The Endstate: The 2030 Battle of Zarqa Ridge

What the future will look like with reforms being made today. It is not just technology, but laid upon a culture of Maneuver Warfare, Mission Command, and a new personnel system.

In the arid expanse of a contested border region, 2030, the 3rd Battalion, 7th Infantry Regiment (Battle Group Marquez) faced a crucible of modern warfare. The enemy, a hybrid force of insurgents backed by advanced drones and electronic warfare, as well as supported by fire and forget mortars, held Zarqa Ridge—a rocky outcrop overlooking a critical supply route. The Battle Group’s mission: destroy the enemy, seize the ridge to secure the route.

The method was a combination of technological evolution and tried and historically proven adjustments to the personnel/manpower system. Technology would be combined with Maneuver Warfare and Mission Command. These were the Department of Defense’s new and tried approaches to warfare. It was the cultural philosophy of decentralized execution, empowered subordinates, and disciplined initiative. This had evolved over the last four years under new ways to manage, develop and man units.

The task organization, three mobile infantry companies organized as three teams. Each would have a robotic tank platoon from the attached robotic tank company. They were supported by a drone company headquarters unit (-) which had an offensive drone platoon (to supplement those carried by each unit), an anti drone platoon (from the same company), and an electronic warfare platoon.

The unit had been together for two years (with another year remaining together on their three year cycle), with the commanders and non-commissioned officers at all levels selected after rigorous criteria from years of experience and learning from the Outcomes Based Learning (OBL) based learning doctrine the Army adapted in 2026. This methodology was applied at professional institutions as well as in the field. To supplement this approach to learning was a new emphasis on unit manning.

The teams from crews, squads and platoons, as well as companies were families, having served with each other for the last two of three years under the Army’s new cohesion and unit manning program. This new personnel system emphasis was also adapted in 2026 with lessons learned from the Army tried COHORT program from the 1980s and 1990s. The confidence, competence and resilience of this unit was high, but the ability to always evolve, to improved, to adapt remained constant. They were ready for combat.

Lieutenant Colonel Joe Marquez had been in command two years. Him and his Battle Group were ready. This time it was for real. But their development made the transition smooth. He was comfortable as he communicated with his commanders and staff using secure holographic headsets from separate locations under an anti-drone EW umbrella that included drone hunters flying above their positions.

Pointing at his augmented reality overlay updating constantly in real time, “The enemy controls Zarqa Ridge.” He went on keeping it brief, “Our intent is to dislodge them, secure the ridge, and ensure the supply route stays open. I don’t care how you get it done—adapt, innovate, and trust your people. We move at dawn. It is all based on the hard training we have had over the last two years as a unit.”

Marquez’s intent was clear: Team Alpha (Company) would be the Schwerpunkt (Main Effort), and pass through Team Bravo, exploit their lodgement, then secure the route, dislodge the enemy, hold the ridge, and ensure a safe passage for supplies. He didn’t dictate tactics. All other units regardless of purpose, would support Team Alpha unless conditions changed the Schwerpunkt. Maneuver Warfare and Mission Command demanded he trust his subordinates to execute within his intent, adapting to the chaos of combat.

Major Phil Carter, Team Alpha commander, huddled with his platoon leaders under an anti drone and EW camouflage net. Ahead of them was the ridge that was a maze of boulders and caves, bristling with enemy sensors and automated turrets. Carter’s orders from Marquez were broad: be prepared to exploit Team Bravo’s and Charlies initial lodgements once they secure the key terrain and the flank, pass through, then neutralize the enemy’s deep defenses. How? That was his call.

Carter turned to 1st Lieutenant Glenn Nguyen, his 1st Platoon leader. “Glenn, your drones picked up enemy jammers in the north sector. Can you suppress them?”

Nguyen nodded, already sketching a plan. “I’ll use our micro-drones to spoof their sensors, then hit the jammers with EMP grenades. My squads following the robotic tanks can move in behind the chaos.”

Carter didn’t micromanage. He clarified the intent—disrupt the enemy’s ability to coordinate—and let Nguyen execute. This was Mission Command in action: leaders at every level empowered to solve problems.

At 0500, the attack began. Team Bravo, under Major Tom Lopez, assaulted the southern slope. But enemy drones swarmed, pinning his lead platoon behind a rock formation. Lopez’s radio crackled with reports of casualties and dwindling ammo. His orders were to clear the southern approach, but the drones were relentless.

Lopez made a call. “Redirect the reserve platoon to flank east,” he told his XO. “Use the ravine for cover and hit their drone control node.” It wasn’t in the original plan, but it aligned with Marquez’s intent: dislodge the enemy. His XO, 2nd Lieutenant Alan Reza, didn’t hesitate. He led the platoon through the ravine, neutralizing the node with a well-placed rocket. The drones faltered, and Team Bravo surged forward, sitting the conditions for Team Alpha to pass through the gap, and seize the ridge from behind.

Marquez, monitoring from the command post, which constantly displaced to avoid kamikaze drones, received Lopez’s update. He didn’t second-guess the deviation. Mission Command thrived on disciplined initiative—actions within the commander’s intent, not blind adherence to a script.

On the northern front, Nguyen’s plan hit a snag. The enemy had upgraded their jammers, rendering his micro-drones useless. His platoon was exposed, taking fire from hidden snipers. Nguyen radioed Carter: “Jammers are too strong. I’m shifting to a ground assault with smoke cover. Need Team Bravo’s mortars to suppress the snipers.”

Carter trusted Nguyen’s judgment. He coordinated with Lopez, who diverted his mortar team to support. The mortars roared, blanketing the enemy positions. Nguyen’s platoon advanced under smoke, breaching the northern defenses. Trust flowed both ways: Nguyen trusted Carter to back his pivot, and Carter trusted Nguyen to adapt without hand-holding.

Back at the command post, Marquez’s staff fused data from drones, satellites, and ground reports into a real-time battle picture using. While not physically in one location, in an extremely vulnerable old school Tactical Operations Center or TOC, the staff instead spoke and coordinated from different locations through a combination of augmented reality (AR), virtual reality (VR), and wireless communication systems to enable immersive, secure, and real-time collaboration. These were critical for distributed teams to not only survive, but to harmonize the actions of the entire Battle Group while communicating above, to the side and below.

Mission Command required shared understanding—a common operational view enabling independent action. When Team Charlie securing the other flank for Team Alpha to flow through, reported enemy reinforcements massing west of the ridge, Marquez broadcast the update across the Battle Group’s network. No one waited for orders; each Team and supporting platoons adjusted with their specific missions to complement one another, offsetting strengths and weaknesses.

Major Alexander Khan, Team Charlie commander, repositioned his anti-tank teams to ambush the reinforcements. His initiative—unprompted but aligned with the intent—blunted the enemy’s counterattack. The Battle Groups’s shared understanding, built through rigorous training and clear communication, let leaders act decisively.

By noon, the ridge was theirs. Team Bravo held the north, Team Charlie secured the western flank, allowing Team Alpha to exploit through clearing out the remaining resistance, and secure the key terrain overlooking the supply route. The supply route was open. The enemy, outmaneuvered by the Battle’s adaptability, was destroyed with remnants retreating in disarray.

Marquez walked the ridge, debriefing his commanders. “You made it happen,” he said. “I gave you the ‘what’ and ‘why.’ You figured out the ‘how.’” Losses were light, morale high. The Battle Group’s success wasn’t due to a flawless plan but to Maneuver Warfare and Mission Command’s principles: strength against weakness, constant pressure, multiple thrusts carried out by a clear intent, decentralized execution, disciplined initiative, mutual trust, and shared understanding. This had been built into a cohesive team by months of realistic training, learning and relearning where mistakes were learned from and applied opportunities to do better in the future.

That night, in a after-action review, Nguyen summed it up: “The enemy had tech, but we had freedom to think. That’s why we won.” In modern combat—fluid, chaotic, and tech-driven—Maneuver Warfare and Mission Command turned a mixed battalion and supporting units of soldiers into a network of problem-solvers, each empowered to act, adapt, and win.