Kateryna Mykhalko on drone wars: AI, defense exports, and economics of attrition

hromadske: You recently stepped down as head of the Technological Forces of Ukraine. What do you consider your most significant achievement there?

Kateryna Mykhalko: The first achievement I would name is the team at the Technological Forces, along with the companies that came together. For me, these are the two most important factors. These companies are direct competitors, yet they joined forces on this platform, openly sharing their successes and challenges while working together to develop the industry. That, to me, is a positive and healthy development. I’m happy it happened.

The team consists of highly professional people in their fields, though none had previously worked in defense. The Technological Forces also served as a platform for bringing men and women from other civilian sectors into the defense sector. Integrating them and improving our industry was what inspired me.

There are clear achievements on the regulatory side. We opened drone exports — something we consistently and persistently advocated. We also established more than 10 committees within the Technological Forces to address various regulatory challenges, including personnel resourcing, localized components, and international cooperation.

What do you see ahead for Ukraine’s drone industry?

The biggest change in 2026 will undoubtedly be the opening of international markets and increased cooperation. Many think export simply means shipping a piece of metal across a border. That’s not the case at all. It’s primarily about technological collaboration, integration, and supply chains into European countries. This is clearly vital for Ukraine’s strategic defense — and no less important for the European Union’s security.

We see Russian drones entering not just Ukraine but dozens of EU countries. That makes it essential for Ukraine’s industry to integrate into Western markets, exchange technologies, jointly purchase and develop components, and become less dependent on China. All of these will be priorities.

Supplies to the front line are already well established. We owe our state a great deal of thanks for improving procurement and speeding up responses to military requests, ensuring our forces receive the highest-quality products; for enabling technology development, funding R&D in the industry, and strengthening international cooperation. The international track will undoubtedly remain important for the front line as well.

The defense industry is often seen as a field for, say, “tough men.” How comfortable has it been for you as a woman to work in that environment?

Absolutely comfortable. I genuinely believe there is space in this industry for women — and for everyone, including young people. There is still ageism and sexism, unfortunately, present in society. In my view, more people in Ukraine need to be drawn into this industry because it is directly tied to Ukraine’s ability to win.

The industry welcomes very different people — young, women, girls — quite well. I would like society’s prejudices to shift a bit so we become more tolerant of people’s desire to contribute to Ukraine’s defense capability.

Overall, companies are progressive, and founders are progressive. Our country is changing too—young people are stepping up to serve in government. I feel we are at a turning point: since 2022, this industry has undergone a dramatic transformation. From a closed club of older men, it has become an innovative space full of energy, drive, and opportunities for diverse people to get involved.

How did you enter the defense sector? It would seem there is nothing more difficult than working in defense during wartime.

In 2022, when the full-scale invasion began, it was extremely important for me to find my place in this war. Defense is certainly a specific and high-stakes field. But the hardest work is still at the front. Ukraine’s independence rests entirely on the people holding the line of contact. I wanted to be useful to them, to help and support them — not just with donations, but on a more systemic level.

I joined a drone company at their invitation — it turned out to be a systemic player active since 2014. For me, the arms sector was completely new. There was a professional team that had worked in it for decades. I was fortunate that people deeply immersed in the topic could teach me and share their challenges.

I came in to develop regulatory recommendations — primarily to accelerate drone production for our military. But it quickly became clear that the problems even one strong company with a quality product faced were actually symptoms of much broader systemic issues in the industry. Imperfect legislation and regulatory procedures weren’t a problem for one producer; they were barriers to the entire sector’s growth.

So the next step was uniting the biggest players that existed then. In 2022, there weren’t many companies in Ukraine. We brought together six, began synchronizing because regulatory challenges affected everyone, and started developing positions — that’s how the Technological Forces of Ukraine were born.

In your view, does Ukraine’s drone industry currently have enough talent and investment potential to keep growing? What obstacles could hinder that growth?

Is there a talent shortage in Ukraine? Absolutely — and not just in this industry, but globally. Unfortunately, many people have left the country. Unfortunately, many have died. The personnel situation is extremely difficult — which is why we need to draw more people from civilian sectors into defense. There is definitely room for improvement.

Universities should have drone-specialized programs. We need to work globally with the education market — not only to train engineers, though that’s important, but also for supply chains, equipment maintenance, government relations and communications in the field. We must prepare the younger generation in universities so they are ready to join the defense sector.

At the school level, it is fundamentally important to raise awareness of technology, as it has dramatically changed Ukraine’s security landscape. Introducing cutting-edge technologies and automated systems in schools — even outside the context of war — is key. The very idea of robotics matters greatly to young people.

As for investment in defense, it is closely tied to Ukraine’s overall business climate — not just defense companies. When an investor enters, it’s not only a sensitive military technology sector; there are also many risks related to the judicial system and investor rights protection. We need to create conditions so companies can stay in Ukraine and not relocate abroad.

Unfortunately, we see that investment volumes are far below what they could be, given that this is currently the most critical sector.

What risks do you see? Official statistics show that 80% of strikes on the front line are now from drones. It seems the drone industry is at its peak — and peaks are often followed by declines. Could that happen?

This is a philosophical question. On one hand, we would like that decline to occur — because if drones are no longer needed, it means the war has ended. We want that to happen through victory.

What should the state strive for? To have strong defense capabilities and a robust defense industry while having no war on Ukrainian territory. There are precedents: the United Kingdom, the United States, Germany, and several other countries have strong defense industries without war on their soil. That would be the ideal scenario for Ukraine.

Even in any scenario — peace plans, cease-fires, and so on — it is crucial not to forget about the industry at the state level and to keep supporting it.

That will be a real challenge when we must focus on reconstruction and social needs without losing sight of defense. Because, unfortunately, we know the Russians could return. Even if there is a pause now, the risk could recur.

How do we ensure we don’t forget the industry, that it doesn’t lose resources, that the peak doesn’t pass and leave us defenseless again? That’s why international markets are important. As soon as domestic demand for drones in Ukraine decreases, the resources we can count on will come from international partners who want Ukraine’s experience to protect themselves. That’s why Ukrainian producers must integrate into European supply chains — so that partner funding can sustain these companies in the long term. I don’t think the peak will simply pass. But I would like Ukraine’s need for drone quantities to decrease.

Does the European Union really want Ukrainian drone exports? I ask because the EU has its own fairly developed defense industry.

Yes and no. Does the EU have a developed defense industry, and is it somewhat more stable than Ukraine’s? Yes. But what kind of producers do they have? Mostly conventional weapons: armored vehicles, tanks, artillery. They also build aircraft and fighter jets. All of these are critically important — and Ukraine depends on those supplies.

But that is not enough in the conditions of the real war now underway in Ukraine. We see the importance of drones — you mentioned the 80% figure for enemy equipment destroyed by drones. Europeans see it too. The fact is that such technological experience can only be gained in real wartime conditions. Unfortunately, Ukraine has that experience. This tragic experience allows us to be confident that this weaponry, these drones, work effectively. Ukraine has paid an unimaginable price for proving the effectiveness of these technologies on the front line — people died for it. It is an unspeakably terrible scenario we would not wish on our partners.

Partners understand that Ukraine has this tragic experience, which gives us certainty in our technologies. They want access to that experience. Once again, because cheap Shahed [drones] cannot be shot down with multimillion-dollar missiles, that is not an effective self-defense strategy. So Europe is now looking more at asymmetric responses to such threats. They don’t have many solutions of that kind yet.

True, a few EU companies have historically worked in Ukraine and are deeply integrated into the local defense context, but that is the exception rather than the rule. There is definitely demand from the EU side, but much work remains to make it a systemic approach. For now, drones are something new and unclear for the EU. We need to ensure the need and the criticality of drones are felt more acutely — not just for Ukraine’s defense, but also for EU countries.

There is a lot of talk now about the role of artificial intelligence in drone control. How far have Ukrainian producers advanced in this area? Even major global AI product companies — like Elon Musk’s — are incurring losses on this technology.

Let’s put it this way: the software direction in Ukraine’s military technologies needs improvement. As a state, we buy physical products — hardware — but we don’t know how to procure software because there are no such procedures.

This limits the development of these technologies inside Ukraine to some extent. So the idea is to improve regulation in the AI sphere. I see long-term potential there, undoubtedly.

In summary, these technologies exist and are working, including on the front line, but there is room for improvement if the state begins working more systematically with software producers.

What qualities do you consider most important in a person — not just to survive, but to achieve something in the modern world? The war continues, geopolitics is unstable, and people are becoming emotional.

I was impressed by Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s speech at Davos — I think many saw it — about value-oriented pragmatism. I think combining those qualities is important. I fully agree with the prime minister.

On one hand, Ukraine has been forced first to survive, then to show the world how — even in such inhuman conditions — innovation can be produced, creativity maintained, and hope not lost. Now the world has something to learn from all of us. Ukrainians are victors, not victims.

That is actually why, as an industry, we need to enter international markets: to show the world that we are not victims constantly asking for help, but that we have something to offer. It is important to be rational in that sense, to be a victor rather than a victim.

But Ukrainians are extraordinarily value-driven. We fight for values, and it is fundamentally important not to lose that component when we become strong.

Because when you are strong, it is very easy to lose humanity, to lose values, to lose everything we fought for. What inspires me most in people is the ability to combine these qualities: to be strong, to be victors, yet remain humane, loyal, sincere, and honest.

I consider myself a very sincere person, and I would like there to be more sincerity in the world. It is not always easy, especially when we see realpolitik with openly cynical decisions, sometimes regarding Ukraine. But that means we need to be even more value-oriented, because that is our main differentiation in this turbulent world: we are willing to pay a high price for values. And not all nations in the world would be ready to do the same.

This material was produced with the support of the Finnish Embassy in Ukraine’s Fund for Local Cooperation.