Incidents with drones on NATO territory are increasing. Last Thursday night and over the weekend, fighter jets shot down suspicious drones over Latvia and Romania. Two weeks earlier, a drone with explosives was found at Leipzig airport.
Last September, when there were also drone incidents in Europe, it became clear that cheaper and more efficient ways had to be found to combat drones than using fighter jets. The actions of last weekend made it clear that this has not yet been achieved. Why is it so difficult to develop cheap and efficient drone defense?
New weapons system
It is difficult for NATO to defend itself well against drones because it concerns a new weapons system, says Patrick Bolder, defense expert at the The Hague Centre for Strategic Studies (HCSS). "There are many different drones with different functions and sizes. For example, small drones can fly unnoticed by radar systems. NATO has little experience with these weapons."
In a short time, drones have become the main weapons on the battlefield in Ukraine. "They have actually taken over the role of traditional artillery," says Bolder. Drones are popular because of their accuracy and multi-functionality. They are used for reconnaissance, transport, and as attack weapons where the operator can watch via a video connection.
"In addition, they play a major role in psychological warfare," explains the defense expert. "Soldiers on the battlefield hear the buzzing of the drone but do not know exactly when it will strike. That creates a huge threat."
Acceleration of innovation needed
The drone incidents last September woke up the NATO countries. For example, defense allocated 1 to 2.5 billion euros last year for anti-drone measures, and during the NATO summit in Ankara in July it appeared that NATO countries jointly invest 35 billion euros in anti-drone technologies. By the end of 2027, five times as many drone pilots must be trained to operate interception drones.
Spending money and making plans is not enough. Innovation must be accelerated, says Bolder. "Defense organizations are cumbersome, decisions often take a very long time." Meanwhile, developments in attack drones are rapidly succeeding each other due to the war in Ukraine.
"Ukraine and Russia try to outdo each other by developing increasingly advanced drones that can evade the opponent's interception attempts. Often this is done with cheap drones."
NATO is lagging behind in this development and still shoots down relatively cheap drones, costing several thousand to tens of thousands of euros, with weapons that cost millions. "This cost structure is unsustainable; NATO must ensure it innovates quickly and leads in developments." According to Bolder, radar systems must be developed that can detect drones at different altitudes and cheaper counter-weapons, such as interception drones.
"This must happen not only at the borders but also around our critical infrastructure such as airports," thinks Patrick Bolder. "The recent incident at Leipzig showed that drones do not only take off from Russia but also from NATO territory."
EU and NATO correspondent Kysia Hekster:
"There is a lot of money and a lot is being done to accelerate drone production, but NATO allies are starting from a disadvantage. And although they can learn a lot from Ukraine, it takes a long time to catch up with such a disadvantage; that awareness certainly exists.
NATO members also watch with dismay as Russia continues drone actions to test how the alliance reacts. The alliance does not want to be provoked and above all wants to project that it is not panicking every time a drone flies over NATO territory.
But the concerns are real; just last week in the middle of summer, the 32 ambassadors met to discuss all recent incidents. Afterwards, a statement was issued calling the events "unacceptable and dangerous." The danger is that something really goes wrong one time and that NATO will have to respond in some way to the increased drone threat."
The increase in drone threats coincides with statements by Trump about the military alliance, says Bolder. "NATO provides protection to member states because of the deterrence the alliance projects. If that is questioned by the American president, this deterrence disappears."
Through targeted provocations, sabotage actions, and airspace violations using drones, the Russians try to test how strong the mutual support is among the allies. "It is part of hybrid warfare, just like cyberattacks, which have been ongoing for a long time. The Russians want to know: how far do NATO countries dare to go in their response to Russian provocations?"
Solution lies in Europe
To achieve a cheaper and more efficient defense system, Bolder sees a key role for the European NATO countries, the EU, and Ukraine. "The Ukrainians have the production capacity, knowledge, and experience. The EU must, together with the European NATO countries, allocate money for innovation projects. The Union is perfectly capable of that; the money is there."
This is important at a time when American support for NATO seems less self-evident. Bolder summarizes: "This way we innovate on our own territory and build up knowledge, strengthen the European economy, and become more independent. And no European tax money is sent to the United States in exchange for equipment."