Electronic warfare (EW) has quietly become the decisive battleground of modern conflicts. By manipulating the electromagnetic spectrum, nations can blind radars, jam communications, and cripple enemy systems without firing a shot. From drone swarms to cyber intrusions, EW now rivals conventional firepower, forcing militaries worldwide to rethink strategy, resilience, and survival in this invisible domain of war.
AIR MARSHAL ANIL KHOSLA (R)
FORMER VICE CHIEF OF IAF | FOR NEWS ANALYTICS
a 5 mins read.
Electronic warfare (EW) encompasses all strategies and technologies used to exploit the electromagnetic spectrum, including radio waves, microwaves, infrared, visible light, ultraviolet light and X-rays. The spectrum is an integral part of various military operations and serves as the backbone for communication, navigation and targeting.
Contemporary combat is not just about deploying and using weapons; it is also about disrupting communications, radars and navigation systems. EW works quietly in the background, manipulating the invisible waves that are essential to modern warfare. It represents the clash of invisible forces that can determine the outcome of conflicts.
EW tactics have evolved from niche techniques to core elements of military strategy. Their significance has increased alongside technological advancements and the growing availability of affordable tools, making engagement in spectrum warfare more feasible. EW has rapidly emerged as a crucial yet often underestimated element of contemporary warfare. This shift has led militaries to rethink their electronic strategies.
ELECTRONIC WARFARE
Electronic warfare aims to deny the enemy the use of the electromagnetic spectrum, while ensuring that friendly forces can operate freely within it. EW includes proactive actions, such as jamming, deceiving and electromagnetic attacks. It also includes protective measures, such as electronic shielding and countermeasures. EW can be carried out from the air, land, sea or space, using both manned and unmanned systems. EW is built on three main pillars.
Electronic Attack or ECM: Electronic attack techniques seek to disrupt, deceive or destroy the enemy’s electronic systems. For instance, high-power microwave systems can render electronics inoperable from a distance, effectively disabling drones or missiles. Electronic jamming is carried out by emitting radio frequency signals to saturate enemy receivers and hinder or prevent their ability to receive or transmit information. Spoofing involves sending false signals to the enemy to confuse or deceive their electronic systems.- Electronic Protection or ECCM: EP/ECCM refers to actions taken to protect personnel, facilities, equipment or weapon systems from any effect of the use of the electromagnetic spectrum by either side. EP employs techniques such as encryption, frequency hopping or anti-jamming technologies. Modern EP uses adaptive algorithms that automatically adjust frequencies to minimise interference.
- Electronic Support Measures (ESM): ESM refers to actions taken to search for, intercept, identify and locate sources of intentional or unintentional electromagnetic energy. This pillar often feeds into broader intelligence operations, enabling predictive strikes. The primary technique is Signals Intelligence (SIGINT), a form of information gathering that involves intercepting signals.
TERRESTRIAL AND AIRBORNE EW
EW capabilities are traditionally categorised into two distinct categories: terrestrial and airborne. Each has its respective advantages and disadvantages, making it imperative for militaries to use both. Ground EW capabilities were traditionally used to intercept and jam enemy radio and radar signals. Terrestrial EW sensors and jammers have their limitations; variance in the terrain in which they operate hinders their effects. Airborne EW is primarily employed to intercept, decrypt and disrupt communications, radars and other command and control (C2) systems over large areas. However, these capabilities are limited by aircraft endurance. Modern military operations also rely on satellite-based EW capabilities, including broad area surveillance, early warning, communications and C2.
Nagorno-Karabakh showcased EW’s strengths and limits: Armenian systems disrupted Azerbaijani drones, yet swarming strikes overwhelmed defences, exposing vulnerabilities and underscoring the urgent need for integrated counter-drone strategies.
EFFECTS
On a tactical level, EW can degrade the enemy’s situational awareness by disrupting their communications. Deception techniques, such as inserting false data into sensors or communications systems, can mislead enemy forces. Attacks against airborne, ground-based and space-based enemy sensors can blind air defences and delay decision cycles, creating windows for kinetic strikes. The integration of AI has made these operations quicker and more accurate, affecting the decision-making cycle.
EW doctrines adopted by global powers vary due to their differing goals and priorities. NATO focuses on integrated and interoperable EW systems, reflecting its philosophy of collective security. Chinese doctrine advocates achieving information dominance by leveraging EW in a networked environment. Russia employs an EW strategy of strategic flexibility by integrating EW with hybrid warfare. These divergent methods highlight EW’s role as a force multiplier tailored to respective geopolitical contexts.
The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict highlighted the critical role of EW in modern warfare. Azerbaijan attempted to overwhelm Armenian defences with precision strikes using Turkish Bayraktar TB2 drones. Armenia countered them with Russian Polye-21 EW systems, disrupting Azerbaijani drone signals and C2 for several days. However, drone swarms eventually saturated the defences. The conflict exposed EW’s vulnerability to massed aerial attacks and underscored the need for integrated EW counter-drone systems.
Syria has been described as the “most aggressive EW environment on Earth.” Russian forces jammed U.S. and NATO communications, disrupting operations. In 2020, Turkey’s Koral EW system neutralised Syrian air defences, blinding their radars and enabling drone incursions. Pro-government “electronic armies” employed cyber-EW hybrids to target opposition networks. The conflict highlighted EW’s dual-use in hybrid warfare.
The Russia-Ukraine war represents EW’s maturation in peer-level conflict. Russia deployed extensive EW systems, including jammers and aerial decoys, to disrupt Ukrainian and NATO surveillance radars. Ukraine captured some of these assets for allied analysis and countermeasure development. Russian EW systems have reportedly caused significant Ukrainian drone losses, primarily through GPS scrambling and radio-control jamming. Meanwhile, Ukraine’s targeting of Russian EW assets has been prioritised to enable counteroffensives. Both sides have adapted dynamically.
EW’s importance grows as networked systems, commercial satellites, and low-cost technologies expand vulnerabilities. Even smaller actors now wield outsized impact through affordable, disruptive EW attacks.
These wars demonstrate EW’s potential to break asymmetry, where superior electromagnetic spectrum control increases the effectiveness of kinetic strikes. Future forces must prioritise resilient, AI-augmented EW systems to dominate this invisible battlefield.
FUTURE TRAJECTORY
Trends: Three trends have amplified EW’s importance. First, systems (military and civilian) are far more networked. Precision-guided munitions, networked sensors and satellite-enabled navigation make modern systems efficient but also vulnerable. Second, the commercial space and telecom sectors have proliferated capabilities, including small satellites and broadband networks, creating numerous new targets and disruption vectors. Third, inexpensive technologies (software-defined radios, low-cost drones and portable jammers) reduce the cost of effective EW attacks, allowing smaller actors to impose outsized effects.
AI and Automation: AI-driven EW systems can rapidly detect, analyse and jam signals, reducing response times. Machine learning is also used to predict and counter enemy EW tactics.
Miniaturisation: Smaller, less expensive EW systems, such as those on drones, enable even non-state actors to disrupt advanced militaries.
Cyber-EW Convergence: EW increasingly overlaps with cyber warfare, targeting networked systems. For example, hacking into radar systems can complement traditional jamming.
Space as a Battleground: Satellites, critical for communication and navigation, are vulnerable to EW attacks like jamming or spoofing. China and Russia have demonstrated anti-satellite EW capabilities.
Resilience Needs: Militaries are investing in spectrum-agile systems, low-probability-of-intercept communications and redundant networks to counter EW threats.
Emerging technologies are redefining electronic warfare. AI, quantum advances, and cross-domain integration demand resilient, adaptive strategies, making electromagnetic dominance as vital as conventional firepower for battlefield success.
MYRIAD CHALLENGES
Military forces will face myriad challenges in electronic warfare as technologies continue to advance rapidly. Spectrum congestion, cyber intrusions and countermeasure developments will create new threats. Advances in quantum, photonic and space-based technologies will drive EW’s growth. Quantum computing will enable precise navigation without GPS reliance, while post-quantum cryptography will secure communications. By 2030, quantum technology is expected to deliver unbreakable encryption and realistic battlefield simulations. Notable effects of AI, machine learning, offensive cyber capabilities and directed energy weapons will shape EW systems.
Emerging technologies are reshaping EW strategies. The impact of electromagnetic denial or deception will grow stronger as battlefield systems become increasingly automated and sensor-equipped. Militaries must enhance resilience and adaptability in electronic warfare. Investment in AI, quantum technologies and integration across domains—combining EW with cyber and kinetic operations—will be key. Training and doctrines must evolve, making the invisible as critical as the visible. Recent conflicts have underscored that investing in electronic warfare (EW) and spectrum management strategies is as vital as traditional firepower for battlefield success. With technologies such as quantum computing and AI now central to warfare, embracing innovative EW techniques is more important than ever to stay ahead and prepared.
(Air Marshal Anil Khosla (R), Former Vice Chief, Indian Air Force. Researcher & Analyst Distinguished Fellow – USI & CAPS. The views expressed are of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The News Analytics Herald.)
Key Takeaways
- EW harnesses the electromagnetic spectrum to conduct offensive attacks, protective measures, and intelligence operations.
- Recent wars demonstrate EW’s decisive power in disrupting drones, radars, and critical communication networks.
- Major powers adopt distinct EW doctrines, shaped by national security priorities and geopolitical ambitions.
- AI, quantum advances, cyber-EW convergence, and space warfare are transforming future electronic warfare capabilities.
- Resilient, adaptive, AI-enabled EW systems will determine battlefield dominance in the invisible electromagnetic domain.
