ETK Introduction: These youtube videos and articles demonstrate that Syria is now an Electronic Warfare Test Zone. However, they fail to note that, with GOG’S NeW GESSTTTAPO (Global Organized Stalking/Electronic Torture/Mind Control Operations), most of the world is now an Electronic Warfare Test Zone!!!!! We can assume that the testing of electronic weapons on “targeted individuals” is the manner in which the US and other nations are testing the effectiveness of these weapons on personnel. And of course, the military-industrial complex continues to profit mightily (last video).
Electronic Warfare: The Game-Changer
The future warfare will no longer be about bullets and bombs, or dominating land, sea and air. It will be an electronic warfare marked by invisible electromagnetic energy and cyber-attacks dropping drones from the sky, leaving cities in total darkness and disabling entire aircraft carriers at sea. It will be a new world of electromagnetic warfare where enemies will use invisible and often untraceable weapons that can theoretically disable everything from satellites and computers to radar and aircraft. Electromagnetic warfare covers weapons using electromagnetic radiation, which can jam or can even permanently fry electronics.
Electronic warfare is the ability to manipulate the electromagnetic spectrum in order to sense where enemy targets are so that they can be attacked before the enemy starts attack. Modern wars involve less and less contact fighting. The wars are gradually shifting into virtual reality where opponents compete not in fire-power weapons but in effective use of radio electronic warfare that can easily deceive the enemy, blind his radars or guide the fired missiles onto false targets.
Whoever rules the airwaves will be able to keep their networks and sensors working while shutting down those of the enemy. As the world goes wireless, both phones and computers depend increasingly on radio links rather than physical cables. The technology is now available that allows troops to carry high-capability sensors which can pick up cell phones, satellite phones or military HF radios used by rebels or other irregulars.
Electronic magnetic weapons is going to be one of the most critical operational domains in modern warfare. In the same way that smartphones and the Internet are redefining how the world shares, chats, shops, learns and works, the development of electromagnet sensors and networking technologies will enable armies to gain significant new advantages over competitors that fail to keep pace.
In recent years, Russia and China have developed advanced capabilities of Electronic Warfare. When the Americans got engaged in Iraq and Afghanistan, they were taken by surprise when they encountered with radio-controlled improvised explosive device. In Ukraine and Syria, Russian forces are using high-tech equipment to jam drones and block battlefield communications, thus forcing the US to scramble to catch-up. The Ukranian forces, who have been fighting the Russian-backed separatists, have to grapple with formidable Russian electronic capabilities. The electronic war was on display from the start of the Russian incursion into Crimea in 2014. Not long after the Russian electronic war equipment began rolling into the region, the Ukrainian troops began to find that their radios and phones were unusable for hours at a time. Confronting this hard experience, the Ukranians have learned about Russia’s jamming capability and its sophistication in electronic warfare. Russia is also using electronic warfare to cloak its action in Syria from ISIS and NATO. Russia is now providing direct military air support to Syria, and it is using electronic warfare to jam Islamic State’s communications as well as to prevent NATO from detecting what it is up to.
One of the most effective Russian electronic warfare systems is in a shape of a small container which is mounted on the wingtips of the aircraft and makes air-fighters invulnerable to all modern means of defense and enemy fighters. After the crew receives missile attack alerts, the device comes into action and covers the air-fighter with a radio-electronic protective hood, which prevents the missile from reaching the target and makes it deviate from its course.
The Russian advanced technology in electronic warfare has started worrying many Americans as it threatens to disconnect US forces from their real targets. The Americans now realize that during the 25-year lull since the end of the Cold War, their focus had been on counter-insurgency warfare in the Middle East rather than preparing for war against another great power. During the same lull period, the American industries allowed electronics production to be shifted abroad, so that now countries like China can match the US in many digital technologies relevant to war fighting. On the other hand, Russia – which retains a very robust defense industry – has invested heavily on countering American advantages. They watched closely the American war fighting capabilities since the fist Persian Gulf War and have learned lessons from those wars. The Russians discovered that the US forces had the technical know-how to jam the wireless detonators of improvised explosive devices during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. They also found out that the US forces did not have technology to secure their communication links or access to GPS signals.
Having discovered that the strength of US forces rests on connectedness and precision, the Russians have invested a lot in electronic warfare to make the US forces disconnected and make their targets become imprecise. Washington is under pressure to re-invest in electronic and cyber warfare to counter Moscow’s advancements in those fields.
Turkey is organizing an International Electronic warfare and Radar Conference in Ankara this year to address the system and operational concepts for a joint integrated and interoperable Electronic Warfare and Radar capability in the Middle East and examine the challenges of aerial operations which have unfolded over Iraq and Syria. In February of this year, Turkey’s leading defense system producer ASELSAN has handed over its newly developed and locally produced land-based radar electronic system called KORAL to Turkish Air Force. The transportable attack system has the capability to jam, deceive and paralyse hostile radars.
Electronic warfare consists of three areas of operations: electronic attack, electronic protection and electronic warfare support. Basically, it aims at neutralizing or destroying enemy without getting too dirty.
The interest in acquiring the skills and technology in electronic warfare is gaining the attention of other nations. Saudi Arabia, which has the 4th largest defense budget in the world, hosted the 4th Electronic Warfare Symposium in November 2015 under the patronage of Prince Mohammed Bin Salman, Second Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Defence. While Saudi Arabia can afford to purchase state-of-the-art systems from the USA and Europe, it is becoming increasingly concerned with an Electronic Warfare threat. The Saudis want their own national Electronic Warfare capability.
Many countries which have piled up their arsenal with conventional weapons will soon find that their military strategies will no longer be relevant in face of electronic warfare.
I. RUSSIA IS ATTACKING U.S. FORCES WITH ELECTRONIC WEAPONS IN SYRIA EVERY DAY, GENERAL SAYS
American forces in Syria are increasingly facing attacks from Russian and Syrian electronic warfare weapons, as Moscow uses the conflict to test its future arsenal.
General Raymond Thomas, head of the U.S. Special Operations Command, said that Syria has become “the most aggressive electronic warfare environment on the planet,” Breaking Defense reported.
Speaking at a geospatial intelligence conference in Florida, Thomas said that Russian and Syrian regime forces “are testing us every day, knocking our communications down, disabling our [EC-130 aircraft].”
The Lockheed Martin EC-130 Compass Call is one of America’s most advanced electronic warfare weapons. Based on the C-130 Hercules, the plane was developed to disrupt enemy communications, radar and command operations. The craft’s presence in Syrian skies gives Russia the chance to test its weapons against the best the U.S. has to offer, whether directly or through its Syrian allies.
An EC-130H Compass Call, a U.S. airborne tactical weapon system, receives maintenance at an undisclosed location in southwest Asia, on August 30, 2017. Russian electronic weapons have been targeting planes over Syria.
JONATHAN HEHNLY/U.S. AIR FORCE
Earlier this month, four anonymous officials told NBC News that Russia has also been regularly targeting smaller U.S. surveillance drones. One of those quoted said Russian operations were having a significant impact on U.S. capabilities. The sophisticated attacks were even successful against encrypted signals and anti-jamming devices, the official said.
In Syria, the Russian military is bringing to bear the lessons learned from the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, which provided invaluable electronic warfare experience. Throughout the fighting in the east of the country, jammers have been used to disrupt Ukrainian communications and disable surveillance drones. Even Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe drones monitoring the area were affected, grounded by a combination of Russian conventional and electronic weapons.
Keep Up With This Story And More By Subscribing Now
A Ukrainian serviceman launches a surveillance drone near the eastern Ukrainian city of Lysychansk, on March 24, 2015. Russian electronic warfare systems have been used to take down Ukrainian drones and disrupt communications.
PETRO ZADOROZHNYY/AFP/GETTY IMAGES
According to a 2017 report by Roger McDermott of the Estonia-based International Centre for Defence and Security, Moscow invested heavily in electronic warfare in response to NATO’s dominance in conventional weaponry. The operations in Ukraine and Syria have allowed the Russian military to use electronic weapons in combat scenarios, and electronic warfare systems and units have now been introduced at every level of the Russian military.
Initially such weapons were used to protect Russian troops and bases. McDermott said their use had almost certainly reduced personnel and material losses. In January, Moscow displayed several drones it said were launched by militants and shot down near its Khmeimim air base in Syria, through a combination of electronic jamming and intercepting missiles.
Electronic attacks are politically more acceptable than conventional ones; knocking out a spy plane’s jamming systems does not carry the same risk as shooting it down with a missile. Moscow—alongside the other powers fighting in Syria—has been expanding its electronic footprint, gathering information on its own abilities and the responses of its adversaries. With the battlefields of Syria busier than ever, the war offers valuable testing ground for the weapons of tomorrow.
II. Russian military jamming in Syria is seriously affecting US drones
Apr. 10, 2018, 6:26 PM 8,445
A New Jersey National Guard RQ-7 Shadow unmanned aerial vehicle launches during day two of Operation Morning Coffee, June 17, 2015 US Air National Guard
Russia has reportedly deployed electronic warfare equipment that is successfully jamming small US military surveillance drones.
Department of Defense officials speaking to NBC News did not confirm if they lost any of the drones to crashes.
One official did say that the jamming is having an operational impact on military operations in Syria.
Russian electronic warfare tactics have been observed in past war zones like Ukraine and have recently shown signs of getting more advanced.
The Russian military has deployed jamming tactics against US drones that have affected the US military’s ability to operate in the region, NBC News reports.
US officials told NBC News that the Russian military has been jamming smaller US drones. The jamming is focused on the GPS systems of drones, which can result in things like the operators not knowing where the drone currently is, to more extreme results like crashes.
Department of Defense officials speaking to NBC News did not confirm if they lost any of the drones to crashes as a result of the jamming, but one official did say that the jamming is having an operational impact on military operations in Syria.
The drones that have been targeted are smaller surveillance drones, and not the larger ones with strike capability like the MQ-1 Predator or the MQ-9 Reaper, according to NBC News. US military drones are encrypted and are supposed to have defenses against electronic counter measures, suggesting that Russian capabilities are more advanced than previously thought.
President Donald Trump is debating how the US will respond to Saturday’s alleged chemical weapons attack in the Syrian city of Douma.
Russian electronic warfare capability has long been observed by the West, especially since Russia annexed Crimea and supported the continuation of a war in Ukraine’s eastern Donbas region.
Russian jamming equipment has been documented on the frontline on numerous occasions, and other elements of their electronic warfare capabilities have also been recorded.
The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, an international security organization that has been monitoring the conflict in Ukraine, has also reported that the drones they use to monitor the frontline have been jammed multiple times.
Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges, then the commanding general for US Army Europe, said in in 2016 that he has seen Russian “electronic warfare capability at a tactical level that we absolutely don’t have.”
Russia’s ally in Syria, Iran, also reportedly has hacking capabilities. In 2011 it claimed that it hacked into a US RQ-170 Sentinel and forced it to land after it gained access to its GPS.
III. Russian Operations, Exercises Have Better Integrated Electronic Warfare
By: John Grady
January 30, 2018 12:00 PM
Promotional photos of the Murmansk-BN system. Sputnik Photo
Russia has integrated electronic warfare and offensive and defensive electromagnetic spectrum capabilities into its operations and strategies, in a way not seen from NATO forces in Europe, a leading expert on the Kremlin’s armed forces said Monday.
Roger McDermott, a senior research fellow in war studies at King’s College London, said “the Russians learn by doing” and that they are taking lessons learned in Syria and Ukraine to heart. Citing their recent response to a drone swarm attack on a Russian air base and naval facility in Syria, he said, “all were brought down” by conventional air defense or jamming using electronic warfare tools.
In Ukraine, small electronic warfare units have previously crossed the border to jam the Kiev government’s communications or enhance the fire control of the separatists’ artillery, before pulling back to their own territory shortly after, McDermott said while speaking at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C.
For the Kremlin, “there is an EMS [electro-magnetic spectrum] narrative” in southeastern Ukraine military operations. “They are gaining operational experience.”
In his recent report on electronic warfare, McDermott noted that Moscow had already begun the integration of its electronic warfare capabilities with conventional military hardware and software when it seized Crimea and Ukraine in 2014. Already in place in each motorized rifle brigade was an EW unit of 150 to 180 non-conscript soldiers engaged in planning and executing missions. In addition, each of the country’s five military districts had an EW element assigned to their headquarters, as do each of the armed forces.
McDermott said the United States and NATO do not have their armed forces organized in that way.
The idea, he said, is to integrate C4ISR [command, control, communications, computers and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance], A2/AD [anti-access/area denial], space, cyber and electronic warfare for offensive and defensive military effect. The Russian military has been at this reform in strategic thinking since 2008.
“What [President Vladimir] Putin did, he gave stability to the Russian armed forces” in funding, and has done so “consistently for the last few years.” This has allowed the armed forces to move promising projects out of research and development “to get these systems up and running.” He specifically mentioned an anti-communications satellite project that includes a strike system as one of the outgrowths of steady financing from the Kremlin.
Michael Kofman, a senior research scientist at CNA who also spoke at the CSIS event, said the Russians are “also investing in capacity and how they can spread it across the force” when it comes to EW, as well as harnessing new capability in force development, thought and future warfare strategy.
A screenshot from a Russian propaganda video of a Black Sea incident between a Su-24 Fencer and USS Donald Cook (DDG-74).
McDermott said the Russians are not 10-feet tall in this arena. He used the buzzing of destroyer USS Donald Cook (DDG-75) by a Sukhoi-24 in the Black Sea in 2014 as an example of exaggerating Russian prowess. Initial news accounts said that, not only did the aircraft come dangerously close to the vessel, but through a new electronic warfare system the Su-24 knocked out the destroyer’s radars and left its Aegis system inoperable.
“That’s mythology that built up,” he said.
Two years later, when the facts became much clearer, the Russian company that builds the electronic warfare system in question said it had never been mounted on a Su-24.
In the same light, McDermott said large military Russian exercises, the Zapad series, shouldn’t be viewed as training for an invasion of the Baltic nations or Poland; instead, it should be seen as what the Russian military would do in the event of NATO meddling in Belarus.
An undated photo of Russian President Vladimir Putin Russian Presidential Press and Information Office Photo
“When they look, they see an unpredictable actor [in NATO with] this appetite to intervene” outside of its area, McDermott said. The Zapad exercises are training to respond to that challenge from the West across the electromagnetic spectrum.
The question for Russian military planners, Kofman said, becomes “how do you achieve superiority” in situations like that. The answer: the Russians are working on asymmetric responses to expected challenges, McDermott added.
Later in the event, McDermott noted that NATO does not conduct any training on that scale, nor does it routinely include EW in its exercises.
“On its periphery, Russia has escalation dominance,” he said.