Electronic War in IAF Strike in Syria

The NY Times position is that the Israel strike hit a Syrian nuclear facility that was being built with North Korean assistance. The project was reportedly in an early phase of construction and was discovered earlier this year by satellite photographs.

To be honest, I've lost interest in what exactly Israel hit, my interest has shifted to how they did it. From Ares:

U.S. aerospace industry and retired military officials indicated today that a technology like the U.S.-developed “Suter” airborne network attack system developed by BAE Systems and integrated into U.S. unmanned aircraft by L-3 Communications was used by the Israelis. The system has been used or at least tested operationally in Iraq and Afghanistan over the last year.

The technology allows users to invade communications networks, see what enemy sensors see and even take over as systems administrator so sensors can be manipulated into positions so that approaching aircraft can’t be seen, they say. The process involves locating enemy emitters with great precision and then directing data streams into them that can include false targets and misleading messages algorithms that allow a number of activities including control.

A Kuwaiti newspaper wrote that "Russian experts are studying why the two state-of-the art Russian-built radar systems in Syria did not detect the Israeli jets entering Syrian territory. Iran reportedly has asked the same question, since it is buying the same systems and might have paid for the Syrian acquisitions."

For those who may recall, "Project Suter" first showed up in the black toolbox prior to Operation Iraqi Freedom when a mysterious item popped up in the public record. Specifically, extra funding was added to the FY02 budget to modify the capabilities of the US Air Force EC-130H Compass Call in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. Other than the bit disclosed in the budget, the only other readily available source of information on Project Suter is from AviationWeek.

Senior Suter is a Big Safari-managed special access program. Big Safari itself is a shadowy Air Force unit that has developed small numbers of specialized reconnaissance systems, including drones, in what are often classified programs. The Suter technology was developed during the last several years by BAE Systems and involves invading enemy communications networks and computer systems, particularly those associated with integrated air defense systems (AW&ST Aug. 16, 2004, p. 24; Nov. 4, 2002, p. 30). Suter 1 allowed U.S. operators to monitor what enemy radars could see. The capability enables U.S. forces to assess the effectiveness of their stealth systems or terrain-masking tactics. Suter 2 permits U.S. operators to take control of enemy networks as system managers and actually manipulate the sensors, steering them away from penetrating U.S. aircraft. Suter 3 was tested last summer to add the ability to invade the links to time-critical targets, such as battlefield ballistic missile launchers or mobile surface-to-air missile launchers. Aircraft involved in the Suter programs include the EC-130 Compass Call, RC-135 Rivet Joint and F-16CJ strike aircraft specialized for suppression of enemy air defenses.

Since WWII there has been a constant shift in balance tilting between radar systems and stealth. As stealth technology improved into the 1990s, more advanced radar systems were invented to counterbalance back into the favor of detection. It is said the F-22A currently holds the balance in favor of stealth, but it is also said that as the Joint Strike Fighter comes online in numbers worldwide, radar systems will have caught up to sophistication to detect it.

That may be true, but I am not sure it will matter. The advancement of electronic warfare systems appears to be on a wider curve than either radar systems or stealth, and the future points to electronic warfare. There is a school of thought that believes lasers will never be able to replace ballistics in weaponry because lasers are electronic systems that will be subjected to advanced electronic countermeasures. I tend to agree with this, for the long term anyway, because the ability to overload electronics is getting easier as greater power sources become available to mobile platforms, like ships and aircraft.

There has been a lot of speculation regarding how "Suter" works. Some of that speculation has been wrong. Cited in a number of places, the YES satellite TV network has been down since Israel conducted its air strike. There has been speculation that it is a side effect of the electronic warfare capabilities that Israel deployed. It turns out, maybe not.

Electronic disturbances that have played havoc with the YES satellite television company's broadcasts in the past month were caused by powerful radar equipment deployed onboard a Dutch Navy vessel off the Lebanese coast, The Jerusalem Post has established. The disturbances took the form of time delays on soundtracks as well as distorted and fragmented pictures during broadcasts.

Sources close to YES say that the disturbances, which have caused the company significant financial harm, were caused by an extremely powerful radar system, exponentially stronger than the signal beamed to subscribers' home dishes.

The radar was deployed by a UNIFIL vessel, possibly the Dutch vessel HNLMS De Ruyter, an air defense frigate, off the coast of Lebanon. Observers and subscribers are calling on YES to return the monthly fees for YES subscription over the time of the disturbances. Should YES return one month's fee to every subscriber affected, the damages could potentially add up to NIS 100 million.

OK, so it isn't intentional, but consider for a minute that Thales had no idea the radar system of the HNLMS De Ruyter (F 804) would have this kind of side effect. It raises the questions what other nasty tricks can the Thales APAR system do? The ability for a warship to project jamming capability from satellite communication over an area the size of northern Israel, and one would assume Lebanon as well, sounds like capability I'd be interested in. After all, if you integrate the capabilities as described by "Suter" into a warship that can project signals over large areas of land, conceivably you can remove the entire coastal defensive network of a nation like Iran with a relatively small number of ships without firing a shot.

Noteworthy, if you bring up Google Earth, you can measure the approximate distance between the YES subscribers and a reasonable guess for the location of the HNLMS De Ruyter (F 804) which would not be off Israel, rather off Lebanon. Noteworthy, because it is about the same distance between Taiwan and China. Hmm...