Dmytro Kavun, President of Dignitas Ukraine (USA)

Dmytro Kavun is the co-founder and president of Dignitas Ukraine, a U.S.-based nonprofit focused on strengthening Ukraine’s defense capabilities through technological solutions and innovation, particularly in unmanned systems. A Kyiv native, Kavun has lived in the United States for nearly three decades, holds a degree in computer engineering, and has spent many years working in cybersecurity.

In this interview, Ukrinform discussed the role of drones in contemporary warfare, priority areas for supporting Ukraine’s Armed Forces, and practical lessons from cooperation with American partners.

FROM MAVICs TO FPVs

Q: Dmytro, how did your organization come about, and why did you choose to focus on drones?

A: Dignitas Ukraine is a U.S.-based nonprofit founded in 2023 to support Ukraine’s Defense Forces. From the outset, we set a very clear priority: helping Ukrainian service members in the most effective way possible.

Ukraine does not have unlimited human resources, nor the luxury of losing large numbers of people. Victory, therefore, must be achieved through technology and innovation.

Before the full-scale invasion, I had been volunteering since 2014. But after 2022 it became obvious that traditional models of charitable assistance no longer matched the realities of this war.

For a long time in the United States there was an informal taboo: it was widely assumed that charitable organizations could not assist the military of another country. After the full-scale invasion, we examined this issue in detail with legal experts and established that U.S. legislation contains no such prohibition.

A key realization was that in this war the distinction between civilians and the military is rather arbitrary. Civilians became soldiers; soldiers defend civilians. In this context, focusing on military support delivers the greatest defensive effect for the country as a whole.

Initially, our support focused on tactical medicine—first-aid kits, medic backpacks, and basic field supplies. It soon became clear, however, that drones were emerging as the decisive technology of this war.

As early as 2014–2015, our volunteer Maria Berlinska was already emphasizing that unmanned systems are going to become a determining factor on the battlefield.

When Dignitas Ukraine was established in 2023, we therefore made a deliberate decision to develop the FPV (First Person View) drone direction. Until then, FPV drones had been used only in a very limited way. Previously, we had also worked with other types of UAVs—most notably commercial quadcopters such as Chinese-made DJI “Mavics” and Autel platforms.

Q: Why did you ultimately prioritize FPV systems?

A: These are drones typically assembled from individual components; visually, they resemble a skeletal frame. The operator controls them through FPV goggles and literally experiences the flight from a first-person perspective.

FPV is not a specific model but a control principle. With a Mavic, the operator looks at a phone or tablet screen, monitoring a map and the camera feed. With FPV, you are effectively “inside” the drone, flying through the goggles. This difference fundamentally changes situational awareness, maneuverability, and, ultimately, combat effectiveness.

By 2023, it had become clear that the war was increasingly constrained by economics. At the time, a single DJI “Mavic” cost around $2,000, whereas an FPV drone could be built for up to $300. The disparity was dramatic.

Indeed, FPV drones are more demanding in terms of piloting skills, but they are significantly less expensive. They originate from the hobbyist ecosystem—FPV racing is a distinct sport in which pilots compete in speed and maneuverability—and this background made rapid adaptation possible.

We also realized another critical point: simply delivering drones to the front line is ineffective. They are lost very quickly, and overall effectiveness depends directly on the level of operator training.

That drove us to launching a free volunteer online course, “The Use of Technology in Warfare,” hosted on the Prometheus platform. It is a limited access course, exclusive for military personnel. Trainees could download the lectures—even via Starlink—and complete the training without leaving their positions, including directly from trenches.

Subsequently, we expanded this effort to include hands-on training at military training grounds, complementing the online instruction with practical field experience.

Upon completing the course, service members received a certificate, which entitled them to apply to us directly for further support.

Later, in 2023, we expanded our training program beyond commercial quadcopters DJI “Mavics” to include FPV systems and began actively promoting this capability. At first, the initiative was met with skepticism—many dismissed FPV drones as mere “toys.” However, after a pause in ammunition supplies, FPV drones proved their battlefield value in practice: a single precision strike could replace dozens of artillery shells.

The effect was a step-change in cost-effectiveness, and FPV systems quickly moved into widespread operational use.

Q: These are essentially kamikaze drones, am I right?

A:There are both kamikaze FPVs and FPV bombers. The latter drop munitions and can return to base. One example is “Baba Yaga” (Nemesis)—a large FPV octocopter with eight motors designed to deliver aerial munitions.

MOST U.S. DONORS HAVE UKRAINIAN SURNAMES

Q: What are Dignitas Ukraine’s key areas of focus today?

A: We operate across three core pillars. First, education and training. Second, the provision of technology. Third, advocacy for technological and regulatory change.

Our work is not limited to drones alone. We deal with virtually all categories of unmanned systems—vertical-takeoff quadcopters and fixed-wing platforms—as well as counter-drone systems, electronic warfare (EW), electronic intelligence (ELINT), fiber-optic solutions, and unmanned ground vehicles (UGVs).

Q: You mentioned advocacy. What does that involve in practice?

A: Advocacy, in our understanding, is about systematically promoting changes in how military technology is perceived, adopted, and scaled—both in Ukraine and among international partners. This includes pushing for faster decision-making cycles, more flexible procurement rules, and a mindset shift toward rapid experimentation and battlefield-driven innovation.

In practical terms, it means constant engagement with U.S. policymakers, defense professionals, think tanks, and donor communities to explain what actually works on the battlefield today, why traditional approaches are often too slow, and how relatively small technological interventions—if implemented correctly—can have a disproportionate operational impact.

We see advocacy as a force multiplier: without it, even the best technologies risk remaining isolated pilot projects rather than becoming system-level solutions.

Until 2023, drones and related components imported into Ukraine were subject to customs duties. Through sustained advocacy—together with our activist Liuba Shypovych and partner organizations—we achieved legislative changes that removed import taxes on drones, EW and ELINT systems, and related components, recognizing them as critically essential for frontline operations.

Q: What is the scale of your operations?

A: In 2025, the U.S. arm of Dignitas raised $2.3 million. In Ukraine, the amount raised was roughly twice as much. Funds raised in the United States are directed straight into program implementation in Ukraine.

In the U.S., we have around 20 volunteers—I also work on a volunteer basis. In Ukraine, the team numbers more than 100, and we also cooperate with partners in several other countries.

Q: Who are your donors in the United States?

A: The overwhelming majority of our donors are private individuals, not institutions. Roughly half have Ukrainian surnames, although I don’t track donors’ ethnic backgrounds. The largest donor base is in New York, followed by California, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania.

This is the Ukrainian diaspora—people who may have lived in the U.S. for decades, but who remain deeply connected to Ukraine and clearly understand what is at stake.

At the same time, we are gradually seeing growing interest from non-Ukrainian Americans, particularly those with backgrounds in technology, defense, and cybersecurity. When we explain how modern warfare actually works—how drones, electronic warfare, and rapid innovation shape outcomes on the battlefield—it resonates strongly. For many of them, supporting Ukraine is not only a moral choice, but also an investment in the future of security and military technology.

Q: Are there other organizations in the U.S. engaged in similar activities?

A: I’m not aware of any organizations that do exactly what we do. There are groups that also support the Ukrainian militar, United Help Ukraine among them. We have cooperated with them, including on drone procurement.

Q: You also work with veterans and children. What do these programs involve?

A: Everything we do in these areas is technology-driven. Our veterans’ program, “Litai” (Fly), focuses on rehabilitation through technology. We train veterans in drone operation, engineering, and electronics assembly/soldering. This has both a therapeutic effect and clear employment potential.

Some participants return to military service; others go on to work for drone manufacturers. Ukraine, incidentally, actively encourages the employment of veterans. Among them are people with severe injuries—even amputations—who, given sufficient motivation, can become instructors.

The children’s track targets ages 8 to 17. We run classes in drone assembly and engineering and organize competitions. It’s a long-term investment—in skills, resilience, and the country’s technological future.

THE TECHNOLOGICAL WEAPONS CYCLE HAS SHRUNK DRAMATICALLY

Q: Overall, how would you assess the role of drones in Russia’s current war against Ukraine?

A: Without drones, Ukraine would not have been able to reach its current level of defense. The war has become fundamentally technological. Ukrainian soldiers have demonstrated extraordinary bravery, but, in my view, it is technology that has shifted the course of the war in Ukraine’s favor.

Unfortunately, Russia is learning as well.

Q: Who produces more drones—Ukraine or Russia?

A: It’s difficult to say with certainty. Russia has a structural advantage in the form of China: Chinese companies sell to whoever pays. In addition, a shared border significantly simplifies supply chains.

Q: What types of drones does Russia mainly use—Chinese, Iranian, or domestically produced?

A: They absorb technologies very quickly. They use Chinese and Iranian systems, and in some cases go even further—purchasing entire factories in China, relocating them to Russia, and scaling up production domestically in order to reduce dependence on external suppliers.

They steal technologies from us, reverse engineer and put them into production. Of course, there is corruption and inefficiency, but there is also a lot of money.

We, in turn, also try to appropriate technologies from them—this is where cybersecurity and cyber-intelligence become critically important.

Ukraine has its own strengths and weaknesses. The key strength is the extraordinary diversity of people working on technological challenges. The main weakness is that companies often lack sufficient funding to move a project from a basic prototype to scaled industrial production. Russia has less diversity, but far more centralized focus: once a task is set, it gets executed.

Q:  At one point, Turkish Bayraktars were seen as revolutionary. Where are they now?

A: They have largely phased out. This illustrates just how rapidly technologies evolve during wartime. In the first six months—perhaps until the end of 2022—they were highly effective, but over time they lost much of their impact. Russia learned how to counter them, as it did with many other weapons systems.

The technological renewal cycle of weapons has become extremely short. Whereas war was once associated with tanks, aircraft, and helicopters, today small, cheap, and mass-produced systems can destroy extremely expensive equipment. A $10 million tank can be neutralized by a $500 drone. The cost asymmetry is enormous.

Q: What types of drones exist in modern warfare?

A: Aerial, ground, maritime—and now even subterranean systems. Essentially, anything that can be controlled remotely.

Artificial intelligence-driven solutions are actively being tested as well: autonomous navigation, target acquisition, autonomy of operation.

Q: And drone swarms?

A: Drone swarms are the future. There are no fully scalable, battlefield-ready solutions yet solutions yet, but manufacturers are working on this very intensively.

Q:  What about functional categories?

A: There are reconnaissance drones, bombers, kamikaze systems, and logistics platforms. Ground robotic systems are often deployed specifically for logistics: resupplying positions, evacuating wounded or fallen personnel. This is critical, because the so-called kill zone at the front can now extend up to 20 kilometers.

Q: How do you view the appointment of Mykhailo Fedorov as Minister of Defense in this context?

A: I see it as a very positive development. In fact, this is not only about drones. It is about a broader technological shift in defense thinking—the search for solutions that allow Ukraine to prevail not only kinetically, but also through asymmetric and non-kinetic means.

Russia understands this very well. That is why it invests heavily in disinformation, attempts to fracture Ukrainian society, NATO, and American public opinion. Chaos is their natural operating environment.

Q: There are frequent reports of Russian reconnaissance drones flying over Ukrainian cities, followed by strikes. Are they really that difficult to shoot down?

A: They are being shot down, but Russia deployes them en masse. Many of these drones are built, quite literally, from improvised materials—lightweight frames with minimal metal content—which makes them harder to detect with radar.

In some cases, they resemble something like a kite equipped with a camera and a modem, transmitting data via mobile networks. That is precisely why Ukraine sometimes has to jam GPS signals or mobile communications.

DRONES HAVE OPENED PANDORA’S BOX

Q:  Do you work with Ukrainian manufacturers?

A: Yes, and this is a matter of principle for us. We prioritize procuring equipment for the military that is produced in Ukraine. This shortens logistics chains, enables faster feedback from the field, and supports the Ukrainian economy.

Q: Do you have long-term partner companies in Ukraine?

A: Yes. We have multiple partners in Kyiv, Lviv, Dnipro, Kharkiv, and Chernihiv. Unfortunately, as you may recall, a Russian strike in Chernihiv followed an information leak and resulted in civilian casualties. That incident underscored the critical importance of operational security. Russian actors are constantly trying to penetrate Ukrainian efforts through intelligence and cyber-intelligence operations.

Q: Are there many companies in Ukraine manufacturing FPV drones now?

A: At the beginning of 2023, there were around fifty such manufacturers. In 2024, that number rose to roughly 250, and it continues to grow. The sector ranges from very small teams of two or three employees to companies with multimillion-dollar turnover. A significant portion of them now receive government contracts.

Previously, procurement was centralized through the Ministry of Defense, which proved highly inefficient. Today, individual brigades are able to procure equipment directly from suppliers. They have their own budgets and can acquire drones tailored to specific operational environments they face. For example, units operating in the Zaporizhzhia sector require different types of drones than those deployed in Sumy or Kharkiv regions.

Electronic warfare (EW) systems are also critically important. However, they operate across different frequency ranges, and there is no versatile solution: comprehensive coverage is prohibitively expensive and extremely energy-intensive. As a result, each brigade determines which EW systems best meet its operational needs.

Q: There have been reports of abuses in this sector—kickbacks, corruption. To what extent does this interfere with your work?

A: Wherever there are people, there will always be those who try to to profit unfairly. But environment shapes behavior. For me, it is far more important to build an ecosystem of motivated, mission-driven people than to remain constantly fixated on corruption.

Q: Can the United States learn anything from Ukraine in the production and deployment of drones?

A: Yes, quite a lot. This is already of interest to local police departments, the FBI, and the military. They understand that they are lagging behind in this domain.

Drones have effectively opened a Pandora’s box, and there is no way to close it again.

Q: We have mostly discussed the use of drones on the battlefield, but are they also needed at the home front?

A: Absolutely. We have recently launched a training program for Volunteer Territorial Defense Formations focused on intercepting Shahed-type drones.

This effort involves civilians who defend their communities alongside the Territorial Defense Forces. They can be on duty for several days a month, intercepting drones while receiving funding from local businesses. In effect, this is a model of community-based or “private” air defense.

Q: Can drones fully replace human beings in warfare?

A: No, not entirely. Drones still need to be designed, maintained, repaired, and operated. Someone has to serve as an engineer, an operator, or a technician. Human beings remain at the center of decision-making at all times.

Volodymyr Ilchenko, New York

Photos via Author and Dmytro Kavun