Adapting to the Spectrum: Operating in the EMS Domain in the European Theater

Air University Press | Ryan Mendenhall, Melissa Crenshaw, Anthony Mafnas, William Dean Long

United States Air Force and Marine Corps officers Maj Ryan Mendenhall, Maj Melissa Crenshaw, Maj Anthony Mafnas, and Maj William Dean Long published Wright Flyer Paper 100 through Air University Press on September 2, 2026. The research paper analyzes military operations within the electromagnetic spectrum (EMS) across the European theater.

Modern theater commanders face intense electromagnetic warfare, spectrum congestion, and sophisticated peer electronic attack capabilities. Electronic warfare is now vital. Joint and Allied forces must adopt specific operational adaptations to maintain spectrum superiority, command and control resiliency, and multi-domain integration under severely contested conditions. NATO operational elements require restructured tactical spectrum management protocols to counter adversarial jamming, mitigate emission signatures, and ensure operational survival during large-scale combat operations. Sustaining effective spectrum maneuver requires unified theater doctrine, modernized tactical communications equipment, agile frequency allocation, and decentralized electromagnetic battle management across integrated multi-domain theater formations.

Comment

Contesting the electromagnetic spectrum across the European theater forces NATO formations to abandon centralised command nodes in favour of emission-controlled command structures. High-power radiation from conventional tactical command posts, such as those historically deployed by U.S. Army Europe and Africa, creates high-fidelity targeting vectors for adversary passive sensor networks. Executing mission command under severe spectrum denial relies on NATO brigade combat teams delegating engagement authority to isolated units using low-probability-of-intercept radio links.

During Operation Allied Force in 1999, Allied air assets encountered comparable friction when Serbian air defence radars maintained strict emission control to evade AGM-88 HARM strikes. Modern peer electronic attack assets, such as the Russian Krasukha-4 mobile electronic warfare system, expand this threat across operational command networks. Consequently, Joint Force Air Component Commanders operating out of Ramstein Air Base depend on dynamic frequency agility integrated into air tasking order execution to maintain battle management integrity.

Strategic Question for Discussion

If adversary systems like the Krasukha-4 can systematically sever central command nodes, which operational adaptation carries greater survivability for Allied formations — strictly enforced emission control or decentralized execution by autonomous tactical units?

The available evidence points toward decentralized execution as the primary survivability driver, because passive emission control merely delays targeting rather than eliminating electromagnetic signatures entirely. Operating experience during operational deployments indicates that rigid reliance on passive emission control collapses once active transmissions become necessary for weapon guidance or air defence coordination. Consequently, delegating engagement authority to brigade-level command elements provides the required resilience against high-power jamming environments.

Share your assessment in the comments below.

To read in details click here