In 2018 an event occurred that really deserved more attention. A military parade was being addressed by Nicolás Maduro in Caracas, Venezuela, and two small, explosive-laden drones exploded. The attack was unsuccessful (Maduro survived) but around ten people were injured. The use of targeted drones represented a new phase of terrorism.
We are now a long way from the comparatively primitive efforts of 2018. While Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) have been a staple of militaries for decades (in fact the first attack using mechanical UAVs was at the Siege of Venice in 1849), the miniaturisation and improving technology available on the civilian market means that the threat from the small hobbyist drone is reaching new heights. This is being demonstrated in Ukraine right now. The use of cheap, essentially home-built drones has changed the battlefield. The drone has become to the Ukraine war what the machine gun was to world war one.
It doesn’t take much to do serious damage
I don’t see this remaining the status-quo indefinitely. In Ukraine we are seeing drone and counter-drone technology and tactics develop at breakneck speeds. But why are they not yet a domestic security concern?
In the very recent past we’ve seen assassination attempts on politicians and terror attacks on civilians. Most of these episodes, despite the horror they inflict, are quickly dealt with. The attacker, or attackers, are generally killed or arrested by police or security forces. But with the technology now available to the average hobbyist online for purchase, the prospect is that the terrorist doesn’t need to be anywhere close to his intended target. Ukraine has bought to the fore the utility of the ‘suicide drone’ equipped with small warheads and guided by a pilot using first-person view goggles, which allow them to see what the drone camera sees.
This raises the prospect of making attacks not just on soft targets easier but also the potential for attacks on important locations or personnel. If we consider one of the recent attempts against former President Donald Trump, the 13 July shooting where a gunman clipped the former president’s ear and killed an unfortunate bystander, such an attack would be considerably easier to conduct via drone.
Of course, we should assume that security agencies have considered this possibility and deploy jammers that interfere with the radio frequencies that these devices use in places of risk. But that brings us back to Ukraine. That conflict has been a constant cat-and-mouse game of drone warfare, with both sides displaying ever increasing ingenuity in jamming and counter-jamming techniques.
Plus, now drones are not necessarily operating on radio transmissions. There are models entering the market that are controlled and powered via a wire spool, capable of ranges greater than five kilometres. As there is no radio transmission, these are unjammable.
If we use the previous example of the attempt on Trump, theoretically the would-be assassin no longer needs to get within rifle range of his target. Instead, they could just deposit their cable-fed drone within range of its spool, maybe some convenient rooftop out of sight of the target zone, and then fly it where they want, when they need, all from a nice and safe location far away.
And if you think that’s bad… Drones are now autonomously killing humans. In 2020, a Turkish built Kargu-2 drone, which is essentially a self-guiding flying claymore mine, allegedly hunted down and killed opposition soldiers in Libya. The worrying thing about this, and what it represents, is that you can simply program the weapon to either patrol or go to a location, identify a specific type of target and then destroy it. This sort of technology, and the computer algorithms that allow a drone to identify specific objects, is basically now available to any high-end hobbyist.
Modern satellite links are causing problems too, Elon Musk’s Starlink system has revolutionised communication in much of the world, allowing communities with no internet access to enjoy high-speed access to the internet. Unfortunately, it also makes for an excellent guidance system for drones, as has been demonstrated by both Russia and Ukraine. This means that it is entirely possible for an assassin or terrorist to conduct a guided attack from anywhere on the planet.
My point is that it doesn’t take much to do serious damage. On 4 April, one of the forces fighting against the military junta in Myanmar launched an attack against the army’s main headquarters in the capital, Naypyitaw. The attack didn’t destroy the facility, but damage was inflicted it rattled the junta. They realised they were never safe from attack.
These drones were made in jungle camps. Their guidance was primitive and cheap, made from off-the-shelf components found in hobby shops. They delivered ordnance into one of the most protected cities on the planet. Imagine what the folks who built these are going to be able to build in five years? That scenario is one that security organisations would do well to consider.
Comments