NATO official: Russia’s use of electronic warfare outpaces alliance capabilities

NATO must make drastic changes to its electronic warfare (EW) capabilities if the alliance wants to win a future war against Russia, as reliance on US systems remains in doubt, a senior alliance official has warned.

Speaking at the Association of Old Crows Europe trade show in Rome, Bas Nieuwenhuijse, who leads NATO’s maritime electronic warfare group, said the alliance must rethink how it uses technology in the electromagnetic environment — the invisible battlefield where radio signals, radar, and GPS operate, Caliber.Az reports citing Breaking Defence. 

“I think we as NATO can accomplish this [victory], but it will take a paradigm shift in how we operate within [the] EME [Electromagnetic Environment] and broadly EW capabilities in the maritime environment,” he said. 

One of the biggest problems, he explained, is that NATO depends too much on the United States for these technologies. 

“That’s a luxury we may no longer have,” Nieuwenhuijse said.

His warning comes as doubts grow over the US’s future support for NATO, especially after President Donald Trump questioned whether the US should defend allies that don’t spend enough on defence. European officials are also worried that the US could block updates for key military equipment like the F-35 stealth fighter.

Still, Nieuwenhuijse said this is about more than politics. He described a realistic situation where NATO must stop a wave of Russian cruise missiles launched from submarines during an attack on the Baltic states. These missiles fly so fast that using regular weapons to shoot them down may not work in time.

Imagine “they [sizzlers] pop up over the radar horizon [at] 30 kilometres [range]. At Mach 2.9 it takes 30 seconds” for a direct hit, he said. “Try to keep those all [neutralized through] hard kill. I challenge you to try it. So EW comes into play within those 30 seconds. We must detect the threat, classify the threat, predict the track, prioritize, then order your countermeasure.”

Electronic warfare can jam or confuse enemy systems, helping to stop or redirect missiles. But NATO hasn’t focused much on developing these tools over the past 30 years because its missions were mostly peacekeeping in safer areas.

Russia’s widespread use of EW systems in Ukraine far surpasses the way in which NATO has approached electronic warfare. Nieuwenhuijse said Russia has shown in its war against Ukraine that it is far ahead in this field. Russian forces have been able to jam GPS signals, locate enemy forces using their radio signals, and even launch psychological attacks on Ukrainian citizens using information warfare.

“They’ve proven they can block or control the electromagnetic environment,” he said. “We haven’t kept up.”

NATO is now working to improve, with the maritime EW group developing a plan to help the alliance gain the upper hand in this type of warfare. That plan will be part of NATO’s updated military goals, expected to be released this summer.

Still, Nieuwenhuijse admitted the maritime group is “playing catch-up” compared to more advanced parts of NATO, like the air force’s electronic warfare units.

The capability targets are fundamental to making improvements covering individual member force commitments and interoperability.

By Sabina Mammadli