill chain. Human operators, overwhelmed by the volume of targets, reportedly spent as little as 20 seconds reviewing each AI recommendation, effectively “rubber-stamping” the machine’s output. This phenomenon, known as automation bias, undermines the “Mind-Tech Nexus” ideal of meaningful human control. Instead of the human remaining the “decider,” the human becomes a biological component of the machine’s error loop.26

  • Legal Implications: The use of systems like Lavender challenges International Humanitarian Law (IHL). If a commander cannot explain why the AI selected a target (the “black box” problem), can they truly assess distinction and proportionality? This question drives the urgency of the legal debates discussed in Section 5.27

  1. Drone Saturation & The Economics of Countermeasures

The third major theme is the economic inversion of air defense. The conflict in Ukraine has devolved into a war of attrition where the cost of the interceptor relative to the target is the decisive variable. In late 2025, the emergence of the “Sting” interceptor and the jet-powered Shahed-238 represents a new phase in this economic warfare.

3.1 The “Sting” Interceptor: Changing the Cost Curve

For years, Russia has exploited the “cost asymmetry” of air defense by flooding Ukrainian airspace with cheap Shahed-136 drones (~50k). Ukraine was forced to use expensive missiles (Patriot, NASAMS, or even MANPADS costing $100k+) to intercept them, a losing economic proposition. The “Sting” drone, developed by the Ukrainian volunteer group Wild Hornets, is the answer to this equation.

3.1.1 Technical Specifications

  • Design: The Sting is a “First-Person View” (FPV) quadcopter modified for air-to-air combat. It features a bullet-shaped, 3D-printed aerodynamic frame.

  • Performance: It can reach speeds of 160 km/h (100 mph) and altitudes of 3,000 meters (10,000 ft). This performance envelope allows it to catch loitering munitions that fly at similar altitudes.28

  • Guidance: It utilizes “Kurbas” thermal imaging cameras from Odd Systems, allowing night operations where Shaheds are most active.28

  • Economics: The unit cost is approximately 20k+) or a Stinger missile ($100k+). This flips the economic leverage: now the attacker is spending more than the defender.28

3.1.2 Operational Impact

By October 2025, Sting drones had reportedly intercepted over 1,000 enemy UAVs. On November 30, 2025, a historic milestone was reached when Sting drones successfully intercepted jet-powered Shahed-238s, proving that low-cost electric drones can engage high-speed jet targets under specific conditions.30

3.2 The Escalation: Jet-Powered Shahed-238 (Geran-3)

Russia has not remained static. Recognizing the vulnerability of the slow, loud Shahed-136, they introduced the Shahed-238 (Russian designation Geran-3).

  • Propulsion: The Shahed-238 replaces the piston engine with a Tolou-10 or Tolou-13 micro-turbojet. This increases the theoretical top speed to 500-600 km/h, making it difficult for mobile fire teams with machine guns to track and hit.30

  • Supply Chain: Wreckage analysis from late 2025 indicates a heavy reliance on Chinese supply chains for the engines and navigation components, as well as Western components (US chips) sourced through intermediaries, highlighting the “Sinification” and sanction-evasion capabilities of the Russian defense industrial base.33

3.2.1 The “Sprint Zone” Vulnerability

Despite the jet engine, the Shahed-238 has a critical flaw: fuel consumption. Jet engines are less fuel-efficient than piston engines. To achieve the necessary range (claimed 2,500km, likely less), the drone must cruise at lower speeds (300-350 km/h) for most of its flight, “sprinting” to top speed only in the terminal phase or when air defenses are detected.

  • Tactical Consequence: This “cruise phase” creates a window of vulnerability. Ukrainian forces have learned to intercept the drones outside their “sprint zones” using the Sting. This cat-and-mouse game—managing fuel vs. speed—defines the air battle of late 2025.30

3.3 Saturation Tactics and “Mowing the Lawn”

The drone war has become a contest of volume.

  • Decoys: Russia employs “decoy” drones (Gerbera, Parodiya) made of cheap foam and plastic, equipped with “Luneberg lenses” to mimic the radar signature of larger threats. These are launched in the first wave to exhaust Ukrainian missile stocks.

  • Distributed Defense: Ukraine counters this with a “distributed defense” model. Instead of relying solely on centralized batteries, they deploy thousands of mobile fire teams and Sting operators networked via Delta. This creates a “defense in depth” that is economically sustainable against saturation attacks.19

  1. Internationalized Intrastate Wars: Escalating Proxy Dynamics

Beyond the high-tech battlefields of Ukraine, a series of “Internationalized Intrastate Wars” are escalating in the Global South. These conflicts are characterized by the heavy involvement of “Middle Powers” (UAE, Rwanda, Iran) who use local proxies to project power, secure resources, and bypass the diplomatic gridlock of the UN Security Council.

4.1 Sudan: The UAE-Russia Proxy Nexus

The civil war in Sudan between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) has morphed into a proxy theater for the UAE and Russia.

  • Humanitarian Context: In November 2025, the siege of El Obeid in North Kordofan intensified. RSF drone attacks killed at least 40 civilians, part of a broader campaign that has displaced nearly 12 million people.35

  • The UAE’s Role: Reports from late 2025 highlight the UAE as the primary patron of the RSF. Utilizing a logistics hub in Amjarass, Chad, the UAE allegedly supplies the RSF with weapons and dual-use technology, including Wing Loong II drones (manufactured in China, supplied by UAE). This support provides the RSF with an air capability that neutralizes the SAF’s traditional air superiority.37

  • Russia’s “Africa Corps”: Following the dissolution of the Wagner Group, Russia has restructured its presence under the “Africa Corps,” directly controlled by the Ministry of Defense. In late 2025, the Africa Corps operates with a duality: officially engaging the SAF government to secure a Red Sea naval base, while maintaining legacy smuggling networks with the RSF for gold extraction. This “hedging” strategy allows Russia to profit from the chaos regardless of the victor.39

4.2 DRC: The Resource War (M23 and Coltan)

In the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), the conflict has escalated due to the resurgence of the M23 rebellion, driven by the global demand for critical minerals.

  • The “Coltan” Economy: A UN Group of Experts report (July 2025) and subsequent updates reveal that M23 has established a “parallel administration” in the territories it occupies. In 2024 alone, M23 fraudulently exported at least 150 tons of coltan to Rwanda. This mineral wealth, essential for global electronics, directly finances the insurgency.41

  • Rwandan Intervention: The UN and Western powers accuse Rwanda of direct military support for M23, including the deployment of 4,000 Rwandan Defence Force (RDF) troops and heavy weaponry (surface-to-air missiles). Rwanda denies these charges, framing its involvement as border security against the FDLR (a Hutu militia). However, the scale of M23’s operations—using advanced night-vision and guided mortars—betrays state-level sponsorship.43

  • Regional Fragility: The conflict has drawn in regional actors. In November 2025, Burundian troops deployed to fight M23 faced internal mutiny over pay and accusations of blockading Banyamulenge villages near Uvira. This illustrates the fragility of the anti-M23 coalition; the “helpers” are themselves sources of instability.45

4.3 Yemen: The Fragmentation of the Coalition

The relative calm in Yemen has shattered in late 2025, revealing deep fissures within the anti-Houthi coalition.

  • Houthi Resurgence: In November 2025, the Houthis resumed attacks on commercial shipping in the Red Sea, linking their actions to the ongoing conflict in Gaza. This effectively ends the de facto truce that had held for much of the year.47

  • The Battle for Seiyun: More significantly, a new front opened in the south. In early December 2025, armed clashes erupted in Seiyun (Hadramout) between the Southern Transitional Council (STC)—backed by the UAE—and the internationally recognized government forces—backed by Saudi Arabia. The STC stormed the presidential palace, signaling a breakdown in the Saudi-UAE coalition. This “civil war within a civil war” complicates any peace process, as the anti-Houthi front is now fighting itself.49

  1. Algorithmic International Law: The Race to 2026

As autonomous weapons proliferate from Ukraine to Sudan, the international legal community is racing to codify rules before the technology outpaces regulation. The focal point of this effort is the Group of Governmental Experts on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems (GGE LAWS).

5.1 The GGE LAWS Process: The Final Stretch

The GGE LAWS operates under a mandate to formulate a “set of elements” for a legal instrument by the end of 2026. The period of late 2025 is critical as states position themselves for the final year of negotiations.

  • The Consensus Deadlock: The GGE operates by consensus, which gives major military powers (Russia, US, India, Israel) a veto over binding regulations. Frustrated by this slow pace, a bloc of 39 states led by Brazil and Austria issued a joint statement in September 2025 declaring their readiness to negotiate a binding treaty outside the GGE if necessary. This “threat of exit” places immense pressure on the 2026 deadline.50

  • UN GA Resolution 79/62: On December 2, 2024 (referenced in the 2025 context as a precursor to current actions), the UN General Assembly adopted Resolution 79/62 with a vote of 166-3. This resolution mandates the Secretary-General to seek views on autonomous weapons, creating a parallel track that bypasses the GGE’s consensus rule. This move is designed to isolate the “spoiler” states and build normative momentum for a ban.51

5.2 The Core Debate: “Meaningful Human Control” vs. “Judgment”

The central legal battleground is the definition of human involvement.

  • The Humanitarian Position: States like Austria, Brazil, and NGOs (Stop Killer Robots) advocate for “Meaningful Human Control.” This standard requires that a human operator must understand the context, target, and likely collateral damage of every specific attack. They argue that an algorithm cannot make the qualitative judgment required by IHL (e.g., is the military advantage proportional to civilian loss?).53

  • The Military Power Position: The US and its allies prefer the term “Context-Appropriate Human Judgment.” This more flexible standard acknowledges that the level of control can vary. For example, a defensive system (like Iron Dome) shooting down incoming rockets may have minimal human intervention due to the speed required, whereas an offensive drone hunting insurgents would require strict human oversight. They argue that “control” is too rigid for the realities of machine-speed warfare.55

5.3 The Trap of “Technological Neutrality”

A pervasive doctrine in these debates is “Technological Neutrality”—the idea that laws should regulate effects (e.g., civilian death) rather than specific technologies (e.g., neural networks).

  • The Dilemma: While neutrality keeps the law relevant as tech evolves, critics argue it is a trap. AI systems introduce unique risks—such as “black box” unpredictability—that traditional laws do not address. If a neural network targets a civilian due to a data bias, is it a war crime? Or a “product malfunction”?

  • Current Trend: The emerging consensus in the “rolling text” of the GGE is a two-tier approach:

  1. Prohibited Systems: Those that are inherently unpredictable or incapable of distinguishing civilians (e.g., learning on the fly without constraints).

  2. Regulated Systems: Those that can be used lawfully but require strict validation and “lifecycle” oversight.57

Conclusion: The Great Decoupling

The convergence of these five verticals in late 2025 paints a picture of a world where the State is losing its monopoly on the core functions that once defined it.

  • Identity and Education are decoupling from the physical state in Myanmar, migrating to the cloud via LearnCloud and blockchain credentials.

  • Air Superiority is decoupling from national air forces in Ukraine, moving to volunteer groups manufacturing $2,000 interceptors.

  • Decision-Making is decoupling from human commanders, moving to AI “kill webs” like Delta and Lavender that process data faster than human synapses.

  • Sovereignty in the Global South is decoupling from national governments, fracturing into proxy-controlled enclaves (M23, RSF, STC) fueled by global supply chains.

We are moving toward a system of Networked Sovereignty. In this “Fractured Horizon,” power lies not in static institutions or defined borders, but in the resilience of one’s network. The NUG proves a government can exist without territory if it has a digital network. The “Sting” proves an air defense system can exist without a defense budget if it has a volunteer network. The challenge for 2026 will be navigating a world where these networks—unregulated, lethal, and agile—increasingly dictate the terms of global order.

Table 1: Comparative Metrics of the “Fractured Horizon” (Late 2025)

Metric”Sting” Interceptor (Ukraine)Shahed-238 (Russia/Iran)NUG Pay (Myanmar)GGE LAWS Debate
Primary FunctionKinetic Intercept (Air-to-Air)Saturation Strike (Air-to-Ground)Financial SovereigntyLegal Regulation
Cost / Value~$2,100 USDEst. >$100,000 USD>312 Billion MMK Vol.N/A
Key TechnologyFPV / Thermal / ElectricTurbojet / Radar HomingBlockchain / StablecoinAI / Autonomous Logic
Strategic InsightDemocratized Air DefenseEconomic AttritionMonetary DecouplingNormative Struggle
Status (Dec 2025)Operational (1000+ kills)Deployed (Jet variants)Growing (28k+ users)Deadlocked (Consensus)

Works cited

  1. CrisisWatch: November Trends and December Alerts 2025, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.crisisgroup.org/crisiswatch/november-trends-and-december-alerts-2025

  2. (PDF) Educational fragmentation in Myanmar: Governance shifts, conflict, and the digital divide - ResearchGate, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/396071892_Educational_fragmentation_in_Myanmar_Governance_shifts_conflict_and_the_digital_divide

  3. final list of cases - BC ELN, accessed December 4, 2025, https://bceln.ca/sites/default/files/resources_supporting_docs/HBS%20Select%20Case%20Studies%20Title%20List.xlsx

  4. Educational fragmentation in Myanmar: Governance shifts, conflict, and the digital divide | Pedagogical Research, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.pedagogicalresearch.com/download/educational-fragmentation-in-myanmar-governance-shifts-conflict-and-the-digital-divide-17054.pdf

  5. (PDF) The development and policies of ICT supporting educational technology in Singapore, Thailand, Indonesia, and Myanmar - ResearchGate, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/349669750_The_development_and_policies_of_ICT_supporting_educational_technology_in_Singapore_Thailand_Indonesia_and_Myanmar

  6. Education Reform in Post-Coup Myanmar: Federalizing or Federating? - Ashley South, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.ashleysouth.co.uk/files/CS46_2_006.pdf

  7. international idea’s annual outcome report 2022, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.idea.int/sites/default/files/reference_docs/international-idea-annual-outcome-report-2022.pdf

  8. निजामति सेवा पत्रिका (Vol 45) २०८२ असार | PDF - Scribd, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.scribd.com/document/913061977/%E0%A4%A8%E0%A4%BF%E0%A4%9C%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%AE%E0%A4%A4%E0%A4%BF-%E0%A4%B8%E0%A5%87%E0%A4%B5%E0%A4%BE-%E0%A4%AA%E0%A4%A4-%E0%A4%B0%E0%A4%BF%E0%A4%95%E0%A4%BE-Vol-45-%E0%A5%A8%E0%A5%A6%E0%A5%AE%E0%A5%A8-%E0%A4%85%E0%A4%B8%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%B0

  9. CyberDiplomacy and International Relations, accessed December 4, 2025, https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/64b94adadbfa4c824629b337/671c9145febc15af8c40b7c6_e-magazine_August%202024.pdf

  10. Our use of cookies - Committees - UK Parliament, accessed December 4, 2025, https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/152305/html/

  11. Financing the Anti-military Resistance: Unpacking the National Unity Government’s role in Myanmar’s political transition - PeaceRep, accessed December 4, 2025, https://peacerep.org/2024/12/16/financing-the-anti-military-resistance-unpacking-the-national-unity-governments-role-in-myanmars-political-transition/

  12. NUG launches online bank to support fight against Myanmar junta, accessed December 4, 2025, https://myanmar-now.org/en/news/nug-launches-online-bank-to-support-fight-against-myanmar-junta/

  13. Episode #363: Crypto in the Time of Tyranny - Insight Myanmar, accessed December 4, 2025, https://insightmyanmar.org/complete-shows/2025/7/4/episode-363-crypto-in-the-time-of-tyranny

  14. Human, Machine, War: How the Mind-Tech Nexus Will Win Future …, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/AUPress/Display/Article/4162241/human-machine-war-how-the-mind-tech-nexus-will-win-future-wars/

  15. Human, Machine, War: How the Mind-Tech Nexus Will Win Future Wars | CNAS, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.cnas.org/publications/book/human-machine-war-how-the-mind-tech-nexus-will-win-future-wars

  16. Human, Machine, War: How the Mind-Tech Nexus will Win Future Wars - Air University, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/Portals/10/AUPress/Books/B_188_Wright_Human_Machine_War.1.pdf

  17. Loitering Munitions in Modern Combat: Addressing Tactical Gaps at the Small Unit Level - usajfkswcs, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.swcs.mil/Special-Warfare-Journal/Article/4338971/loitering-munitions-in-modern-combat-addressing-tactical-gaps-at-the-small-unit/

  18. The U.S.-China South China Sea War of 2025: Who Would Win? - National Security Journal, accessed December 4, 2025, https://nationalsecurityjournal.org/the-u-s-china-south-china-sea-war-of-2025-who-would-win/

  19. The Point Defense Paradox: Sustaining Airpower in Contested Distributed Operations > Air University (AU) > Wild Blue Yonder, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/Wild-Blue-Yonder/Articles/Article-Display/Article/4316568/the-point-defense-paradox-sustaining-airpower-in-contested-distributed-operatio/

  20. Fiscal 2025 budget docs reveal how Project Maven is still evolving - DefenseScoop, accessed December 4, 2025, https://defensescoop.com/2024/03/14/project-maven-fiscal-2025-budget-still-evolving/

  21. GAO-22-105834, Accessible Version, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE: DOD Should Improve Strategies, Inventory Process, and Collaboration, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.gao.gov/assets/720/719871.pdf

  22. DELTA reaches over 200,000 registered users, Minister Shmyhal reports | MoD News, accessed December 4, 2025, https://mod.gov.ua/en/news/delta-reaches-over-200-000-registered-users-minister-shmyhal-reports

  23. DELTA reaches over 200000 registered users: Minister of Defense Denys Shmyhal, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.kmu.gov.ua/en/news/v-delta-zareiestruvalys-ponad-200-tysiach-korystuvachiv-denys-shmyhal

  24. Ukrainian combat system DELTA became primary command platform for combined multinational team at NATO exercises | MoD News, accessed December 4, 2025, https://mod.gov.ua/en/news/ukrainian-combat-system-delta-became-primary-command-platform-for-combined-multinational-team-at-nato-exercises

  25. Future Land Forces Agenda - Defence Leaders, accessed December 4, 2025, https://defenceleaders.com/flf-agenda/

  26. Military Use of Biometrics Series - Israel’s Use of AI-DSS and Facial Recognition Technology: The Erosion of Civilian Protection in Gaza - Lieber Institute, accessed December 4, 2025, https://lieber.westpoint.edu/israels-use-ai-dss-facial-recognition-technology-erosion-civilian-protection-gaza/

  27. Gaza, Artificial Intelligence, and Kill Lists, accessed December 4, 2025, https://verfassungsblog.de/gaza-artificial-intelligence-and-kill-lists/

  28. Sting (drone) - Wikipedia, accessed December 4, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sting_(drone)

  29. Low-cost kinetic effectors for drone defence - Euro-sd, accessed December 4, 2025, https://euro-sd.com/2025/04/articles/43709/low-cost-kinetic-effectors-for-drone-defence/

  30. Ukraine’s interceptor drone downs Russia’s jet-propelled Shahed …, accessed December 4, 2025, https://euromaidanpress.com/2025/12/01/ukraines-interceptor-drone-downs-russias-jet-propelled-shahed-uav-in-historic-first/

  31. The Wild Hornets have created an effective Shahed interceptor — STING - YouTube, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9BW9UGX7dl4

  32. Shahed drones - Wikipedia, accessed December 4, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shahed_drones

  33. Russia doubles down on the Shahed - The International Institute for Strategic Studies, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.iiss.org/online-analysis/military-balance/2025/04/russia-doubles-down-on-the-shahed/

  34. Drone Saturation: Russia’s Shahed Campaign - CSIS, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.csis.org/analysis/drone-saturation-russias-shahed-campaign

  35. Sudan: Civilians must be protected amid escalating RSF attacks in Kordofan region, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2025/11/sudan-civilians-escalating-rsf-attacks-kordofan/

  36. What Is the Extent of Sudan’s Humanitarian Crisis? | Council on Foreign Relations, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.cfr.org/in-brief/what-extent-sudans-humanitarian-crisis

  37. Understanding the war in Sudan: The human cost of geopolitics - European Parliament, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2025/779180/EPRS_BRI(2025)779180_EN.pdf

  38. The falcons and the secretary bird: Arab Gulf states in Sudan’s war | ECFR - European Council on Foreign Relations, accessed December 4, 2025, https://ecfr.eu/publication/the-falcons-and-the-secretary-bird-arab-gulf-states-in-sudans-war/

  39. A Shadow War in the Global South: Are Kyiv’s Operations in Africa Paying Off?, accessed December 4, 2025, https://carnegieendowment.org/research/2025/11/a-shadow-war-in-the-global-south-are-kyivs-operations-in-africa-paying-off?lang=en

  40. Russia’s Africa Corps: Wagner’s Successor in Africa (2022–2025) - Robert Lansing Institute, accessed December 4, 2025, https://lansinginstitute.org/2025/09/30/russias-africa-corps-wagners-successor-in-africa-2022-2025/

  41. UN experts warn Congo’s conflict minerals slipping into global market - Swissinfo, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/international-geneva/un-experts-warn-congos-conflict-minerals-slipping-into-global-market/89978793

  42. S/2024/969 Security Council - Official Document System, accessed December 4, 2025, https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/n24/373/37/pdf/n2437337.pdf

  43. Democratic Republic of the Congo–Rwanda conflict (2022–2025) - Wikipedia, accessed December 4, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Republic_of_the_Congo%E2%80%93Rwanda_conflict_(2022%E2%80%932025)

  44. Illicit mineral supply chains fuel the DRC’s M23 insurgency - Atlantic Council, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/energysource/illicit-mineral-supply-chains-fuel-the-drcs-m23-insurgency/

  45. Ukraine’s Interceptor Drone Downs Russia’s Jet-Powered Shahed for the First Time, accessed December 4, 2025, https://united24media.com/latest-news/ukraines-interceptor-drone-downs-russias-jet-powered-shahed-for-the-first-time-13885

  46. In DR Congo’s Uvira, pro-government militia actions show abuses aren’t just an M23 problem - The New Humanitarian, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/news-feature/2025/11/25/dr-congo-uvira-pro-government-militia-abuses-m23

  47. Conflict in Yemen and the Red Sea | Global Conflict Tracker - Council on Foreign Relations, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.cfr.org/global-conflict-tracker/conflict/war-yemen

  48. Calming the Red Sea’s Turbulent Waters | International Crisis Group, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.crisisgroup.org/middle-east-north-africa/gulf-and-arabian-peninsula/yemen/248-calming-red-seas-turbulent-waters

  49. Armed clashes reported between Yemeni army and southern separatists - Al Jazeera, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/12/4/armed-clashes-reported-between-yemeni-army-and-southern-separatists

  50. Geneva Talks on Autonomous Weapons: Momentum Builds, But Challenges Remain, accessed December 4, 2025, https://ict4peace.org/activities/geneva-talks-on-autonomous-weapons-momentum-builds-but-challenges-remain/

  51. 2025 Informal Consultations on LAWS - Reaching Critical Will, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/disarmament-fora/others/informal-consultations-laws

  52. 79/62. Lethal autonomous weapons systems - General Assembly - the United Nations, accessed December 4, 2025, https://docs.un.org/en/a/res/79/62

  53. Box II – Statement by Stop Killer Robots to the GGE on lethal autonomous weapons systems, 1-5 September, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.stopkillerrobots.org/resource/statement-by-stop-killer-robots-to-the-gge-on-lethal-autonomous-weapons-systems-1-5-september/

  54. PROGRAMMED TO OBEY: THE LIMITS OF LAW AND THE DEBATE OVER MEANINGFUL HUMAN CONTROL OF AUTONOMOUS WEAPONS, accessed December 4, 2025, https://hrlr.law.columbia.edu/files/2025/11/Shany_Programmed-to-Obey_Final-Upload.pdf

  55. Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Inju, accessed December 4, 2025, https://docs-library.unoda.org/Convention_on_Certain_Conventional_Weapons_-Group_of_Governmental_Experts_on_Lethal_Autonomous_Weapons_Systems_(2025)/CCW-GGE.1-2025-WP.4.pdf

  56. Geopolitics and the Regulation of Autonomous Weapons Systems, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2025-01/features/geopolitics-and-regulation-autonomous-weapons-systems

  57. GGE on lethal autonomous weapons systems | Digital Watch Observatory, accessed December 4, 2025, https://dig.watch/processes/gge-laws

  58. CyCon 2025 Series – Artificial Intelligence in Armed Conflict: The Current State of International Law - Lieber Institute West Point, accessed December 4, 2025, https://lieber.westpoint.edu/artificial-intelligence-armed-conflict-current-state-international-law/sessment: October–November 2025

Graph View

Backlinks