������Ƶ

I remember having a discussion with a security official during the COVID-19 pandemic. We were noticing how the entire travel industry had come to a standstill and how it would take time to recover. He said something bluntly: “In the future, we might only have spacecraft and trains — basically nothing between low Earth orbit and the ground.”

His thought intrigued me, so I asked what he meant. He answered quickly: “The aviation industry is far from being ready for the major security risks drones are going to represent.” So, when I heard last week that Denmark’s airports had been closed as several had reported unauthorized drone activity, I could not help but think of what this expert had mentioned five years ago.

Drones today represent the perfect asymmetric threat to global security. They cost little to purchase — significantly less than the cost of destroying them. This was very clear as Poland announced last month it had shot down at least three Russian drones, with the support of other NATO aircraft, in its airspace. Prime Minister Donald Tusk said that, during the incident, Poland recorded 19 drone incursions, with some flying deep enough into its territory to temporarily close four airports, including Warsaw’s main hub, Chopin.

A $1,000 drone required a $100 million aircraft and missiles in response and cost millions more in closures and economic losses. Thankfully, no lives were lost during these incidents. But they show there is indeed a lack of readiness for this threat.

A $1,000 drone required a $100 million aircraft and missiles in response and cost millions more in economic losses

Khaled Abou Zahr

The European answer came fast, as European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen this week announced, alongside NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, a commitment to supply drones to Ukraine worth €2 billion ($2.35 billion). Kyiv, which has shown its capacity to develop functional unmanned aerial systems for little cost, will boost its battlefield capacity with this support. In exchange, the EU will advance its own technology.

There is no doubt that drones have become a major risk in all fields. Following this announcement, EU leaders gathered in Copenhagen under pressure to boost European defense. And it is no surprise that several member states have started pushing plans for a multilayered “drone wall” to quickly detect, track and destroy hostile drones.

Although Denmark did not find any evidence of Russian involvement, these steps are necessary to maintain security in the air. Threats and incidents are not waiting for the outcome of this meeting. Drones have also been witnessed in the past week over the north of Germany and flights have been delayed at Vilnius Airport in Lithuania and at Oslo Airport in Norway because of drone activity.

The bigger risk from this threat is that even moderately financed nonstate actors can conduct such terror activities. It is, in a way, a similar disruption to the way cyberattacks are conducted. So, it was interesting to note that, around the same time as the drone incursions, the EU’s cybersecurity agency, ENISA, stated that criminals had used ransomware to cause chaos in airports around the world by disrupting their automatic check-in and boarding software. ENISA stated that malicious software was used to scramble the systems, disrupting flights in London, Brussels and elsewhere.

No matter if it was Russia or any other actor behind the drone incidents, Europeans have to act as one

Khaled Abou Zahr

The reality is that any “drone wall” needs to use counter-drone technologies that cost thousands, not millions, or they will be impossible to apply if a large number of drones are launched. There are many such technologies and several will need to be used in a hybrid manner. They include, to name a few, radiofrequency jammers, navigation “spoofing” systems, directed-energy lasers, high-power microwave emitters, capture systems, both ground and aerial, electronic detection and disruption, optical tracking, and autonomous interceptor drones. The key question is: what is the level of acceptable risk?

Europe has more than 500 commercial airports. This means it is necessary to build massive infrastructure to protect the entire aviation industry. We also need to note that, while consumer drones can fly up to 1,000 meters and threaten airports, professional or industrial drones can fly up to 5,000 meters and so, in the hands of a trained group, could present a risk to planes anywhere within their radius. Of course, there are radar networks, satellite surveillance and other systems, followed by missile defense systems. But they are not adapted to this new type of hybrid, asymmetric threat.

No matter if it was Russia or any other actor behind the drone incidents, Europeans have to act as one. They need to coordinate at the highest level and be prepared for synchronized attacks that could include drones and cyber threats. The EU cannot and should not delay by over-discussing the establishment of a regulatory framework. This needs to be settled swiftly to focus on what matters, such as developing a powerful and efficient intelligence-sharing system. Indeed, intelligence is the best way to curtail the risk before the drones are even in the sky by taking strong preemptive actions.

The threat the security official shared with me of a future of only spacecraft and trains is now in danger of becoming reality. And the level of acceptable risk when it comes to aviation and human lives needs to be zero. Drones are, without doubt, posing a real challenge to peace and global security — and this goes beyond airports.

• Khaled Abou Zahr is the founder of SpaceQuest Ventures, a space-focused investment platform. He is CEO of EurabiaMedia and editor of Al-Watan Al-Arabi